The Economist is the publication ambitious operators most want to be published in and least understand. The masthead does not list bylines. The articles are anonymous. The editorial process is famously closed. Most of what people imagine “getting published in The Economist” looks like is not actually how the publication works.
This piece breaks down what is real and what is not. The few legitimate paths to a published byline. The more achievable goal of being covered as a source. And the work that actually compounds toward both outcomes.
The publication’s structure
The Economist publishes a weekly print edition plus daily online content. The weekly is divided into sections: Leaders, Letters, Briefing, United States, Americas, Asia, China, Europe, Britain, Middle East and Africa, International, Business, Finance and Economics, Science and Technology, Culture, By Invitation, Special Reports, Obituary, and a back-page essay.
Every section except Letters, By Invitation, and Obituary is written and edited by The Economist’s staff. The articles do not carry individual bylines because the publication maintains a collective editorial voice. A reader cannot tell whether a piece in the Business section was written by a senior writer with 20 years at the publication or a recent hire on their first major assignment. This is intentional and structural.
This means the standard “I want to write for The Economist” path that works at most publications (pitch an editor, write the piece, get the byline) does not exist for the bulk of The Economist’s coverage. The only sections that accept outside writing are By Invitation, Letters, and Obituary, plus a small number of guest essays that occasionally run on the back page.
By Invitation: the realistic byline path
By Invitation is the section most outside contributors are aiming for, even if they do not realize it by name. The section runs short opinion pieces by recognized experts on subjects within their direct expertise. The form is consistent: 1,000 to 1,500 words, tightly argued, addressing a question of current importance, written by someone whose authority on the topic is independently established.
Recent contributors to By Invitation have included former US Treasury Secretaries, current and former central bank governors, leading academics in economics and political science, senior figures in foreign policy, and CEOs of major companies writing on topics within their commercial expertise. The contributors share a common attribute: their authority on the topic they are writing about is established by their position, prior published work, or institutional affiliation, and that authority is verifiable in 30 seconds by an editor.
The path to writing a By Invitation piece does not run through an application form. It runs through becoming the kind of person an editor would invite. This is a longer game.
The practical components: build a published track record on your topic in other respected publications. Foreign Affairs, the Financial Times, Project Syndicate, Bloomberg Opinion, Wall Street Journal opinion pages, and similar venues are the proving ground. Editors at The Economist read these publications and pull contributors from them. A founder or executive who has published twice in Foreign Affairs and once in the FT is a more plausible By Invitation candidate than one who has published in less recognized venues. The publications that do not help: company blogs, Medium, LinkedIn articles, contributor-program pieces in Forbes or Inc. These do not register as proving-ground writing.
Hold a position that gives you formal authority on the topic. Academic appointments, government roles, central bank positions, and CEO/CIO/CTO roles at recognized companies all qualify. Independent consultants and individual experts can qualify, but the bar is much higher and usually requires a recognized book or sustained presence in respected publications.
Be accessible to journalists. The Economist’s reporters often build initial contact with potential contributors during regular reporting work. A source who is helpful, accurate, and quotable in news pieces becomes someone the editor knows by name when guest commentary slots open up.
Cultivate relevance to current events. By Invitation pieces are often timed to news cycles. The expert who is invited to write on AI regulation when AI regulation is in headlines is the one who has been working on AI regulation for years and has visible commentary on the topic. The expert who shows up cold during a news cycle is harder to validate and less likely to be selected.
Letters: the underused path
The Letters section of The Economist accepts unsolicited submissions and publishes a small number each week. The bar is high but the path is direct. Anyone can submit. Editors select based on the quality of the response to a recent article.
Letters that get published share traits. They respond to a specific Economist article published in the past one to two weeks. They make a substantive point that adds, corrects, or counters something in the original piece. They are short, typically 150 to 300 words. They identify the author with a credential or affiliation that gives the comment weight (CEO of a relevant company, professor at a recognized institution, former official with relevant experience).
A published letter in The Economist is a real credential. It signals that the publication’s editors found your perspective valuable enough to print. The letter byline includes your name and affiliation, which appears in The Economist’s archive permanently and gets cited by AI products and search engines as a trust signal.
The work to get a letter published is straightforward. Read The Economist regularly. When you read an article that intersects with your expertise, write a substantive response within 48 hours and send it to letters@economist.com using the format published on their website. Submit only when you have a real point to make. A letter that essentially agrees with the original piece will not run. A letter that disagrees on something specific, or adds a fact the original piece missed, has a real chance.
Obituary: an unexpected path
The Obituary section runs a single long obituary each week, usually about a person who has died recently. The pieces are written in the publication’s distinctive style and selected by the obituary editor.
Outside writers occasionally write obituaries for The Economist when they have direct knowledge of the subject the obituary editor needs. This path requires a personal connection to the deceased that the editor will recognize as authoritative, plus the writing skill to match the publication’s voice. It is rare but it exists.
Being covered as a source
For most readers of this piece, the more achievable goal is being covered in The Economist’s reporting rather than writing for it. This is meaningfully different work from byline pursuit, and it follows standard PR and source-development principles.
The Economist’s reporters cover companies, technology, finance, science, and policy actively. They quote sources in their pieces, even though the pieces themselves are anonymous. Being a quoted source in an Economist article is itself a credential. The publication’s reporters approach sources who are authoritative in their field, accessible, and useful for the specific story being reported.
Building toward being a source for The Economist looks like this. Identify the correspondent who covers your beat. The Economist publishes reporter contact information through industry channels and conference appearances, and the bylines on online pieces sometimes appear in social or professional contexts that reveal the writer. LinkedIn searches for “The Economist” plus the relevant beat (technology, finance, energy, etc.) often surface the right contacts.
Reach out with substance. A first contact email should not pitch a story. It should offer perspective on something the reporter has recently written, share a useful data point, or simply introduce yourself with context for why you are relevant to the beat. The goal is to be remembered the next time the reporter is working on a story where your expertise applies.
Be useful when called. Economist reporters often call sources for quick takes, background context, or specific data points. Being responsive to these calls, providing accurate information, and pointing the reporter to better sources when applicable builds the kind of relationship that produces eventual quoted appearances.
Maintain visibility through other publications. The Economist’s reporters do not source from a closed list. They read other publications and pull experts whose names appear in trade press, industry research, and adjacent reporting. The work to be visible to The Economist starts with being visible across the broader landscape of respected industry publications.
What does not work
A few approaches that get tried regularly and almost never work:
Cold pitches to a generic editorial address with a story idea. The Economist does not run pitched stories from outside writers. The pitch will not get a response.
PR firm outreach offering to “place a story.” The Economist does not work with PR firms in this way. Press releases get filed in a queue that is rarely consulted.
Paid placements. The Economist does not accept paid editorial. There are advertising slots and sponsored content sections, but they are clearly labeled and do not produce editorial credibility.
Contributor-program writing in lower-tier publications as a path to The Economist. Forbes Council, Inc. contributors, Medium, and similar bylines do not move you closer to The Economist. They live in a different tier of the publishing ecosystem.
The path to The Economist is one of the longer paths in publishing. The byline is closed to most writers, the source relationships take years to develop, and even the letters section runs only a few outside voices each week. The work is still worth doing for the people whose career trajectory benefits from association with the publication’s standard. Just go in with realistic expectations about timeline, and focus the effort where the path is real.