ALARMINGNEWS_1_1.jpg

January 23, 2004

Matt Drudge is Da Man

Whiny, tiny Moby, fresh from being embarrassed publicly by Eminem (I particularly liked Moby at some awards show accepting an award and including 'I just want everyone to know I have no problem with Eminem' in his acceptance speech. There's a word for that in Brooklyn but this is a family webpage and the word for female dog seems inappropriate.) has started a brawl with Matt Drudge. Apparently, Drudge dared link to Margaret Cho's rant against Bush (complete with the Bush=Hitler comparison that all the kiddies are into these days) and Cho got some hate mail. This expression of free speech by Cho prompted some free speech from others. Moby thinks this is unacceptable. Don't stupid rightwingers know that they're supposed to shut up and take it? What the hell is wrong with us!?!? Calling himself 'outraged', Moby says that Drudge 'exposed her to some really irresponsible and vile reactions.' Ohmig-d! She was exposed! Poor her. This ain't Cuba. Drudge responds with a great quip: 'Those E-mails are mild compared to what I receive on a daily basis. That is the nature of the Internet. Moby and his friends just have to 'butch up'.

The funny thing is, Moby has yet again chosen to insult someone a lot bigger than him (both in fame, influence and, well, size) and again it is someone that holds grudges. Drudge is the Eminem of the internet. Just like insulting Eminem will get you song after song after song, insulting Drudge will get you link after link etc. These are two men, who just don't let go. Eminem is still rapping about Ja Rule, years after Ja Rule first fired at him. After idiot writer Michaelangelo Signorile wrote something bad about Drudge in the NY Press, Drudge pulled the NY Press from his coveted links list, also pulling individual links to editor Russ Smith's page and then-NY Press writer Taki's page. When Drudge got in a tussle with Bill O'Reilly, the Drudge Report featured every unflattering story on O'Reilly, and went out of its way to highlight O'Reilly's poor radio numbers. Now, I love Drudge and I love that he is big enough that he can hold grudges so publicly (as I mentioned in a previous post, I'm a big fan of vengeance), just like a certain bleach haired rapper can. You know every time Moby will make a misstep, Drudge will be upholding his right to free speech and linking to it so millions of people can know about it.

Via Drudge (where else?).

Posted by Karol at January 23, 2004 10:28 AM | TrackBack
Technorati Tags:
Comments

In a sign that Dawn has finally broken me down and gotten me to comment on her friend's blogs now... (Sorry for length but I cannot figure out the link for the java-based posts I included below...)

I saw this earlier in the week, and I think Moby was more concerned (see his posts below) with what Drudge's readers sent to Cho than what was posted by Drudge. Does someone have the right to make racist/sexist personal attacks on someone for what they say in public? Of course. I do think Moby was completely entitled to say that the kind of reaction made by Drudge's readers was simply not called for.



i want you to see the real face of the right wing in america...
my friend margaret cho was making fun of george bush during a comedy routine at the moveon awards last week.
matt drudge took 2 sentences from her routine and printed them out of context along with a very unflattering picture.
and these are the emails that margaret received...
this is the true face of the right wing in america.
judge for yourself, and think of this vile right-wing hate the next time you turn on fox news or listen to rush limbaugh or even the original 'compassionate conservative' george bush...

Posted by: Alceste at January 23, 2004 11:06 AM

The Left runs to that "chill wind McCarthyism" meme like a baby to a blankie.

Posted by: The Commissar at January 23, 2004 11:07 AM

Alceste, look, again, that's fine. Everyone has a right to their free speech (something you liberals have a poor time grasping) including Moby. I think the emailers have a right to say whatever they want, Drudge has a right to print whatever he wants and Moby has a right to criticize it. It's just, how dumb do you have to be to again put yourself in a situation where you're going to be abused?

Posted by: Kashei at January 23, 2004 11:58 AM

That's "the true face of the right wing in America" no more than this is the true face of the left wing in America.

What a stereotyping dickhead.

Moby is selective with what he cites (Cho complies the most bigoted mail she received and Moby sifts for the worst of that), has double standards (Cho, herself, was ranting about the RNC's focusing on unrepresentative MoveOn entries) and changes the subject (he doesn't actually address Cho's outrageous remarks).

That strategy sounds awfully familar ...

Cho + Moby = Chomsky?

Posted by: Joe Grossberg at January 23, 2004 12:14 PM

Have you been busy with a lot of aliases RR?

Don't know what Moby is whining about. Those posts (or whatever they are) merely confirm that the left does not have a monopoly on brainless fucks - despite what this site tries to say. Much ado about nothing.

Posted by: Bobby at January 23, 2004 12:18 PM

Alceste:

Far worst things have been said about Bush by speakers at Dean rallies. There is rough justice that people who throw obscenities at the President get obscenities thrown back at them.

The solution to this problem is for the Dean campaign to clean up their act and join the civilized world.

Posted by: Jake at January 23, 2004 12:44 PM

Now on to Kashei’s real reason for her post:

Drudge is a true Internet visionary. In 1996, he made a speech before the Press Club, about the future of the Internet and its effect on traditional media.

He predicted the existence and the power of blogs five years before they actually existed. He predicted that the traditional media would loose their power to control the news agenda because Bloggers would not allow them to suppress stories as they did in the past. He predicted that people would get most of their news from the Internet and not from traditional media. That has proved to be true starting this year.

Drudge was widely derided by the press both at the meeting and afterward, but almost everything he said in that speech became true.

There was hundreds of Internet “visionaries” in the 90s.
But Drudge was one of the very, very few to accurately predict the future.

Posted by: Jake at January 23, 2004 01:13 PM

I don't see what is so great about the Drudge Report all it does is link to other news agencys stories. Even I can do that. Why has he gotten so popular?

Posted by: PAUL at January 23, 2004 02:08 PM

Mobys mad at drudge as if they were friends and Moby was betrayed. Drudge can print what he wants.

I read the Daily News story and I don't get how/ why Kashei is trying to turn this into how the left wing is against free speech if it hurts them.
I understand Mobys complaint being about responsible reporting and how drudge took a couple lines of her comedy routine out of context.
Try as you might but you can't make this about the left wing being against free speech.

Posted by: PAUL at January 23, 2004 02:27 PM

Paul:
Drudge’s site is the most popular news site on the web by far so he can give legs to any story he chooses.

But his real power comes from all of his contacts in newsrooms all over the US. If a editor or producer suppresses a story, chances are that Drudge will get a email with the compete story from someone in that newsroom. He publishes the details and the newspaper or network is forced to release the story. That is how the Monica story saw the light of day because the Time editors suppressed it.

Do you know that during the Clinton-Bush campaign in 92:

A reporter for the LA Times wrote a story detailing Clinton’s affairs with 6 women while he was Governor. An editor suppressed the story.

Reporters for the Washington Post and New York Times wrote stories detailing the White Water scandal. Editors at both papers suppressed the stories.

A reporter at the Washington Post wrote a story detailing Clinton’s abusive treatment of his staff. And that his abusive treatment cause high turnover in his staff so that his administrations were mediocre at best. An editor suppressed the story.

How do we know these stories were true? All were printed within a year after the election with notes from the editors saying they held the stories until now because they did not want to influence the elections.

If Drudge would have been around in 92, all of these stories would have been printed and Clinton would have lost in a landslide.

Posted by: Jake at January 23, 2004 03:06 PM

thanks for the info Jake.

Posted by: PAUL at January 23, 2004 03:48 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?