Vs. The Economist

I read and adore the Economist. Its writing is intelligent and concise, writers aren't credited for merely being competent, it is not concerned overly with the U.S. or Britain and gives me some sense of what's happening in Indonesia and Greenland, and it is extraordinarily good value. I even sometimes read about the economy.

However, it is of course only one publication and it does what everyone does, which is expound its opinions as fact. Most of what I read in the Economist is new to me, and I already know so little of what I'm reading (from other sources) that I can't even tell when the Economist is saying something that really is virtually indisputable, and when something controversial. It all seems to be the former.

So my question to those who read the Economist: what do you read to counterbalance it?