« A Day At The Congressional Races | Home | McCain: I'm The Optimist When It Comes To The American Economy »

Overstating Drudge's Influence For Fun And Profit

Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post never tires of telling us how influential Matt Drudge is. It's a frequent topic on the self-confessed Drudge-ologist's otherwise valuable blog, The Fix.

But today's installment of Matt Drudge Rules Our World really can't be allowed to pass without comment. In the course of hailing Drudge's omnipotence yet again, Cillizza compares Drudge's treatment of three stories yesterday as follows:

In the banner headline spot for most of the day was a picture of entertainer Barbra Streisand touting a Beverly Hills fundraiser for Barack Obama -- not exactly the sort of headline that the Illinois senator wants as chum for the cable channels 49 days before the election.

Two other stories never merited attention from Drudge: a claim by a senior aide to John McCain that the Arizona senator had invented the BlackBerry and a statement by McCain surrogate Carly Fiorina that neither McCain nor Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would be equipped to serve as CEO of a major U.S. company.

This strikes us as an unfortunate example, particularly in a column arguing (as Cillizza does) that the source of Drudge's power lies in his influence over the cable networks. Because one of the stories ignored by Drudge actually got a whole lot more coverage on cable yesterday than the one Drudge pushed all day in that supposedly hypnotic banner headline of his.

We followed cable coverage pretty closely yesterday at TPM World Headquarters. And a quick Nexis search by TPM's own Eric Kleefeld verified our suspicions. As best as we can determine, the Streisand story was only the focus of episodes on Fox. Neither CNN nor MSNBC did episodes focused on it. On those two networks, it only came up in passing when brought up by GOP operatives (a no-brainer) or when subjected to ridicule by a few others.

By contrast, all three networks devoted repeated stand-alone episodes to the Fiorina mess -- even though (Heaven forfend) Drudge ignored it! She appeared on all the nets again and again throughout the day.

Look, far be it from me to question the notion that Drudge has influence over network producers. Of course he does. But if we're really going to devote so much time to flacking Drudge's influence, how about a real and nuanced discussion of it?

For instance, does Drudge's influence over the cable nets really mean what it once did? The blogs pushed the heck out of the Fiorina story yesterday. Cable news followed suit. Other media is influencing the cable narrative, too. Even more broadly, in the new media environment, the cable-bubble-narrative has competition and doesn't necessarily reign supreme at all times -- so is Drudge really as omnipotent as he once was?

What's more, another topic that Drudge-ologists will never dare to broach is the question of whether reporters and editors should take their cues from a confirmed serial fact-inventor. Is this, you know, a bad thing? What does it say about the business? Don't the same reporters and editors who proclaim Drudge's influence make editorial decisions to follow him when they do? Isn't one of the dirty secrets of the profession that reporters and editors on occasion actually tailor their stories to get Drudge links?

If Drudge is going to consume our attention, how about a real discussion of Drudge and what the Drudge phenomenon says about the journalism profession -- one that goes beyond the narrow question of how influential he is? The last thing we need is yet more auto-pilot Drudge-worship.


Late Update: A good takedown from MyDD's Josh Orton.


69 Comments

| Leave a comment

Re Chris Cilizza:

If it's stupid, you can find it at the Washington Post. How did the Post ever let Candy Crowley slip through their hands.

user-pic

Eugene Robinson's columns are always worth reading.

I agree. I enjoy Robinson -- and usually enjoy Cillizza too. However, I do not understand the near-obsession with Matt Drudge.

http://thepajamapundit.com/

user-pic

I think Drudge's influence is in decline. A lot of news producers understand that he is just one source.

user-pic

Greg, I saw the Streisand thing on a short segment on David Gregory's show on MSNBC, and I think it might actually have been mentioned by the host on either Countdown or Rachel Maddow's show as well, although obviously not in a derisive way like on Drudge or Fox.

user-pic

Cillizza has drunk a whole pitcher of the Kool-Aid. He has sold his soul.

His filter can only filter out so much crap. He is going to have to upgrade or get busier for him to be able to deal with the amount of poop that is coming at him.

He can effectively filter out a small stream, but when that amount is at the current levels, as you say, people realize he is only one source and they are forced to go elsewhere.

user-pic
He can effectively filter out a small stream,...

Sounds like he has a nasty prostate problem. Maybe someone needs to send him some Flomax?

That's damn funny.

user-pic
Don't the same reporters and editors who proclaim Drudge's influence make editorial decisions to follow him when they do? Isn't one of the dirty secrets of the profession that reporters and editors on occasion actually tailor their stories to get Drudge links?

Thank you, Greg, for saying this. Every time Chris Cilizza mentions the influence of Drudge, I just want to scream "You're part of the issue, dope!"

I take the absence of a story on Drudge to mean that Drudge and the wingnuts don't want the story talked about.

When he's reporting on stuff that is already out there, he probably has little influence. His influence comes when he has some "breaking news" about some scandlous (eg clinton people speading photo of obama in african clothese)

Cillizza is a drudge butt-boy....Cilizza dreams of being drudge, because of the so-called drudge influence. These so called journalists like Cilizza are just wannabe star-fargers......Cilizza is a low IQ nerd who is working at a paper that has been as has-been as anyone paper can be as far as their relevance.

Drudge is AOL.

user-pic

How much money and how many eggs would it take to get the Eggman to go away?

I'm good for a bunch of it.

Someone needs to figure out how to push the story of the influence of TMP on National news.

It's more Mark Halperin's "The Page" that has now become the "go-to" for media.

Halprin's blog is only good when you want to know the Repthugs talking points for the day.

Isn't this Blog guilty of being a Drudge-tool and practice a bit of Drudge-ology itself?

Example, 02.25.08, you ran with the Drudge headline that, "Clinton staffers circulated a 2006 photo of Obama in the garb of a Somali village elder with a turban."

After contacting the Clinton campaign and being unsatisfied with their response, you concluded, "Put it all together and the Clinton camp would appear to be unwilling to make even the most perfunctory denial that they are or were circulating this photo around."

Ergo, it must be true, they did circulate the photos.. Shame on the Clintons.

user-pic

I actually wrote several posts faulting the media's obsession with that idiotic story

user-pic

Greggy - It's BK.

The only troll worse is DemBillC.

;)

Clinton is old news, babe. She's in the trash with video cassettes, the macarena, and the rest of the antiques from the 90s.

user-pic

Too funny. You pick one post out of literally thousands from this site.

A lot like your poll analysis.

Instead of being such a prick, why don't you add something to the discussion.

Stay on topic....

"If Drudge is going to consume our attention, how about a real discussion of Drudge and what the Drudge phenomenon says about the journalism profession"

user-pic

Gotcha!

I am staying on topic. You cherry picked one post of Greg's out of thousands to support the ridiculous claim that Election Central does Drudge's fluffing. Why don't you stay on topic by not posting nonsense?

CT did stay on topic by pointing out how ridiculous your analysis is.

user-pic

I noticed Drudge pushing hard to get somebody to pick up the Babs story. After having it pegged to the home page for 6 or more hours, it started to look like Matt was getting desperate as in, "How can they not run with this?" You know, when the financial services industry is collapsing under our feet, I think even our crappy traditional media - excluding FoxNews - know that there are more serious stories to cover.

Google "Drudge eggs". Mmmm.

I'm sort of an armchair Drudge-ologist, myself, and one thing I know about Drudge is that whenever anybody posts a story about Drudge's influence, Drudge links to that story (not that Cillizza is manipulating Drudge to boost hits on his blog or anything, decreased bonuses being what they will be this year, all things being equal, etc., etc.)....

Yet another example of the media obviously and consciously influencing the debate, yet acting as if they report just the facts, ma'am.

I don't think most media types are very bright. But I feel that their refusal to acknowledge how they steer the debate in this country doesn't stem from ignaorance, but either laziness, which they refuse to recognize, or a belief in the conventional wisdom as long as it supports a Republican worldview.

In either case, they are abolutely complicit in the destruction of our country, and I pray that they are called to account at some point.

Remember when Chris Cillizza thought that the 2006 mid-terms meant that we'd see the "pragmatic" George W Bush who was about to, according to Chris, start a phased withdrawal from Iraq?

Thread Jack!

Anyone notice that according to the Daily Kos daily tracking poll McCain's favorable rating is below 50 percent for the first time in the election? And Palin's unfavorable is higher than her favorable? Great news. She's pulling him down.

Pufferfish

user-pic

Yes - I noticed that a couple of days ago actually and posted some poll results on it.

McLame is the most unpopular of the 4 candidates running, I believe. Unless it has changed since I looked at the numbers at Kos.

Cool. Here's the link:

http://www.dailykos.com/dailypoll/2008/09/17

McCain's favorable is 48. Palin's is 44. And both are trending down.

user-pic

Hey - you know what I noticed this time? There are very few undecideds about Obama - and all his numbers are very good.

I see Palin and McLame are now tied on unfavorable -

Hee hee!

She's going to implode. And yes, I'm knocking on wood.

user-pic

The should be "hog-tied" with lipstick on it!

user-pic

They should be hog-tied - with lipstick.

Patience is a virtue - especially with no preview!

Thank you, Greg! I glad someone finally said something about this nonsense. I think you hit the nail on the head with this article, particularly the points about the appropriateness of Drudge's influence.

ABC's Jake Tapper is calling McCain out on another lie that he warned about the banking crisis.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/despite-claims.html

"So, I’d like to tell you that I did anticipate it, but I have to give you straight talk, I did not.”

AWESOME!

Drudge's influence is as over-hyped as his number of hits. His site refreshes 4 times more often than other sites without new content.

That's Just What I Said

Pfffft! Cillizza's a hack and The Fix sucks. Ignore 'em, Greg, neither (Cillizza nor Drudge) can touch you. :)


user-pic

Well that goes without saying, Carol!


;)

But I'm glad you said it.

Fuck Drudge, seriously!

Can we just move on?

There's more important things on the world today.

I cant believe you didnt mention that Chris C. quotes TIM GRIFFIN at the end of the article -

HOW COULD YOU NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT?!

TOM DELAY LOVES TIM GRIFFIN!!

I use Drudge at least 10 times a day but only as a portal to other sites. I think he has the best. I wonder how many people use his sight just to get somewhere else?

Chris is a tool of Drudgereport. Only lazy journalists pay attention to Drudge. When the whole economic is tanking, drudge only cares about Barbara Streisand. You will think Chris Cilliaza will use his brain before writing nonsense.

Reading all of the posts under The Fix' drudge article, you could tell that all of drudge's readership was out in force. Truant officers everywhere could have easily located all of their missing middle school boys.

user-pic

I will argue that the Internet has almost a ZIPPO record on changing the way america votes. Even tho, the last 8 years or more, the internet might be the ONLY place to find the truth....it has made very little dent.

One good thing I will say is that THE LEFT dominates on the internet, for all the good it has done us. NONE of the rightwing sites has any HEFT. No ideas. No real content....just bloviating and hating and repeating lies. And yes, they have been useful if what your "Betters" need is someone to echo and repeat their lies. So, the rightwing internet has been useful, to a tiny degree.

The Left blogosphere and news outlets have ALL the content that the rightwing internet and Corporate Networks DON'T HAVE.

Drudge was only effective at one thing. A one-trick pony like that can only contribute so much and it is mostly used up. If the dude had any journalistic importance or gravitas it might have been different. Misquoting Tolkien, "when they are done with their Tools, they discard them"


Every day spent discussing meaningless non-issues and gossipy nonsense is a good day for the Republicans.

The Republican strategy is to keep the public distracted with silly stories about name-calling, hairdos, and the 'culture wars'.

Is our country going to restore the constitution ? Are we going to start more wars ? Are we going to borrow more money from China ?

I'm sorry - is this boring ?

Drudge is a new school gay. He prefers Fergie and Beyonce to that old hag Barbra.

Yesterday and today, I wrote about this example of Drudge firing up the right wing echo chamber here...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/16/114318/458/497/600544

... and document the subsequent echoes making their way into the McCain stump speech, and MSM.

user-pic

Quick word of support for Babs. Why is she the symbol of "Elitism"? She's from a very modest background and her lack of affect and down to earth persona was a large part of her appeal in the early years of her career; sort of like Sarah Palin with talent, a mind, and a heart.

Quoting Griffin without providing background on his Rovian connections is an unpardonable journalistic sin.

user-pic

I can remember this site semi-frequently pointing to Drudge's site, much to my dismay, in the not-so-distant past. I never followed through by checking Drudge's site for myself. It doesn't matter to me if mentions here are favorable or not, and of course it was mostly not. But still, I can clearly remember this site openly struggling with determining the veracity of Drudge scoops. I ask, who cares? Every once in a while the National Enquirer has a true story no one else is covering, but I'm not gonna wade through 10 feet of sewage on a regular basis for that one glimmer of something shiny.

I live my life quite happily, and well-informed, without ever hearing about that site. I'd like to keep it that way. I have no need for the freepers either. The less I am reminded of such filth here, all the better. To even acknowledge that site, or those who go ga-ga over it, is to empower it further.

Can we talk about something else now??

How can even post something about this guy cillizza and, worse, argue that that hymn to mediocrity, "the fix" is an "otherwise valuable blog"? It is seriously and serially bad, a compendium of coward, boring clichés by a jerk without any proven merits to be hired by WAPO. I mean, I really stopped reading the entire Politics section for while when they started that joke. The guy is as prepared to write and think about politics as palin for VP.

I've been watching drudge lately, and the effect I get from that site is full-blown panic. He's trying DESPERATELY to change the narrative, with Streisand Headlines (a personal favorite of his,) Pelosi attacks, and claims of media bias (a la the Palin media mention counter.) None of it worked.

I do think Drudge has lost some of his edge, and I do think it's the case of the many vs. the one. He still has the ability to make mountains out of molehills (curse the siren) but as far as pushing the editorial desk, I think he burned bright and then out with the primaries.

user-pic

It must be hard for Cilizza: he's gotta carry a roll of toilet paper or an old sock around with him at all times to wipe Drudge's DNA off of his chin.

user-pic

Wait - Barbara Streisand? Are you kidding?

Where's Marc Maron? His "liberal marching orders from the just faxed in from the Streisand compound" was genius.

Hey Drudge, what's that important liberal icon Rosie O'Donnell doing today? Or better yet, Jane Fonda?

God Goopers are stupid.

Cilizza is one of those...you know the type...not popular at ALL in High School though he had a mouth on him when it was just him and his buds....always looking for attention from the popular people....and to him? Matt Drudge is that popular boy he wants attention from...still seeking that ever elusive affirmation that someone of substance finds him worthy. Shame when people like that never grow up.

user-pic

I hate redundancy. I also hate when I type the same thing twice.

Wonder if Cilizza's parents were breeding for stupid when they had him????? Oh wait I get it now! He's the love child of Matt Drudge and John McCain! That's the answer! Really scummy DNA!

Bet Drudge and Cilizza both hit their knees at night and thank the stars above that breathing is an automatic response.....keeps Sarah "The Failed Beauty Queen" alive!

user-pic

Isn't it a little smoke & mirrors? Druge rails against the liberal media, that in turn hangs on his every word to get their marching orders. He wields enormous influence, except when they ignore his lead.

So, which is it? Is the press his lackey or is he another web guy inflating his importance? Is it possible that it's both?

Drudge? Who's he? I have barely looked at him lately and, when I do, there is little of interest there (except the slathering hurricane coverage; but that is only a periodic phenomenon). He has been left in the dust on this election, as far as I can see. Maybe he's getting a little long in the tooth.

user-pic

the only thing useful about Cillizza's blog is the insight it offers into beltway CW.

Please explain why that messy website is such a big deal. I took a look years ago to see what the fuss was about, haven't been back since.

Why bother?

Would you like a little Drudge on that BS? Thanks, but no thanks!

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address