--- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > He's a funnel for anti-liberal rumors. Sometimes they are factual. > Usually not. > > Not specifically to Sparaig, but to all the posters who characterize > Drudge similiar to above: Do you actually read Drudge? Daily? Ever? > From your comments, its sounds like you are repeating stale 4th hand > characterizations you read on some other site. And not from > reading / Scanning Drudge daily.
I read him occasionally. I find what has been written about him is verified by my own observations. > Your characterizations - while sparse and not comprehensive (and > thus that may be the communications problem here) -- do not well > reflect what Druge is day in and day out: his site is a news- > digesting service -- like so many others, including many newspapers > (who do little or no reporting, but pull stuff and reprint from > other sources). His choice of articles is hardly "right-wing" or > anti-liberal. Reasonable people, I suppose, can disagree as to whether his choice of articles leans right. From my perspective and that of many others, the political articles he links to, as well as his own scoops, certainly do tend to lean right. I read him almost daily at the beginning of the Lewinsky scandal because he seemed always to have the very latest scoop. But I found the tone of the articles about the scandal that he linked to, and the scoops he wrote about himself, so relentlessly and viciously anti-Clinton (as well as very frequently wildly inaccurate--the most hateful of the right-wingers' false claims about the Clintons) that I was thoroughly turned off and started getting my information elsewhere. Drudge was also instrumental in pushing the anti- Kerry claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for <gag> Truth, which played a significant role in Kerry's defeat in the presidential election. And in a recent interview he insisted that the Foley scandal was the fault of the pages. He's also very strongly anti-choice. I can't recall the last time I saw a lefty blog linking to Drudge for a story that was critical of or reflected badly on right-wingers. The vast majority of mentions on lefty blogs of the Drudge Report are citations of some particularly outrageous attack on Democrats/liberals. Many won't even provide links because they don't want to encourage traffic to his site. Righty blogs, in contrast, link to him approvingly all the time. > He posts/links a wide variety of articles from a wide range of > sources. One thing I like is his comprehensive set of links to a > variety of media sources -- and presumably the primary ones he draws from. Hardly unique. BuzzFlash.com also has something very similar, for instance. (In fact, BuzzFlash, which is distinctly left-leaning, was started quite specifically as a counter to Drudge.) > I look at his site regularly because his choice is a bity quirky, > surprising, ironic. I find one or two articles of interest, at times, > at a glance at his site, that would take a lot of slogging thru to > back pages of other news digesters. Mildly entertaining. He's near the bottom of my list of sites to visit when I have nothing better to do. There are much more interesting pot-pourri-type sites, as far as I'm concerned. > Occaisionally, once or twice a month, he gets leaks on stories -- > which he will hjeqadline -- and usually puts a huge "Developing...." > banner on it. I take that to mean, as I imagine any reader above > second grade, as saying he has a good rumor, is running it down, but > its just arumor at this point. I believe you imagine incorrectly, both as to what he means by "Developing..." and what the majority of his readers think he means. I find his leaks often do bear some > fruit -- have some substance behind them. But this part of his blog > is a very minor part. In terms of space, yes, but it's by far the most important part in terms of the role the DrudgeReport plays in journalism and politics. Obviously, it's difficult to fill most of a Web page with sensational leaks every day. > And he rearely if ever posts his own editorials. He is not like a > blogger who are often 95% editorial, -- with some newsdigesting thrown in. Did somebody suggest he was? > Look at his page today. What is right-wing and anti-liberal about > these articles: > > http://www.drudgereport.com/ > > "Maybe It Will Take a Woman to Clean up the House" > "Ugly Iowa: Republican Spot Links Dem to Communist Paarty" > "Marijuana may help stave off Alzheimer's > Active ingredient in pot may help preserve brain function" > "New Media A Weapon in New World Of Politics" > "Three More Former Pages Accuse Foley of Online Sexual Approaches" > "Major chains refuse to play Bush death film" > "Man Apologizes for Courtroom Feces" Huh, you seem to have chosen *only* articles that are not oriented to the right. (Although if you actually read them, you'll find several are not quite so neutral as they might sound from the headlines.) I don't believe anyone ever claimed that he posts only right-wing articles, did they? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
