Clinton Aide: Obama Wins 'Drudge Primary'

Politico has a story today about the influence of internet innovator and journalism lightning-rod Matt Drudge that includes this ominous admission:

"It's clear to us that Barack Obama has won the Drudge Primary, and it's one of the most important primaries in this process," conceded a senior Clinton aide, who also acknowledged that Drudge's treatment of Obama could also make the Illinois senator more electable in November.

The piece goes on to explain that Drudge has also had John McCain in the crosshairs, so it isn't just an anti-Clinton thing.

This is undeniably good news for Obama, as long as this holds. Matt Drudge is, for better or worse, the most influential man in political journalism.

I say it's for worse.


As luck would have it, I already had Drudge on my mind. I was all ready to do a story about the single biggest turning point of this campaign, instigated by Drudge, when the RFK remarks story broke. That story was also promoted by Drudge.

The Drudge Report is like a watercooler that almost all political reporters gather around to find out what's hot. Whether they like him or not, ignoring him is not an option. Nobody wants to be the only one to miss the bus on the sexy new story. Politico quotes a Romney aide calling Drudge "an assignment editor for the national press corps."

This is a scary concept. Even if you like and trust him, that is too much power for one man to have. Until this election season, he has been seen as solidly on the conservative side, spearheading the piranha-like skeletoning of Bill Clinton, Al Gore in 2000, and John Kerry in 2004. The thought of a pro-Obama Drudge has got to make the GOP's blood run cold.

How powerful is Drudge? He accidentally saved Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire.

Most pundits attributed the canyon-sized gap between the polling data and the results in New Hampshire to factors like the "humanizing" quality of the infamous, overblown "crying jag."

But the real story there was a barely-sourced piece by Drudge suggesting that, after Iowa, Hillary couldn't survive back-to-back defeats, and was considering dropping out if she lost there.

I theorized at the time that Drudge was planting a seed to try and force Hillary out, but it backfired. The media took the bait and reported the rumor widely, which I believe rallied Hillary's supporters to turn out and defy those polls.

Drudge was also behind another campaign turning point, the story of the photograph of Barack Obama in African garb, claiming it came from the Clinton campaign. That story cemented the idea that Hillary's camp was willing to fight dirtier than a casino ashtray.

Drudge performs two functions. One is finding, framing, and highlighting other news stories, and the other is "journalism" of his own. The first is mainly a product of the herd mentality in the media, so it is extremely problematic, but not devastating.

Drudge's "reporting," however, usually consists of very poorly sourced rumors. The press picks up on these, because they're just reporting what Drudge is saying. Drudge has no editor to check his sources. Unless he prints a rumor that is defamatory and actionable, he has nothing to fear from the courts. Now, even if you trust a journalist completely, there needs to be a check in place for the sourcing. The whole point of the exercise is that you are presenting that which is verifiable.

The fact that "real" journalists enable Drudge by reporting this stuff has contributed greatly to the decline of journalism, to the point where you get things like the ABC Debate debacle, the NY Times/John McCain kerfuffle (which Drudge was neck deep in), and this type of reporting becomes accepted practice.

Drudge may smile on Barack Obama now, but, like Captain Hook, Barack should think twice about smiling back.