he "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
- What the collapse of the Ming Dynasty can tell us about American decline
- Colorado’s new ‘drive high, get a DUI’ commercials are actually pretty clever
- 7 ways to be the most interesting person in any room
- Why is American internet so slow?
- Ukraine's fraught relationship with Russia: A brief history
- Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza's dad: 'I wish he'd never been born'
- 10 things you need to know today: March 10, 2014
- What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
- Why is it so expensive to build a bridge in America?
- Who are the real gay marriage bigots?
Subscribe to the Week