Top blogs often too one-sided [Free Republic and Drudge dwarf all others but are unfair]

The Oregonian ^ | October 23, 2005 | Regina Lawrence

[Jim Robinson]

T here's been a lot of excitement about blogs since they broke into public consciousness during the 2004 election. They are now growing at an astronomical rate. The blog search engine Technorati now tracks almost 20 million of them, and various estimates of the number of blog users range from 32 million to 50 million Americans.

Blogophiles see blogs as a new way for citizens to express themselves and, especially among the political bloggers, a new way for citizens to talk back to the "MSM" -- the mainstream media. According to Mike Godwin, legal director of a First Amendment advocacy group called Public Knowledge, "A.J. Liebling famously commented that freedom of the press belongs to those who own one. Well, we all own one now."

But in all the excitement and hype, it's easy to overlook the fact that in some ways political blogs are not so different from or even separate from the MSM they often love to hate.

One similarity is found in emerging patterns of Web traffic. Blog abundance creates a paradox: Given more information choices than ever, most people economize, trying to find efficient ways to tame the information tide. So most regular users rely on a few blogs for most of their information. That's one reason why a handful of political blogs gets the lion's share of traffic. A recent study of 2 million Internet users found that the top four blog "hosts," such as blogspot.com, are visited by more than 5 million visitors per quarter. Unique visitors to the Drudge Report and the conservative blog freerepublic.com number2 million to 3 million per quarter, twice as many as their nearest competitors and dwarfing countless smaller blogs.

[Hebrews 11:6]

FRog

[Syntyr]

Okay people... be "fair" now! :)

[Mia T]

bump and congrats.

Sounds like the virtual equivalent of Jayson Blair.
How could Regina Lawrence have visited FR and missed what was in Plame sight?

[MinuteGal]

I need a new tag line. I hope you don't mind me borrowing your emphatic comment. I want to be firstest!

Leni

[Petronski]

Anything for you, Leni!



Rock on.

[ASA Vet]

I'll bring the ants if you bring the honey.

[William Tell]

From the linked article: "A 2004 Pew Center study found that people who turned to the Internet for their campaign information were quite likely to be familiar with arguments both for and against their preferred candidate.
But a campaign is an unusual moment when virtually all news organizations and news blogs are focused on the same set of topics. "

I guess one must read between the lines in order to determine whether people who turned to the MSM for their campaign information were "quite likely to be familiar with arguments both for and against their preferred candidate". Further, one is left wondering just WHY there might be such a distinction. Is the MSM inherently unable to provide arguments both for and against particular candidates? Or are they just unwilling? Or, more to the point, decidedly dedicated to presenting information in a biased fashion which favors the candidate whom they wish to promote?

[1stMarylandRegiment]

Forgive me for possibly duping . . .

FR is not a blog, it is a DISCUSSION FORUM frequented by conservative free thinkers.

Much of the discussion has centered around the definiton of conservative - frequently interrupted by extended group rants on many topics and persons, most often related to those with the surname Clinton.

[andyandval]

placemarker for work tonight.

[Txsleuth]

This person has NO CLUE about Free Republic.com....I bet she hasn't spent 5 minutes here.

And this is NOT A BLOG! JEEZ LOUISE...WHEN WILL PEOPLE FIGURE THAT OUT!

[Calpernia]

Actually, it is all that invisible ink I FTPed to the server when Jim wasn't looking. I scripted it to only hide stories with certain keywords.

[Txsleuth]

You always sound very intelligent in your posts...you do not have to worry.

[Calpernia]

"You already know what I think about that:) I do wish they could settle on what FR is."

No worries. They are still trying to come up with a definition for is.

[SevenofNine]

I think this author been drinking DU Kool aid LOL!

[Killborn]

Mr. Robinson,

Tell these whiny, girlymen loosers to take a Leaky Leahy and we'll KEEP ON TRUDKIN'!

GIT 'ER DONE!

[Calpernia]

>>>>>> FR is necessary if for no other reason than to document and correct the many mistakes and inaccuracies made elsewhere.

>>>>>The starting point for discussion here almost always starts with a posted article from the MSM.

ding! ding!

Hence, more and more MSM sources make us excerpt.

[Killborn]

Say hi to the PResident for me. And don't forget to tell Karl Rove "the biscuits are burning".

[Porterville]

never ever read blogs, just FR and Drudge

[Killborn]

Essentially a blog is an entire website made of vanities by the owner(s). Since Jim Robinson and John robinson don't post vanities everyday for our edification (alas), we are not a blog. Since we comment on news stories, editorials, articles, and the occasional (or not) vanity, we are a news commentary forum.

[B.O. Plenty]

If FR was "fair and balanced" I for one would not spend any time here. I don't want fair and balanced...I am an extreme conservative....a Walter E. Williams "radical". I don't want to waste my time on hearing what the socalists and "progressives" have to say. I have been living with the fruits of their policies for most of my life. Progressive policies have not worked, will not work and I don't want to hear them anymore. I want them religated, as they say, to the ash heap of history.

If you get to thinking about it, however, FR is kind of "fair and balanced" since we post left wing articles....not to be fair, but so everyone can read the drivel coming from the "progressives" and make fun of it.

I find it difficult to post leftist sh!t, because I have a hard time typing on the keyboard while hysterically laughing at their "ideas".