Drudge Report

In recent months, some on the pro-Donald right have been complaining about the Drudge Report having an anti-Trump bias and have stopped reading it. I wound’t know, because the last time I visited Drudge was in 2010 or 2009, so I was one step ahead on that, too. The Drudge Report always has a that big, stupid headline on the top of that page with a picture of someone like Pelosi or Reid below it even if there is nothing in the news that necessitates so much contrived excitement and hype. I don’t need Drudge telling me what is important. But it’s a nice, slick website that loads fast and has an aesthetically pleasing balanced layout.

Regarding the bias, if the Drudge Report seems biased, it’s not necessary Matt’s fault (assuming he still runs the site in any major capacity), because Drudge Report is an aggregator and has no original content, so these headlines do not necessarily represent Drudge’s own views. All Drudge is doing is picking from the stories available to him from major sources, and sorting them in order of importance. As the cliched saying goes, don’t shoot the messenger.

The pro-Trump media doesn’t really exist. The media is more anti-Trump than they were pro-Obama or anti-Bush. Even Fox is ambivalent about Trump. Many conservative publications and intellectuals tolerate Trump but are not that enthusiastic about him. It’s hard to find news columnists who are openly pro-Trump. There are plenty of pro-Trump bloggers, but fewer pro-Trump journalists and pundits. Drudge cannot link to personal sites and blogs because it would betray any pretense of impartiality, and people who visit Drudge are expecting mainstream news sources.

Also it’s in Drudge’s financial interests, whoever is in power, for shit to hit the fan, because he makes more ad revenue that way. Trump being impeached and then leaving office would bring an unprecedented amount of traffic and ad revenue to his site. Drudge readers tend to be news junkies and want the latest scoops irrespective of loyalty to any ideology or political party. It would an abdication of Drudge’s duty as a reporter if he withheld stories that portrayed Trump in a negative or unflattering light, or if he only chose to link to stories from pro-Trump sources. It would defeat the purpose of the site. The reason why Drudge became so popular is because it published the Lewinsky scandal after Newsweek withheld the story.