[semimojo]

They are all businesses and it is undeniable that you can make more money if you at least try to serve the total market rather than restricting yourself to half or so of it.

I think it's quite deniable, especially in the internet/social media era.

There's no way Breitbart would even exist if they tried to go down the middle - they would just get lost in the sea of other outlets.

.Same is true of dozens of other sites/shows.

Do you think Rush would have made as much money trying to serve the total market?

How long do you think the FReepathons would run if this was a wide open forum?

For many outlets these days the key is to have a loyal, fired up base of readers/listeners who identify as a group. You can make a lot more money off of a small, loyal, highly engaged base than the public in general.

[x]

I think it has more to do with strategy. Leftists don’t go to Drudgereport. But if Drudge can combine large shares of conservatives and centrists, he’ll do fine.

[bigbob]

Your comparisons to Rush and FR are invalid because neither makes any clam to be unbiased or neutral. Both are conservative platforms so they exclude the rest by definition.

Show me where Drudge has ever claimed to be conservative or right-wing. He is primarily a news aggregator and has never claimed to favor the right in the selection of stories he features or through his headlines he writes.