FIRST Minister Alex Salmond has reacted angrily to an influential magazine that has likened Scotland to an impoverished nation, dubbing it Skintland.
Mr Salmond said The Economist would "rue the day" it published the front cover with a map distorting the names of every area in the country.
Place names were changed to read Glasgone, Edinborrow, the Highinterestlands, Obankrupt, Aberdown and Falterkirk.
Kilmarnock, recently hit by job losses following the closure of the Johnnie Walker plant, was dubbed Nilmarnock.
It referred to the Shetlands as the Shutland Islands and the lowlands at the Loanlands.
An article inside claims independence could leave Scotland "one of Europe's vulnerable, marginal economies".
Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens said the cover was ill-judged, but the fiercest criticism came from the SNP.
Mr Salmond said it displayed a "Bullingdon Club humour".
He added: "It just insults every single community in Scotland.
"This is how they really regard Scotland. This is Unionism boiled down to its essence and stuck on a front page for every community in Scotland to see their sneering condescensions. They shall rue the day they thought they'd have a joke at Scotland's expense."
Deputy SNP leader and Glasgow MSP Nicola Sturgeon said even Scots who did not support independence would find the cover offensive.
She said: "This offensive and puerile front page is insulting to literally every single community in Scotland, not least to Glasgow, which it sneeringly terms Glasgone. It is patronising, metropolitan claptrap which lays bare the true nature of Unionism – utterly negative."
"The Economist's article doesn't even reflect its ridiculous front page. As it says, Scotland is not subsidised from Westminster, the Scottish economy performs better than any other nation or region in the UK outside south-east England, and we account for 10% of the UK's GDP with just 8.4% of the population.
"How dare our community and nation be decried in such an insulting manner. It tells us nothing about economics and everything about the insular, metropolitan bias of the anti-independence campaign."
Labour said the cover was "ill-judged". Spokeswoman Patricia Ferguson said: "Most people will recognise this front page does not represent the facts, is way over-the-top and will not endear itself to readers in Scotland.
"I have no doubt Scotland could stand on its own two feet if the Scottish people decided to go it alone, but the SNP owe it to Scots to be straight with us on the costs of separation."
Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said: "The cartoon was a bit silly, but it didn't represent what was in the article. It was well-balanced and posed a number of difficult questions the SNP have failed to answer."
Green co-leader Patrick Harvie said the cover was "ill-judged and patronising", but added: "People should calm down."
Tory spokesman David McLetchie accused the SNP of "manufacturing outrage", adding: "The SNP would be better advised to answer the important points made in the article about Scotland's future."
The article says: "If Scots really want independence for political and cultural reasons, they should go for it. But if they vote for independence they should do so in the knowledge that their country could end up as one of Europe's vulnerable, marginal economies.
"In the 18th century, Edinburgh's fine architecture and its Enlightenment role earned it the nickname Athens of the North. It would be a shame if that name became apt again for less positive reasons."
The Economist refused to comment.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article