I am Zanny Minton Beddoes, the 17th Editor-in-Chief of The Economist. AMA!

Assuming all other factors were equal, would you sooner hire a graduate of Journalism, History, or Business?

We hire people with all kinds of degrees, but in general prefer to hire people who know about a subject and can write. Very few people who work for The Economist have degrees in journalism.

if I may ask a follow up. Do you have the same requirements for the Web/social media and print versions? Because I've seen pretty uneven quality between print and the facebook/web version.

That's interesting. We have a more clearly defined editing process in print than on social.

SIR-

How are the subjects for the obituary section chosen? Usually they are not particularly famous figures, but the pieces are always extremely well written and researched, especially considering the short time frame.

Our brilliant obituaries editor, Ann Wroe, chooses her subject each week.

Hi Zanny!

Isn’t it time to abolish the monarchy in the UK? Your Bagehot column last week called the House of Lords “a joke” and called for “more democracy”: surely the monarchy deserves similar criticism?

Admittedly, it doesn’t have as much real power as the Lords, but from a symbolic perspective the idea that our head of state is still a hereditary position seems to contradict the values of a 21st century democracy? Next to liberal, republican systems like the US it just seems embarrassingly medieval.

That's a great question. You probably know that we have argued for abolishing the monarchy. Bill Emmott, our editor between 1993 and 2006, was a particularly keen Republican. In 1994, he argued that monarchy “is the antithesis of much of what we stand for: democracy, liberty, reward for achievement rather than inheritance.” It is “an idea whose time has passed.”

I am more relaxed about the monarchy. The idea of a hereditary institution is at odds with the meritocracy we champion. But the British monarchy is popular and doesn't seem to do any harm. It is a largely symbolic role. For me the most important thing is that real power is with elected politicians.

Great! Finally I get to ask the question that's been bugging me for months.

Was it your decision to get rid of the honorific "Sir" in the Letters section and not replace it with "Madam"? If so, why? If not, who made that decision?

The Letters section just seems to be missing something without an honorific.

Yes, it was my decision. "Sir" was obviously not accurate. And "Madam" sounded far too old-fashioned to me. You are not the only person who misses the honorific, by the way.

Hi Zanny! Two quick questions:

1. What magazines and newspapers do you read for your own personal news besides The Economist?
2. And what publications would you say you look to as inspiration for the kind of publication you want The Economist to be?

Thank you!

My reading habits are pretty eclectic. On a daily basis I go through the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Times of London and the Financial Times. But, like many people, I read individual articles from a much broader set of newspapers and magazines through my Twitter feed. That's the first thing I scan in every morning, along with a lot of newsletters and other news feeds.

What's your take on the high cost of housing in the UK, particularly London? Does it make it harder for The Economist to hire staff?

The high cost of housing, particularly in London, is an outrage. People have to commute vast distances to find something affordable. Productivity is hit because skilled and talented people cannot afford to live there. Worse, it is a largely self-induced problem. Property prices have soared because supply has failed to keep up with demand. If planning regulations were eased and the pace of construction accelerated, the rise in London house prices need not be so absurd.

At the advent of the internet why did so many people in news give their product away for free right away? Would it have changed the fate of 'print media' if they kept subscriptions going out of the gate? I find it curious that people saw the web as so 'innovative' and a 'wild west' that they threw out business models almost all together, when it was at a fundamental level not much more than a switch to presenting with pixels instead of ink.

I agree with you. The rush to give content away free online was ultimately going to be unsustainable. If you want good content, it has to be paid for somehow. Luckily, we didn't jump on that bandwagon at The Economist.

What are your thoughts on Jon Stewart's influence on media, politics, and journalism? Was it more or less unprecedented, or can you put him in a tradition?

The power of satire and biting humour is nothing new, but Jon Stewart is a spectacularly good example. He's had a big influence, and rightly so.

What do you personally think should be done about the war on drugs?

We have long championed the legalisation of drugs - a cause that I firmly support and one I intend to keep pushing. Last week we launched Economist Films, a new venture that reinterprets our journalism in video form. One of our first two pilots was on the war on drugs. Tell me what you think of it.

The Economist has also long championed the verb champion.

Fair point. Time for a new verb.

What is one article published by your newspaper that you think everyone should read?

I can't possibly choose one article! My goal is to have many must-read articles in every issue. The word I often use is "mind-stretching". I want each section of the The Economist to contain something that is mind-stretching every week.

Hi Zanny! Glad to see the weekly newspaper which I have always associated to be a a magazine haha is represented on this thread.

My question was regarding the future of the Eurozone. Would you agree that it is high time peripherals such as Greece (after almost a decade of bailouts and restructuring) make their way out of the zone? In fact I feel it is a boon when comparing growth rates of such peripherals before and after joining the Eurozone.

The question of whether Greece should stay inside the euro or leave is a tough one-and is the subject of our cover editorial this week. It is still my view that both Greece and the rest of the euro zone would be better off if they stayed in, but that will demand both more reform from the Greeks and debt reduction from the creditors. Grexit is not an easy solution. It will devastate the Greek economy in the short term; even in the longer run the gains from a big devaluation are easily exaggerated. Greece will only prosper if it frees up its still-rigid economy and overhauls its clientilist state, whether or not it is inside the euro.

How do you feel about the term "grexit"?

It's an ugly word for a messy outcome.

How does someone get their foot in the door at The Economist? Do you just hire staff, or also freelancers? And how much experience do you look for in new hires?

One of the best ways to get a foot in the door is through an internship. As it happens we are looking for a social media intern right now. The closing date for applications is tomorrow. For anyone interested in applying, please note that we put a lot of emphasis on your sample article. Being able to write is more important than what you have done. If you are interested, check this out before tomorrow.

Why did you end up staying in DC for 18 years?

For blended family reasons.

Hi Zanny!

Should Britain’s foreign policy be aimed at increasing and strengthening Britain’s standing in the world, or should it be resigned to making the best of a reduced role?

Under David Cameron Britain's global role has shrunk markedly, as we argued in an editorial in April. From shrinking military spending to a lack of diplomatic engagement, Mr Cameron had a Little England mentality. I think that was both unfortunate and short-sighted. I hope that Britain does more to re-engage. The big test will be the referendum on EU membership.

For which 'Leader' did you witness the most argument internally?

In hindsight, which Leader within the last 10 years took a position that you most regret?

It's just outside your ten year window, but I think the most internally controversial leader I can think of is our position on the Iraq war. (Long before my editorship).

Hi, huge fan of the publication. I've got a couple questions about it:

1. The economist doesn't use bylines. Does the newsroom still have a noticeable hierarchy of "hotshot" writers versus average ones despite this?

2. Most of your stories are relatively short compared to other news publications, but every now and then you release a long, extremely thorough piece (i.e. last year's democracy paper.) How do you decide the topic for the longer pieces, and what extra considerations are taken in comparison to publications that do that kind of work more frequently?

3. Is there any particular reason you choose to limit the number of free articles a user can read, opposed to the unlimited approach many other publications have taken? Seems like you answered this one above

Our lack of bylines means that The Economist speaks with a collective voice. Another advantage of our anonymity is that it fosters an unusually collegiate culture. Many incredibly talented people work here, but I don't think we have a "hierarchy of hotshot writers".

Hi Zanny,

Big Economist reader here.

What are your thoughts on the prevalence of "listicles" in online journalism?

Understanding that content like this drives the traffic often required to keep online publications alive, do you find it to be detrimental to strong reporting in a world that needs insight over entertainment?

Ten reasons why I loath listicles...

Hi Zanny!

Huge fan and long-time subscriber of TE. One of my favorite election features you guys did was the Presidential Debate live-blogging but I believe this was recently replaced by what is basically a feed of Twitter accounts posting about the debate rather than TE writers. Do you have any plans to bring back the old format where your columnists weigh-in in real time for the upcoming 2016 presidential election?

Thanks for the feedback. It's good to hear you liked the live-blogging of debates. We are still planning our 2016 election coverage.