- Home & Garden
Understanding Bias in News Media
If you want unbiased news, there’s only one TV news channel that will deliver that. Most news channels have an agenda based on their commercial relationships. A sports reporter for Fox News isn’t going to tell the viewers that the previous afternoon’s NASCAR race was boring and predictable as Fox is one of the broadcasters for the sport. It’s the same story when you consider political coverage across the major news networks. TV news isn’t as important as it used to be thanks to the internet and social media in particular, but it’s still a major player as around half of all adult Americans still rely on TV for their news.
How Biased Is TV News?
TV news broadcasters like to frame stories so that the audience takes one side over the other. This means that balance and fairness are not part of the broadcast, so the viewer doesn’t get to decide on the issue being presented to them. If every time there’s a story about drug users, the broadcaster frames the story with the well-used phrase “the war on drugs” the audience is reminded of the negative stories associated with that phase. An interviewee who’s on the news show to tell positive stories of a decrease in drug use might find that narrative difficult to sell to an audience who are prepared for the worst through images, phrases and graphics that combine to make them recall the losing war on drugs.
Let’s take a look at the type of coverage that President Trump received when he first stepped into office as this shows the way news is now reported. Rather than reporting the facts, news outlets like to give a lot of opinions which is why the Big Three broadcast networks – ABC, CBS and NBC — collectively upset the President so much that he began his much-publicized rant about fake news. The news these outlets were showing wasn’t fake but it was biased to show the President in a negative light with an average of 91% of all coverage comments were negative about the President across all three networks.
In the past, CNN has been subject to claims that their news is biased towards the Democratic Party as statistics generated by the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University suggest that Republicans are shown in a bad light three times as often as Democrats. The research shows that 41% of all stories were negative, 46% were neutral and only 14% were positive. There was a time when CNN was jokingly called the Clinton News Network.
Fox has been accused of biased coverage whenever climate change is on the agenda. A study by Media Matters for America found that in 2013, 69% of its guests and 75% of the overall mentions of climate change threw doubt on the subject. This is a subject that should be hotly debated with each side given an equal voice so the study suggests that Fox has an agenda when it comes to reporting climate change.
BBC World News
Although the BBC World News has not been criticized for political bias, the suggestion has been made that its reporting tends to be a little anti-American. If you read reports by American news commentator Bill O’Reilly, you might start to believe that the BBC’s reporting is anti-American, but they’re not biased towards any side of a particular debate so the suggestion is that if you want to get your news from the TV, check out BBC World News.
MORE FROM LIFE123.COM
Bias of Drudge Report
- Balanced News
- Story of the Week
- News Curation Principles
- Balanced Search
- Bias Ratings
- Media Bias Chart
- Fact Check Bias
- Rate Your Bias
- Types of Bias
- Spot & Avoid Misinformation
- Facts & Fact Checking
- Misinformation Watch Blogs
- Common Ground
- Recommended Reading
- Bridging Divides
- Free Speech
- Freedom of Speech
- AllSides Talks
- Upcoming Conversations & Events
- Lesson Plans
- Classroom Activities
- Media Services
- AllSides for Schools
- Government Services
- Apps & Extensions
- Editorial Philosophy
- Job Openings
- Ownership Information
How we determined this rating:
- Independent Review
- Community Feedback: ratings
- AllSides has medium confidence in this bias rating.
Unless otherwise noted, this bias rating refers only to online news coverage, not TV, print, or radio content.
The source displays media bias in ways that moderately align with conservative, traditional, libertarian, or right-wing thought and/or policy agendas.
About Drudge Report
What a "lean right" rating means, bias reviews, community feedback, confidence level, additional information.
- Ownership & Funding
Articles from Drudge Report
Drudge Report is a news media source with an AllSides Media Bias Rating™ of Lean Right.
Sources with an AllSides Media Bias Rating of Lean Right display media bias in ways that moderately align with conservative, traditional, libertarian, or right-wing thought and/or policy agendas. A Lean Right bias is a moderately conservative rating on the political spectrum.
Drudge Report Rated Lean Right in Aug. 2018 Editorial Review
Drudge Report was given a Lean Right AllSides Media Bias Rating following an Editorial Review in August 2018.
Despite its reputation as being very right/conservative, the AllSides panel noted that the Drudge Report regularly features news stories that are mostly being covered by outlets AllSides rates on the left. The panel found that the Drudge Report often aggregated stories from outlets we rated as Left or Lean Left at the time of review, including The Huffington Post , The Washington Post , NBC , and more. While the Drudge Report did feature news stories and articles from sources on the left, it also featured lots of stories from sources with a Right, Lean Right, or Center AllSides Media Bias Rating™ , including Fox News , The Wall Street Journal , and Breitbart .
In fact, upon first looking at the Drudge Report, at least one member of the AllSides panel initially thought that the Drudge Report might warrant a Lean Left or Center bias rating. This initial instinct is consistent with a 2005 UCLA study which found the Drudge Report has a Lean Left media bias; read more about that study here .
The AllSides editorial panel noted that the Drudge Report often uses sensational stories or language in its headlines and the stories it chooses to feature. Some members of the AllSides panel expressed concerns about the Drudge Report publishing sensationalist or fake news .
Top of Page
As of May 2023, people have voted on the AllSides Media Bias Rating for Drudge Report. On average, those who disagree with our rating think this source has a Lean Right bias.
As of May 2023, AllSides has medium confidence in our Lean Right rating for Drudge Report. Two bias reviews have affirmed this rating or multiple reviews have returned differing results. If we perform more bias reviews and gather consistent data, this confidence level will increase.
Drudge Report is a news aggregation website. Run by Matt Drudge with the help of Joseph Curl and Charles Hurt, the site consists mainly of links to stories from the United States and international mainstream media about politics, entertainment, and current events, as well as links to many columnists. Occasionally, Drudge authors new stories himself based on tips. The Report originated in 1996 as a weekly subscriber-based email dispatch. It was the first news source to break the Monica Lewinsky scandal to the public after Newsweek decided not to publish the story.
Drudge met Andrew Breitbart in Los Angeles during the 1990s and became his mentor, with Breitbart later helping to run the Drudge Report.
UCLA Study on Drudge Report Finds Center / Lean Left Bias Due to Aggregation
A 2005 UCLA stud y found that Drudge Report has a center/lean left bias, due to the website aggregating news from other media outlets. The study's lead author was Tim Groseclose, formerly UCLA faculty and currently Adam Smith Chair at George Mason University's Mercatus Center.
The study authors wrote (emphasis ours):
Another result, which appears anomalous, is not so anomalous upon further examination. This is the estimate for the Drudge Report, which at 60.4, places it approximately in the middle of our mix of media outlets and approximately as liberal as a typical Southern Democrat, such as John Breaux (D-LA). We should emphasize that this estimate reflects both the news flashes that Matt Drudge reports and the news stories to which his site links on other web sites. In fact, of the entire 311 think-tank citations we found in the Drudge Report, only five came from reports written by Matt Drudge. Thus, for all intents and purposes, our estimate for the DrudgeReport refers only to the articles to which the Report links on other web sites. Although the conventional wisdom often asserts that the Drudge Report is relatively conservative, we believe that the conventional wisdom would also assert that—if confined only to the news stories to which the Report links on other web sites—this set would have a slant approximately equal to the average slant of all media outlets, since, after all, it is comprised of stories from a broad mix of such outlets.
Previous AllSides Media Bias Ratings™ for Drudge Report
AllSides previously rated The Drudge Report as having a Right media bias. We switched its bias rating to Lean Right following the Aug. 2018 Editorial Review .
Third-Party Accusations of Bias
The Drudge Report has been criticized in the past for running stories that were hoaxes, poorly sourced, or unfactual , including a theory that Barack Obama was not a U.S. citizen, a hoax about a former prostitute who claimed her son was fathered by Bill Clinton, and a false statement that an undocumented immigrant started the October 2017 Northern California wildfires.
Bias of Drudge Report's Audience
According to a 2014 Pew Research study , the clear majority of Drudge Report's audience (74%) is right-of-center (by comparison, 26% of all Pew panelists were right-of-center). 8% of Drudge Report's audience is left or left-of-center (compared with 38% of all respondents to the survey). Roughly 18% of Drudge Report's audience holds political values consistent with the political center or exhibit mixed values (compared with 36% of all panelists).
Drudge Report Ownership and Funding
Owner: Matt Drudge
- May 25, 2023 | Daily Source Bias Check: NeuroNation
- May 24, 2023 | The Latest Fact Checks curated by Media Bias Fact Check 05/24/2023
- May 24, 2023 | Daily Source Bias Check: Edwardsburg Argus
- May 23, 2023 | The Latest Fact Checks curated by Media Bias Fact Check 05/23/2023
- May 23, 2023 | Daily Source Bias Check: Black Community News (BCN)
Drudge Report – Bias and Credibility
These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources.
- Overall, we rate the Drudge Report Right-Center Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that more frequently favor the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to occasionally using poor sources with failed fact checks.
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER Factual Reporting: MIXED Country: USA Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE Media Type: Website Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
Founded in 1995 as one of the first independent web-only news sources, The Drudge Report is a politically conservative American news aggregation website run by Matt Drudge. The site consists mainly of links to stories from the United States and international media about politics, entertainment, and current events; it also has links to many columnists. Occasionally, Drudge authors new stories himself, based on tips. The Drudge Report focuses on sensationalized stories with a right-wing bias. Matt Drudge and Charles Hunt edit the website .
In 2016, Matt Drudge was a strong supporter of Donald Trump; however, in 2018, Drudge began distancing himself from Trump and openly criticized him , primarily for Trump’s broken promises on the border wall and immigration.
Due to this change in position, some strong Trump supporters have labeled The Drudge Report as the progressive left. For example, Conservative/Libertarian Trump supporter Tucker Carlson stated that Matt Drudge is “firmly a man of the progressive left,” with the conservative Fox News host comparing the Drudge Report founder to The Daily Beast or “any other woke propaganda outlet posing as a news company.”
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Analysis
The Drudge Report is owned by Matt Drudge and is funded through online advertising.
Analysis / Bias
In review, the Drudge Report typically provides hyperlinks to external news sources, in which Matt Drudge writes the lead in headlines. In the past, almost all news stories favored the right and linked to right-leaning sources. Drudge is also frequently linked to conspiracy sources such as ZeroHedge and Infowars and Questionable sources, with very poor fact-check records, such as Breitbart , WND , and the Gateway Pundit .
Today, the Drudge Report typically links to more credible, lower-biased sources such as the Associated Press , Reuters , The Atlantic , and Fox News . However, there are still times when they publish the Questionable Breitbart as well as the Daily Mail .
Drudge Report also publishes columns from a wide range of journalists such as Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Ben Shapiro on the right and Paul Krugman and Maggie Haberman on the left. For the most part, the majority are right-leaning columnists, with many who have poor track records with fact-checkers.
Although the Drudge Report no longer supports Donald Trump, they clearly favor the right based on story selection and the right-leaning columnists that dominate the website. A review of 50 articles revealed that 16 favored the right and 9 favored the left, with the rest falling into a non-political category. In general, the Drudge Report has moderated toward a more Right-Center stance since the last review.
Finally, in the past, the Drudge Report has also promoted numerous debunked conspiracy theories such as The President Obama Birther conspiracy and that Undocumented children are violent criminals . A review of articles over the last two years indicates they have not failed a fact check and do not regularly publish conspiratorial content.
Failed Fact Checks (None recently)
- “Reporters rehearse questions with White House press (secretary).” – PANTS ON FIRE
- “Says Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald “Sterling is a Democrat.” – PANTS ON FIRE
- A photograph shows children holding guns on the US-Mexico border. – FALSE
- Is President Obama’s trip to India going to cost $200 million per day? – FALSE
- BREAKING: Illegal Muslim From Iran Arrested For Starting California Wildfire – PANTS ON FIRE
Overall, we rate the Drudge Report Right-Center Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that more frequently favor the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to occasionally using poor sources with failed fact checks. (7/19/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 9/09/2022)
- Least Biased
Last Updated on May 24, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check
Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources
Explore Similar Sources:
- Drudge Retort – Bias and Credibility
- Black Agenda Report – Bias and Credibility
- Boy Genius Report (BGR) – Bias and Credibility
- Borowitz Report – Bias and Credibility
- Bleacher Report – Bias and Credibility
- North Carolina
- West Virginia
- Online hoaxes
- Health Care
- Foreign Policy
- Kamala Harris
- Charles Schumer
- Mitch McConnell
- Bernie Sanders
- Nancy Pelosi
- Donald Trump
- Tucker Carlson
- Sean Hannity
- Rachel Maddow
- PolitiFact Videos
- 2020 Elections
Mostly false, pants on fire.
- Biden Promise Tracker
- Latest Promises
- Our Process
- Who pays for PolitiFact?
- Advertise with Us
- Suggest a Fact-check
- Corrections and Updates
Stand up for the facts!
Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy. We need your help.
I would like to contribute
The Drudge Report is a news aggregation website founded by Matt Drudge. It is often considered conservative.
Latest Fact-checks of Drudge Report
Fact-checking journalism is the heart of PolitiFact. Our core principles are independence, transparency, fairness, thorough reporting and clear writing. The reason we publish is to give citizens the information they need to govern themselves in a democracy.
Support independent fact-checking. Become a member!
In a world of wild talk and fake news, help us stand up for the facts.
Opinion: Is Drudge Report Real Journalism?
By Jennifer Taylor
September 28, 2020
At first glance, a reader can quickly discern the state of things around the country by noting a few of the eye-popping headlines— NFL players booed as racial justice stand sparks outrage , Oregon Scorched , and Advantages of Incumbency Crumbling Away for Trump . The website, unexpectedly still rudimentary, tells readers almost everything they need to know about today. So between the headlines and accompanying images an unfamiliar consumer might conclude this is a newspaper.
But, it’s not. It’s Drudge Report.
This modern-day news delivery platform dubbed a news aggregator was not initially self-described as journalism. Rather, founder Matt Drudge in an address before the National Press Club characterized himself as a “citizen journalist,” a term which implies license to rush to publish stories that mainstream media hesitate to print based on industry best practices. A lot has changed since this scrappy newsletter made its splash on a budding, 1995 internet, including my view. In a transformative era of journalism, I believe Drudge Report qualifies as journalism in its service to the public, exposing readers to news covered by a range of organizations including those not leaning toward a single bias.
Once narrowly focusing on Hollywood and Washington D.C. gossip, the Drudge Report made waves as one the big drivers of internet traffic even before Google or Facebook, but caused a sensation when it broke the bombshell Clinton-Monica Lewinsky scandal, posting insider information that Newsweek killed, according to Pew Research Center . It has since evolved into the dominating news-aggregation website.
But is it journalism? At its outset, I would have said: Heck no.
Leading up to the Monica Lewinsky scandal and as an undergraduate journalism student at San Francisco State University, I would have scoffed at the idea. My biggest criticism as a then 20-something would have been: There’s no actual journalist. There’s no internal newspaper model monitoring content through multiple layers of editors. It doesn’t look anything like the broadsheet-style paper I held in my ink-stained hands. Yet, my news reporting professor back then warned our class: Newspapers will no longer exist. Still, I would have questioned how this website could demonstrate an obligation to the truth by posting other news organizations’ stories? It’s doubtful Drudge Report actually independently verifies all the facts in the dozens of stories it posts daily. Pew’s obligation to the truth tenet of journalism—one of several principles uniting journalists and news media in their definition of journalism as studied by the Washington D.C. think tank—demands that level of integrity.
Drudge Report also has a history of a Republican-leaning, conservative ideology. This alone would have disqualified Drudge Report as journalism for me then. News is supposed to remain as unbiased as possible; another core principle defining journalism, according to Pew research. Openly presenting this slant seems to violate this pillar, skewing the truth.
But as much as I miss it, it’s not the 1990s. A lot has changed in 25 years, including technology, my opinion about what is journalism and now, my thoughts about Drudge Report. While I’ve always subscribed rigidly to Pew’s four principles of journalism, the functionality of Drudge Report clearly informs the public; keeps government, businesses and other centers of power in check; and shines a light on dishonest acts.
Critics also have challenged Drudge Report as a “conservative ideologue,” according to a 2011 New York Times profile , noting that 15 percent of all the traffic at WashingtonPost.com was driven by Drudge Report. The posting of more “balanced” links speaks to another tenet of journalism—making it harder for those in power to abuse their power. As Drudge Report evolved, so have the linked news stories on the site and the opinions of his critics including those of allsides.com , which in 2018 recategorized the aggregator from a “Right” media bias to a “Leaning Right” bias. That progression is what has since swayed my view.
Twenty-five years ago many of us may not have anticipated the demise of newspapers or exactly how journalism would evolve in an internet- and social-media-driven society. But at some point early on, Drudge did. And it resonates because when I last looked, the counter in the lower right corner on the website showed 27,436,293 visits to the website in the past 24 hours and a new eye-popping headline leading the page— San Francisco may soon allow 16-year-olds to vote . Drudge Report has prevailed in a journalism world in the midst of remolding, in ways mainstream news organizations have not.
May 1, 2023
Opinion: The Persistence of Prejudice: The State of Islamophobia in America
I am hopeful — hopeful that now there is a space for me as a Muslim journalist in the U.S. media to thrive, a space that wasn’t widely available to people like me ever before.
By Sami Vanderlip
March 29, 2023
Opinion: What a YouTuber’s Interview with Sam Bankman-Fried Can Teach Us About Journalism
(PHOENIX) — When Tiffany Fong lost $200k in the crypto market, she started a YouTube channel to “share her grief and […]
By Barbi Walker-Walsh
- Covering Trump
- Business of Journalism
The voice of journalism
Drudge Has Lost His Touch
Technology, the competition, and the times have passed him.
If you visited the Drudge Report on July 1, you’d be forgiven for thinking that nothing had changed. A BILLION THANKS FOR MAKING JUNE 2009—TOP JUNE IN DRUDGE REPORT’S 14 YEAR HISTORY!? PAGE HIT 675,406,735 VIEWS FROM 129,922,878 VISITS … TRAFFIC ROSE 21% FOR MONTH OVER YEAR AGO blared the headline on the right of the home page. Matt Drudge’s Web site appeared to be chugging along, sinking its teeth into the news cycle just like it used to.
In the aftermath of Bush v. Kerry in 2004, Drudge’s place in journalism had no parallel. Mark Halperin and John Harris, two major machers of the Washington, D.C., press corps, jointly declared: “Matt Drudge rules our world.” Over the course of a decade, Drudge’s no-frills approach—his original delivery method was e-mail, and some of his early content was gleaned from the trash cans at CBS News—had turned his Web site into a world-beater. In 1998, his exposure of a spiked Newsweek piece on Monica Lewinsky nearly knocked down the Clinton presidency, and six years later, by amplifying the claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, he helped torpedo John Kerry’s candidacy.
Drudge was the right’s one-man wrecking crew, feared by liberals and respected by bookers and editors around the country.
It’s easy to look back now and laugh at the hyperbolic quality of Harris and Halperin’s claim, but here’s the thing: at the time, it was strikingly close to the truth.
Since then, though, a number of things have changed in ways that have diminished Drudge’s power. The field of online news has welcomed several explosive upstarts, such as Politico and The Huffington Post (Talking Points Memo, which launched in 2000, has also expanded rapidly since 2004). Such sites have built on the promise of Drudge, mixing hard news and chatter into a stew that generates enormous traffic and an ability to shape the conversation. Meanwhile, the Republicans, to whom Drudge hitched his star, have fallen into disarray, and the mood of the country shifted dramatically with the election of Barack Obama and the onset of the financial crisis.
One sign that Drudge’s influence is on the wane is that he goes to such great lengths to deny it. Take his July 1 boast about page views, which sounds impressive—for a moment. Page-view counts aren’t taken seriously when a site automatically and completely refreshes between fifteen and twenty times an hour, as Drudge’s does—a practice that artificially inflates page-view counts. Moreover, unlike unique visitors, page views are not an accurate reflection of engaged eyeballs, which is what advertisers look for above all else. In fact, if you go strictly by the numbers, Drudge is now a middle-of-the-pack niche product. As of this writing, Alexa, Amazon’s Web site counter, lists Drudge as the 704th most popular site on the Internet. (Politico is 2,078 and The Huffington Post is 331.) Compete.com, which tracks Web traffic over time, tells a fuller story: in June of 2008, all three sites had around two million unique visitors. Since then, The Huffington Post’s numbers have soared, reaching 6.7 million in June. Drudge and Politico have both seen their traffic rise slightly, yet remain under the three million mark monthly.
As his competition has grown and become more dynamic, Drudge’s formula has remained essentially unchanged. There are the links to stories that affirm his brand of conservatism, with its focus on the tyranny of taxation, the media’s liberal bias, and the weakness of Democratic politicians, especially on matters of foreign policy. There are the links to stories that reflect his idiosyncratic tastes—JAPAN ROBOTS ON MOON BY 2020! screamed the site on April 3. The Drudge Report is stubbornly invulnerable to user participation—no one blogs, no one comments. The Huffington Post and Politico, meanwhile, host large and loyal armies of readers who interact with one another and with the site’s writers. (And TPM’S readers famously helped the site drive the U.S. attorneys scandal in 2007, for which TPM won a Polk Award.) In the age of Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, community building is the name of the game. But not at the Drudge Report, which remains Drudge’s private kingdom.
So much so that while his erstwhile competitors still think of him as useful from time to time, they no longer regard him as a major force. When Politico first launched in early 2007, its top editors—including John Harris—made a concerted effort to get Drudge to link to their stories. Now, according to Politico insiders, those efforts to grab Drudge’s attention have mostly stopped. When The Huffington Post first launched, I heard Mark Green, the former New York City public advocate and a writer for the site, describe it as an effort by the left to challenge Drudge. So I asked Nico Pitney, HuffPo’s national editor, if he considered Drudge a competitor. “I don’t think people at the site think that way at all,” he said, noting that The Huffington Post is trying to do more original reporting, and has hired veteran reporters like Tom Edsall and Dan Froomkin. “That’s just not Drudge’s thing. We’ve got a dozen articles a day and he does, maybe, one article a week.”
Pitney’s indifference to Drudge is telling. After all, around the same time that Drudge was trumpeting Rather meaningless page-view counts, Pitney was captivating the media world with his Twitter-based coverage of the unrest in Iran. Pitney’s approach to that story, which depended on input from readers all over the world, is the sort of thing that Drudge’s site simply lacks the capacity—and apparently the will—to do.
Obama’s inauguration may have been the turning point. Not one story that originated on Drudge’s site since then has had much staying power in the news cycle—and his sense for what drives that cycle seems to have failed him. Immediately following Obama’s Cairo speech, for instance, Drudge focused on the speech’s length: 6,000 WORDS! read the headline. The Cairo speech was a major media event, generating an enormous amount of coverage and commentary. Drudge’s complaint hardly registered. His influence was also conspicuously absent six weeks later, during the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. On July 15, the third day of the hearings, Drudge focused on Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi, and Obama’s appearance at the baseball All-Star game the night before. The Huffington Post, on the other hand, jumped on a vaguely offensive clip of Senator Tom Coburn addressing Sotomayor in the manner of I Love Lucy ’s Ricky Ricardo (Coburn seems to have assumed that Sotomayor needed to be talked to in the voice of a fellow Latin American). Within minutes, the clip was blowing up on cable news and the blogs. It was exactly the sort of contrived news story that used to be Drudge’s bread and butter. But because it relied on obsessing over and disseminating an instantly edited news clip—which isn’t what Drudge does—and because it showed a Republican senator to be a buffoon, HuffPo beat him at his own game.
It could simply be that with the GOP out of power, Drudge’s star has dimmed as well. But his decline feels more fundamental. Drudge is increasingly out of step with the times and the nation. Brian Williams of NBC once referred to Drudge’s site as “America’s bulletin board,” but these days Drudge seems an unlikely host. An academic study, released in July by Kalev Leetaru of the University of Illinois, found that Drudge’s site was less active than normal during the crucial early months of the Iraq war. That was a different time and different set of issues, but it suggests an interesting parallel to the Drudge Report’s current fecklessness. Drudge’s influence, and his role in the media landscape, seems to shrink when the stakes are high and the stories complex. Drudge has never run a tabloid; his goal isn’t to be an alluring distraction (think Gawker). Rather, he purposely takes an unserious attitude toward politics. But at the moment, politics is very serious and the consequences dire.
It would probably be too much to expect Drudge to grapple seriously with the ways in which George W. Bush’s administration damaged conservatism, but even the civil war that has engulfed the GOP since Bush left office has, for he most part, been ignored by Drudge. Instead, he reheats old conservative arguments, as if the Bush presidency had never happened. Take his undying complaints about “liberal media bias.” This past June, Drudge worked himself into a lather when ABC News nestled inside the Obama White House to shoot an evening special. In Drudge’s world, the special was another example of the too-close-for-comfort relationship between the White House and the press tasked with covering it. While it is an issue worth raising, the ABC special barely registered on the national radar. When it aired, it was the lowest-rated network program of the night. Drudge had directed his ire against a target no one much cared about.
To the extent there has been a meaningful critique of Obama from the right, it has come from a smattering of other Web sites, like Instapundit and Michelle Malkin, as well as from Rush Limbaugh. Significantly, all three engage with their audience in some way. Drudge’s doesn’t reply to e-mail. There is a blank space on his Web site, through which you can submit news tips. (I’ve tried to get in touch with him this way, to no avail.)
Meanwhile, a new right, nascent and based online, has begun to emerge. Pajamas Media has launched an ambitious television project, predicated on the kind of technological advancements that Drudge has shunned. And the struggle over the future of American conservatism is playing out on sites like David Frum’s New Majority. Even National Review , an outpost for traditional conservatives, recently hired the iconoclastic Reihan Salam in an effort to adapt. Thus far, the relationship between this new right and Drudge might best be understood as one of missed opportunity. The “Tea Party” protests that broke out in April took aim at two of Drudge’s favorite targets: the Obama administration and the ballooning federal deficit. Granted, Drudge was the protestors’ loyal cheerleader, turning their every move into a headline on his site. But being a cheerleader means being on the sidelines—precisely where Drudge now finds himself.
“Drudge gets so worked up every day about such petty stuff,” one New York newspaper editor told me. “That’s appropriate for carnival/campaign season, but it doesn’t as effectively fit the mood in a country that is serious about sober governing.” A nation beset by financial crisis at home and besieged around the world, in other words, has more on its mind than the length of a presidential speech or an unwatched ABC special, let alone the threat of Japanese robots. Yet it’s worth noting that this editor declined to put his comments on the record. Mark Halperin and John Harris, once among Drudge’s most prominent validators, also chose not to comment for this piece. The implication is clear: down the road, Matt Drudge could re-emerge. “He’s on a bit of a sabbatical,” explained a friend of Drudge’s. “He doesn’t care” that his influence isn’t what it used to be.
Perhaps. But the short- or long-term prospects of the Drudge Report recapturing its place at the center of our political media are bleak. Even if Drudge were to hire a blogger, open a comments section, and adopt a more substantive approach to news, it’s unlikely that he’d ever match his previous level of influence. Drudge is in part a victim of his own success. He spawned imitators and emulators, who in turn have only further splintered the media world. If there is an agenda to be set, no one outlet or editor has the power to set it. It’s simply too rapid and unknowable a thing to harness. While The Fix, put together by Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post , and Playbook, put together by Politico’s Mike Allen, are often referred to as Drudge’s heirs, neither has the influence that Drudge once had, nor do they display the kind of naked ideological bias that was Drudge’s hallmark. Of course, their existence is a testament to Drudge’s legacy as a trailblazer in the field of Internet newsgathering and gossip mongering. But increasingly, a legacy is all the Drudge Report has to offer.
Has America ever needed a media watchdog more than now? Help us by joining CJR today .
Journalism is now the second draft of history
By james harkin.
In the age of the relentless media fact-check, reading the news often feels like hearing a punch-line deflated before you catch the body of the joke. Free-floating fact-checking initiatives have lately become big (non-profit) business. In an industry—the written media—whose...
The newspaper that #MeToo missed
By jennifer robison, palestinian citizens of israel struggle to tell their stories, by miriam berger, what a report from germany teaches us about investigating algorithms, by nicholas diakopoulos.
Is the drudge report biased
Examples of confirmation bias are found in news reports, academic research and interpersonal relations. For example, a journalist demonstrates confirmation bias when she interviews only those experts who support her story’s angle.
A positive bias is a term in sociology that indicates feelings toward a subject that influence its positive treatment. This can be seen in a number of different forms, and while it may be innocent enough in most cases, it can represent a le...
If you want unbiased news, there’s only one TV news channel that will deliver that. Most news channels have an agenda based on their commercial relationships. TV news broadcasters like to frame stories so that the audience takes one side ov...
As of May 2023, AllSides has medium confidence in our Lean Right rating for Drudge Report. Two bias reviews have affirmed this rating or multiple reviews have
Overall, we rate the Drudge Report Right-Center Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that more frequently favor the right. We also rate them
Some had regarded the Drudge Report as conservative in tone, and it has been referred to in the media as "a conservative news aggregator". In 2008, Richard
The Drudge Report is a news aggregation website founded by Matt Drudge. It is often considered conservative. Drudge Report's Website
Yes, the Drudge Report is biased. It's a news aggregator, which means it simply rounds up links to stories all in one convenient location.
As Drudge Report evolved, so have the linked news stories on the site and the opinions of his critics including those of allsides.com, which in
Reporting. Circles and. Ellipses: Balance of Biases. Neutral. Most Extreme. Liberal. Hyper-Partisan. Liberal. Skews. Liberal. Minimal partisan bias OR.
The Drudge Report made its name by making life hell for Democrats in the White House. But over the past several months, the website, named after
the media's liberal bias, and the weakness of Democratic politicians
first successful attempt to measure bias objectively in a ... entirely on the articles that the Drudge Report lists on.
Quora WitrynaYes, the Drudge Report is biased.