Tue, Oct 21, 2008 11:52am ET
 
 
Drudge unplugged: How his campaign influence has collapsed
by Eric Boehlert
 
I'm not saying that given the choice I wouldn't pick a robust economy and a 
worry-free global outlook. But circumstances being what they are, I have to say 
that as the White House campaign hits its final stride under the ominous shadow 
of the Wall Street meltdown and the deep recession that's hurtling this way, 
perhaps the only silver lining -- the one unexpected pleasure -- has been 
watching the Drudge Report be completely neutered by current events.
 
Matt Drudge is still doing his loyal best to boost the chances of the GOP down 
the homestretch in the form of a blizzard of anti-Obama and pro-McCain links on 
his site. (Last week, it was the half-baked McCain "comeback" that Drudge hyped 
relentlessly.)
 
And there's no question that Drudge's Web traffic remains strong and continues 
to grow, thanks to a burgeoning international audience. But in terms of setting 
the ground rules -- in terms of setting the campaign agenda -- Drudge has been 
AWOL since mid-September when the credit crisis erupted.
 
His current spectator status mirrors that of the low-flying right-wing 
bloggers. 
 
Just as the bloggers were hailed for their (pseudo) detective work in 
undermining CBS' Dan Rather in 2004, Drudge was credited for the way he used 
his widely read platform to push the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth story into 
the mainstream press, which helped derail John Kerry's campaign.
 
Four years ago, Drudge and the right-wing bloggers were at the peak of their 
political power. Today, they're pretty much watching the election pass them by, 
reduced to the role of frustrated sideline hecklers.
 
But that's sure not the narrative the press enjoys pushing about Drudge. In The 
Way to Win, the 2006 conventional wisdom-affirming book about campaigning, Mark 
Halperin and John Harris were wildly impressed by Drudge's acumen and his 
nearly limitless media power. The authors devoted an entire chapter to Drudge, 
toasting his "visionary" "insights" and anointing him "the Walter Cronkite of 
his era."
 
"Matt Drudge rules our world," they wrote. "With the exception of the 
Associated Press, there is no outlet other than the Drudge Report whose 
dispatches instantly can command the attention and energies of the most 
established newspapers and television newscasts."
 
And looking ahead to 2008, the duo warned, "No Democratic politician will 
survive in the 2008 presidential campaign without understanding the singular 
power of Drudge, and crafting a strategy to defend against this power." (That 
wasn't the only thing Halperin and Harris got wrong about 2008.*)
 
That adoration has remained constant among mainstream journalists, who praise 
Drudge's godlike power and prestige, and then benefit from the high-traffic 
links he rewards them with.
 
"What nobody who follows the daily cut and thrust of American politics 
questions is Drudge's continuing power to drive the stories and shape the 
narratives that define presidential politics," Politico announced this year. 
[Emphasis added.]
 
Not to be out-Drudged, washingtonpost.com's Chris Cillizza recently labeled him 
the "single most influential source for how the presidential campaign is 
covered in the country." 
 
Well, I'm here to call bullshit.
 
And no, this isn't just a wishful, 
I-don't-like-Drudge-so-I'm-going-to-claim-he's-irrelevant column.
 
This is fact. 
 
Because it's obvious that since Wall Street's meltdown commenced five weeks 
ago, and since America's economic crisis became a tsunami of a news story 
that's not only dominated the media landscape, but also irrevocably altered the 
course of the campaign, the Drudge Report has become largely irrelevant in 
terms of the setting the news agenda for the White House run.
 
That's because a story like the unfolding credit crisis -- sober and 
complicated -- knocks Drudge completely out of his element of frivolous, 
partisan gotcha links.
 
Think about it. Since Monday, September 15, when word of emergency government 
intervention to save the economy began to spread, the presidential race, 
according to all the available data, has gone through a dramatic fourth-quarter 
shift, with Barack Obama opening up a comfortable lead. We haven't seen this 
kind of wholesale shift in voter sentiment this late in a White House campaign 
since 1980.
 
The race is unrecognizable in terms of where the players are situated now and 
where they were five weeks ago. (Between September 15 and October 19, there was 
a 12-point swing in the Gallup daily tracking poll.) Now ask yourself: What 
role has the Drudge Report played in that burst of campaign movement? The 
answer, of course, is zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. His trademark flashing red 
lights have gone missing.
 
The dynamics of the campaign have irrevocably changed, and the mighty Drudge 
Report, the news site Beltway journalists trip over themselves to genuflect in 
front of, has been a complete bystander in the closing weeks of the 2008 
campaign. (Not that this is the first time Drudge has choked down the stretch 
of a nationwide election.)
 
The reason is simple. Because of the unprecedented economic turmoil, we're now 
in serious times. (Fifty thousand home foreclosures this year, in the state of 
New Jersey alone, is serious business.) And the Drudge Report doesn't do 
serious. The American public's attention has shifted from the campaign to the 
economy, and that's why the Drudge Report remains largely irrelevant to that 
unfolding story. 
 
In fact, nearly two-thirds of Americans (63 percent) claimed economic 
conditions or the stock market drop were the news story they followed most 
closely during the second week in October, compared with just 24 percent who 
selected the campaign. Meanwhile, the credit crisis has unleashed waves of 
voter anxiety. 
 
As long as those patterns hold, Drudge finds himself in no-man's-land with no 
levers of power to pull. 
 
For instance, Drudge spent last week going all-in on the McCain "comeback" 
narrative. But rather than aping the line, most of the press corps demurred, 
simply because the nationwide polling data did not support the claim. In fact, 
as Howard Kurtz noted on washingtonpost.com on Monday, the press has pivoted in 
the opposite direction, with even conservative media commentators declaring the 
cause lost for John McCain. 
 
One of the few times Drudge has come up in the national conversation was when 
conservative commentator Pat Buchanan almost got laughed off the set of 
Hardball after citing Drudge's unscientific reader poll to suggest Sarah Palin 
had been the clear winner of the vice-presidential debate. (See Crooks and 
Liars for the clip.) 
 
And yes, it's true that post-Wall Street meltdown, Drudge did influence the 
campaign narrative when, on the eve of the vice-presidential debate, he 
trumpeted information about moderator Gwen Ifill's upcoming book. But that was 
ostensibly a get-the-media story; it didn't affect the Obama campaign or help 
to boost the Republican ticket. Most viewers still thought Palin lost the 
debate. 
 
Other than that, Drudge has mostly been shooting blanks and remains 
unrecognizable from the 2004 campaign, when his site was central in pushing 
President Bush's re-election. 
 
Why the misfires? As Halperin himself noted in 2006, "Matt Drudge is not doing 
stories on policy, on welfare, on healthcare. He's doing stories on the most 
salacious aspects of American politics. When that drives the dialogue, that's 
where the country heads, that's where our political coverage heads." 
 
Thanks to our current economic crisis, "the most salacious aspects of American 
politics," as Halperin put it, have taken a vacation during the closing weeks 
of this campaign. And the press can't even pretend that those "salacious 
aspects" are remotely newsworthy, which means the second part of Halperin's 
claim, about Drudge driving the dialogue, no longer applies.
 
Halperin's writing partner John Harris admitted as much recently while 
addressing students at St. Lawrence University in upstate New York. In an 
article on Harris' speech, the local paper reported: "The Republican Party's 
'Machiavellian' style of attack politics hasn't struck a chord in this 
election, Mr. Harris said, leaving John McCain to shift strategies nearly 
weekly." 
 
Note that that Machiavellian style of attack politics is pretty much code for 
the Drudge Report, which has been unplugged down the stretch.
 
Not that Drudge hasn't tried to lay gotcha (Machiavellian) traps on behalf of 
Republicans:
 
VIDEO: Liberal Outrage: A Pro-McCain March In Manhattan... 
CBS REPORTER SHOCK CLAIM: OBAMA AIRPLANE SMELLS BAD; CAMPAIGN TREATS PRESS 
POORLY...
RAGE: Burning McCain campaign sign lands men in hot water...
JESSE JACKSON PREDICTS CHANGE IN U.S. FOREIGN POLICY WITH OBAMA...
Joe Biden looks... different...
PAPER: Obama's NH event scraps National Anthem... 
MCCAIN: OBAMA POLICIES SOCIALIST
PROBE: OBAMA SUPPORTER STOLE MENTALLY-CHALLENGED MAN'S VOTE?
POWELL FOR OBAMA: IT'S NOT ABOUT RACE
 
Not one of those Drudge headlines, all posted within the past week, led 
anywhere in terms of blossoming into larger, damaging stories for Democrats, 
let alone full-blown controversies. (The ACORN voter registration story, which 
Drudge has peddled incessantly, has also failed to take hold in the mainstream 
as a true campaign scandal.) 
 
Yet the sad truth is that in previous campaigns, all those items stood a very 
real chance of being embraced by the Beltway press and becoming big stories. As 
Glenn Greenwald wrote last year: 

The last two presidential elections were overwhelmed by the pettiest and most 
fictitious "controversies" (things like Al Gore's invention of the Internet and 
Love Story claims, John Kerry's windsurfing and war wounds, John Edwards' hair 
brushing and Howard Dean's scream), and our discussions of the most critical 
issues are continuously clouded by distortive sideshows concocted by this 
filth-peddling network. Their endless lynch mob crusades supplant rational and 
substantive political debates, and the most wild fictions are passively 
conveyed by a lazy and co-opted national media. 
Still, despite Drudge's power outage this year, you won't see Harris or 
Halperin or any of the other Beltway players who lust after his attention ever 
mention that the Drudge Report's cache has been dented. That kind of talk is 
not allowed. Only constant adoration will do. 
 
In fact, just this month, Halperin still counted Drudge among "the five most 
important people in American politics right now -- who aren't running for 
president."
 
And while liveblogging the final presidential debate last week, Jonathan Martin 
at Politico, which is part of Drudge's permanent cheering section, claimed that 
Joe the Plumber had been inserted into the national debate about taxes because 
McCain picked up his story from the Drudge Report.
" 'Joe the plumber' can thank "Matt theInternetist" for his instant fame," 
wrote Martin, who noted that "McCain first used this anecdote in his economic 
speech" on Monday.
 
The problem with that gratuitous hat tip to Drudge was that the Drudge Report 
didn't highlight Joe the Plumber until Wednesday, two days after McCain started 
talking about him. So, no, the Everyman does not owe his instant fame to 
Drudge. 
 
But the Drudge fans at Politico ("he has an uncanny ability to drive the 
national conversation with what he chooses to highlight on his site") sure 
wanted to push that pleasing line.
 
And today, either Beltway insiders can't see that the media landscape has 
changed dramatically in recent weeks, or they're too afraid to acknowledge that 
their online emperor is missing some clothes.
 
*Footnote: I had to chuckle as I paged through The Way to Win for the first 
time since it was published in 2006. The book is about the blueprint for taking 
the White House and which politicians were positioning themselves for victory 
in 2008. I laughed because there was one name that did not appear anywhere in 
the book about the upcoming campaign, one name Halperin and Harris left out of 
the index: "Obama, Barack." 
 
 
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200810210005?f=h_top
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/WebTV-Pals
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to