Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Friday, November 06, 2009

When choosing stories for the Drudge Report that link to his own Breitbart.Com news portal, Matt Drudge's collaborator Andrew Breitbart has been influenced by a secret commercial deal with Reuters to link to its stories since 2005. "From all appearances, the synergistic three-way between Breitbart, Reuters, and the Drudge Report remains in effect," journalist Greg Beato writes.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

So? Are you saying that news organizations don't promote each other? ABC and Disney don't cross promote? NBC/ABC/CBS/MSNBC/Fox News/CNN don't run stories which have a connection to their own business interests? Don't be so naive RCADE.

Hell, the white house released its own videos in lieu of a press conference. You saying that your ads on the right side of this site have nothing to do with your agenda?

So what is supposed to mean? Is "secret" supposed to imply something sinister?

I'm sure if some Drudge ripoffs were more popular they would do the same.

It's unethical to run paid links to news stories without disclosing the commercial relationship. The fact that Reuters pays for story links on the Drudge Report -- by paying Andrew Breitbart -- calls its editorial independence into question.

Since the Report's independence from the mainstream media is such a vaunted part of its appeal, the fact that it's in bed with Reuters is worth noting.

I'm sure if some Drudge ripoffs were more popular they would do the same.

Funny, but I wouldn't run paid links without telling people they were paid. That's a form of advertising.

well, now we now, you disclosed it for us, thank you.

When Matt and Reuters are in bed, who is on top?

Inguiring minds.....

8 | Posted by Corky at 2009-11-06 01:26 PM | Reply | Flag: Homophobic joke.

Don't let 'em get to you, RC. Your point is bang on right. Outlets have a responsibility to practice the level of transparency they demand from politicians.

Reuters et al. making that arrangement is disturbing. The fact that it could continue unnoticed for four years is downright depressing.

-Homophobic joke

Reuters is gay?

Wasn't there supposed to be some sort of legislation addressing this very issue?

Google cross-supports en-mass. The search engine favors their advertisers and their political agenda.

"Reuters is gay?"

Don't play dumb Corky!

Why? Being territorial, are you?

Google clearly states when something is a "Sponsored Link"

"Hell, the white house released its own videos in lieu of a press conference. You saying that your ads on the right side of this site have nothing to do with your agenda?

#2 | Posted by ELCIDCE90"

Hell, the Bush White House paid fake columnists to concoct propaganda and publish it as news.

@Corky @Member

I thought Reuters was a babe? D'oh!

Said well rcade:

It's unethical to run paid links to news stories without disclosing the commercial relationship. The fact that Reuters pays for story links on the Drudge Report -- by paying Andrew Breitbart -- calls its editorial independence into question.

Since the Report's independence from the mainstream media is such a vaunted part of its appeal, the fact that it's in bed with Reuters is worth noting.

Does anyone know what journalism is anymore? Do they know the difference between news and editorial?

Pfft. I thought you libtards said Drudge isn't a reporter. Now your panties are in a bunch because he runs ads as a news organization?

Do you really find this a violation of some ethical bounds, or is it just a case of chronic penis envy?

#21 | Posted by PublicTrough at 2009-11-06 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag: Just LUVS sayin' "Penis"-it gets him a little "stiffy"....

I never go to that corrupt site. Fuck Drudge and Breitbart.

#23: So incest is best, Jack? Why not read opposing views, if only to understand what warped thinking creates them? That, and Frank's pathetic attempts at witty retorts (#22), are what bring me here.

Penis.

#21 | Posted by PublicTrough at 2009-11-06 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag: Just LUVS sayin' "Penis"-it gets him a little "stiffy"....

#22 | Posted by frankf55 at 2009-11-06 02:43 PM |

Ironic Frank 2.5" decided to retort about a "penis" and little "stiffy"

That post is for you Wisgod.

Publicurinal this is the only site you need for news.

This isn't very important.

There are different standards for what Google does and what Reuters does. One's a search engine that openly markets ad space and search rankings. The other is supposed to be a detached news provider. Drudge or Brietbart selling the links is not nearly as disturbing as Reuters buying them.

In my own little fantasy world, I want certain standards to be met. I want news to be impartial and accurate. It should never be spoonfed. I want government to stick to governing and nothing else. And I want Peter Gabriel to take considerably less time off between albums.

Is that really that much to ask?

The fact that it could continue unnoticed for four years is downright depressing.

Unnoticed? Where have you been for the past 10 years? We all knew Drudge is a bias blog site, but you never noticed Breitbart was a bias news site? Damn, some people are dumber then a canned worm trying escape on a hook tied to a string.

It should be understood that Drudge is an aggregate news source, and it brings in links from all over, even local news websites. If you want to read news from another source, go right ahead. No one is forcing you to only look at Drudge, Reuters, or Breitbart. But it's funny that a website that ripped off the layout and even name of the Drudge Report would raise a stink about this.

Maybe Reuters just recognizes that the Drudge Report has insane amounts of traffic, and they can make their money back and then some when everyone winds up at their site.

Don't play dumb Corky!

Umm. He's not playing.

"8 | Posted by Corky at 2009-11-06 01:26 PM | Reply | Flag: Homophobic joke.

#9 | Posted by member2586 at 2009-11-06 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag: Two Snaps Up!!"

"That post is for you Wisgod.

#25 | Posted by crispee_oc "

Lonely in that basement, CripsyCreme?

That post is for you Wisgod.

#25 | Posted by crispee_oc "

Lonely in that basement, CripsyCreme?

Jealous of Franks 2.5" preyboy?

Noted. I do think it hurts credibility. But, the media, ultimately, is a big whore.

But it's funny that a website that ripped off the layout and even name of the Drudge Report would raise a stink about this.

This site was set up back in 1998 as a response to the Drudge Report. It should not come as a surprise that we'd cover this issue here, just like we've covered dozens of other things about Matt Drudge's site and its rightward tilt.

"This site was set up back in 1998 as a response to the Drudge Report... its rightward tilt."

Pot meet kettle. This site is decidedly biased leftward, so what's the big deal? I don't even support the Drudge Report (although it is a good place to examine current events, as is this site). However, I still view this headline as a non-issue. So you don't like that they and a right-wing news source have a deal worked out... what exactly would you rather them do? I realize we live in a world that craves full disclosure, but I think you are being a little petty.

I've already said what they should do: Tell their audience that the news links are a paid commercial arrangement with Reuters, not editorial content.

What would that even accomplish? It wouldn't diminish the site or it's reputation.

I'm thinking that RCade is a tad jealous that Matt and Andrew are making BigMoney off their sites and, well, you get the gist...

#41

Why should he be jealous? Without comparing the two, you can still say this site is successful.

What would that even accomplish? It wouldn't diminish the site or it's reputation.

You should be able to see how making under-the-table deals with mainstream media organizations diminishes the independence of a site like the Drudge Report. Would Drudge call out Reuters for coverage it thought was inaccurate or biased?

My position is that the Drudge Report serves an important role in the U.S. media and should have ethical practices.

I think most people would be at least a little jealous of Matt Drudge's success. He earns more than $1 million a year running a site with a staff of two people and one ad rep. That's fuck-you money. He doesn't have to answer to anybody.

But as Cobra said, the Retort has been a big success by my standards. I got no complaints.

Try to keep up, Ringmaster. The topic of discussion wasn't the bias of Matt or Rcade's sites. The issue of concern is sites that present themselves as news aggregators and news providers making sub rosa deals.

I watch both sites because they provide interesting counterpoint. Part of me wishes Matt's site had feedback, but I know it'd be nothing but manic mouth-foaming.

My favorite news site is newsmap.jp specifically because it magnifies the attention given stories are receiving.

Rcade

Why hasn't Matt Drudge offered you $1,000,000 for the domain name? If he hasn't he's a bigger idiot than I thought possible.

Why hasn't Matt Drudge offered you $1,000,000 for the domain name?

My guess is that Matt Drudge does not believe drudge.com has any value to him. I have been told that he owned the domain and dropped it before I picked it up in 1998.

He's known about this site for a decade, and even called an LA radio show when my copublisher Jonathan Bourne was on.

rcade,
Just curious how Drudge Report being paid by one outlet is any different than Fox, CNN scrolling news headlines by AP, Reuters etc.

What's your point? Duuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Just curious how Drudge Report being paid by one outlet is any different than Fox, CNN scrolling news headlines by AP, Reuters etc.

The money's going in the wrong direction. Media outlets like Fox and CNN pay AP and Reuters to use their newswires. That's standard practice.

People who link to other sites, like Matt Drudge does, do not typically get paid for those links. (And they don't pay to link either.)

If I was putting news stories on the front page because I'd been paid to link to them, and I didn't tell anybody, would it really not matter at all? I would hope my editorial independence here has value.

Considering both Drudge's are biased and pick and choose the stories that get posted...

So is anyone looking into Zsa Zsa Huffington's financial dealings on her instantly successful site?

Didn't Rcade promote her site too when it first launched?

I've long wondered about HP. It really seemed like it was (at least apparently) significant, influential, and successful even before it went online. I grok the kool-aid drinker affect, but there's just something disconcerting about that site. It's as disturbing as Democratic Underground with their relentless refusal to tolerate any thought other than that which they wish to promote.

FTA: "From all appearances, the synergistic three-way between Breitbart, Reuters, and the Drudge Report remains in effect," journalist Greg Beato writes.

Synergistic?

Lawl!

Like the synergistic three-way deal between record company promoters, unscrupulous disc jockeys and cold hard cash back in the fifties?

The fact that Reuters pays for story links on the Drudge Report -- by paying Andrew Breitbart -- calls its editorial independence into question.

There was never any question regarding Matt in the Hat and Not-So-Brightbart's "editorial independence" they are both bought and sold political hacks.

Reuters on the other hand....

Well, let's just say this revelation makes the stink that Reuters made previously regarding the Retort allegedly exploiting their intellectual property right (by posters C&Ping large chunks of their articles) make a little more sense.

Which is to say... some.

Be Well.

#55 | Posted by dethspud

LOL. Spud just realised that the bruhaha was between the Tort and AP not Reuters.

NVM!

Obviously, failed to re-adjust me tinfoil hat properly there.

Remember this important lesson kids at home...

W/o securing the chin strap yer tin foil hat is effectively useless!

o_O

Be Well.

If I was putting news stories on the front page because I'd been paid to link to them, and I didn't tell anybody, would it really not matter at all?

Not sure about anybody else but, personally, Spud would be surprised and very, very disapointed in yas if you did such a thing.

I would hope my editorial independence here has value.

Without that independence there is little to no value.

The Torters here all enjoy the ability to link to wotever story strikes their fancy. Whether it's a well written piece by someone we rarely hear from in the MSM, the latest developement on the many ongoing situations/crises the planet is embroiled in or just some weird-assed odd spot news that's worthy of entertainment value we get to choose that.

Whether people participate or not on those threads is determined by purely democratic means.

They sink or swim on their own merit, their own inherent ability to generate interest.

The original Drudge Report, of course, presents a slate of articles hand picked by Matt himself and their slant bespeaks an agenda that's obvious to the nekkid eye from outer space.

No discussion.

No postings by individual bloggers dissecting and deconstructing the spin as we see here at the Tort everyday.

No underground deals to promote one news service over another.

Face it, The Drudge Retort despite it's occasional wallowing in crassness and grade school insults has a level of intellectual honesty, integrity, independence and yes, class, that the Drudge Report cannot even approach.

We's also more funneh!

Be Well.

#57 SPUD

Now we have a problem. This is two consecutive days were I find myself in agreement with you. At least mostly in agreement with this one.

Here's where I differ with you. You're accurate, but I think you'd acknowledge the Report and Retort are two different sorts of sites. Comparing the two would be akin to comparing the daytime news content of a network to its prime time analysis/commentary content.

True, the Report links to pieces which paint Republicans/conservatives in a favorable light. (It's dangerous to link the two, but for argument's sake I'll do it)

Yet it's not a blog and even if were that sort of forum, there are many places out there like what RCADE has built here... all with varying degrees of "freedom" to post not only news stories, but to even comment on them.

Now we have a problem. This is two consecutive days were I find myself in agreement with you. At least mostly in agreement with this one.

A brief shiny moment of semi-consensus?

Heaven forbid!

Don't worry, Spud is disagree with you on another thread just now so the ultimate cosmic balance will be maintained.

:>D

You're accurate, but I think you'd acknowledge the Report and Retort are two different sorts of sites. Comparing the two would be akin to comparing the daytime news content of a network to its prime time analysis/commentary content.

Agreed. Comparing the Report to the 'Tort is like comparing a Wormy Apple with a sun ripened Florida Orange, really.

Yet it's not a blog and even if were that sort of forum, there are many places out there like what RCADE has built here... all with varying degrees of "freedom" to post not only news stories, but to even comment on them.

Agreed that there are many other sites out there who allow posters to pick the stories and make comments on them but there really is no other site quite like the Retort in terms of overall balance, fairness and fun.

How many other sites have a resident 8 1/2 inch tall talking Canadian potato fer instance?

Aha, gotcha there!

Be Well.

Touche!

Pot meet kettle. This site is decidedly biased leftward, so what's the big deal?

The big deal is the huge difference between the two sites.

This is a discussion/blog site. Nobody gets their news from here, except in a few instances like when Tosser provides play-by-play on a breaking story in his part of the world that barely rates a sidebar in our media. The important part of drudge.com is not so much the stories, but the discussions that ensue.

DrudgeReport.com is ostensibly a news portal site which also breaks news and gets scoops and does other newsy stuff. (Matt Drudge, as you'll recall, became an overnight sensation running the Monica Lewinsky story that the mainstream press had held back, at the request of the White House. In retrospect it seems the White House could have simply paid him not to run it...) There's no discussion, just links.

But when it turns out he's getting paid to run certain stories, that significantly changes the tenor of what drudgereport.com is. He's whored himself out, skipping the middleman (advertisers) and bringing you the stories the media wants you to see. For a price. While he's certainly entitled to do that, it crosses the line from journalism into something darker.

I mostly stopped looking at DrudgeReport.com years ago. In my opinion the content has degraded to the point that he only runs bash-the-left/glorify-the-
right stories. And his penchant for running ugly photos of those he dislikes is about as discomforting as somebody giddily showing off their porn collection.

Didn't Rcade promote her site too when it first launched?

Not much. I soured on the Huffington Post pretty quickly as a source for news. They clutter the hell out of every story, rehash the work of others to put ads on it, and love dumb titillating stuff like Jon and Kate way more than anyone should.

I've long wondered about HP. It really seemed like it was (at least apparently) significant, influential, and successful even before it went online. I grok the kool-aid drinker affect, but there's just something disconcerting about that site.

Arianna Huffington knew everybody, and by virtue of that she was able to bring a lot of big names on to create free content for her, and get the media to cover the site like it was the Next Big Thing. I think that's why it blew up so quickly.

I'm disappointed in the HP. I expected much more when it started.

I think that's why it blew up so quickly.
I'm disappointed in the HP.

Two days earlier and this would have been a nice Guy Fawkes alternate history joke.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable