The "media gravediggers" were wrong again about Matt Drudge, said Jack Shafer in Slate. A string of observers cited "wishful headlines on the Drudge Report hinting at a possible upset of Barack Obama by John McCain" as evidence that Drudge had lost his ability to influence the mainstream media. But Drudge will endure as long as there are readers who "want an information site that would rather err on the side of recklessness once in a while than be right all the time."
You're missing the point, said Eric Boehlert in Media Matters. Drudge didn't drive the news during the general election, "he was an irrelevant bystander." He clearly doesn't have the influence he craves. Drudge can't be happy "posting headlines that have no impact on American politics."
It's nice of Shafer to spell out all the reasons why it's wrong to deny Drudge's impact, said Drew Grant in Jossip. But Matt Drudge doesn't need a white knight. "People have been calling for his head since the conception of his Web site back during the Lewinsky scandal, and the fact that it's still trooping along, despite, or perhaps because of, Obama's victory should be proof enough that the man isn't going anywhere."
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- How the South's ugly racial history is haunting ObamaCare
- How to be the most productive person in your office — and still get home by 5:30 p.m.
- Stop making fun of philosophy and read some philosophy
- If Democrats abandon immigration reform after Tuesday's likely loss, they will turn 2016 into a debacle
- 43 TV shows to watch in 2014
- Feast your eyes on this beautiful linguistic family tree
- Beware of Splenda: The backlash against artificial sugars
- The culture war finally comes to the Catholic Church
- 6 things the happiest families all have in common
- What if Leo Strauss was right?
Subscribe to the Week