Today, we’re not sure if he still runs the website with his name on it. However, there's no denying Matt Drudge was once one of the country's most influential "gatekeepers of the news."
My answer: Because I think what happened to the Drudge Report is significant and is telling us something important about the nefarious nature of the world’s “shadow rulers.”
I usually start an essay thinking about at least one (observable) “known knowable.”
In this case, the “known knowable” is that the editorial ideology of the Drudge Report suddenly - and dramatically - changed.
This observation prompts several follow-up questions such as: How did it change? Who actually orchestrated this change? And WHY was this change deemed important or necessary to some group?
My hypothesis is that the Drudge Report, which was very popular with tens of millions of citizens, was perceived as a threat to the continued rule of our Shadow Rulers … and/or if the website continued as it was, the site’s “contrarian” or skeptical articles might thwart some of the Deep State’s planned initiatives.
Obvious solutions to this “problem” would include changing the owner of the site (buying out the site and changing its ideological bent to align with all the other captured corporate media) or, perhaps, blackmailing or extorting the proprietor in some manner to force him to change his ways. (This could probably be accomplished via a combination of money, carrots, or threats, aka sticks or “leverage” … or intimidation/coercion).
Who might have orchestrated such a change? We don’t know, but we can make several educated guesses that would include the “usual suspects.”
I’ve already referenced why and how these people/organizations might have accomplished this goal.
What’s obvious is that Drudge, almost over-night, changed dramatically and is certainly no longer viewed as a “threat” to the Powers that Be. Thus: “Problem solved.”
My bigger area of concern: If shadowy forces DO possess the motivation and ability to dramatically change a perceived threat - at a popular media site like The Drudge Report with tremendous potential influence - this scenario would strike many people as sinister.
This thought exercise makes one wonder what other organizations our Shadow Rulers might have similarly attacked or captured … or what other “narrative-control” projects they are currently pursuing.
Indeed, the rapid growth and influence of the Censorship Industrial Complex largely overlaps with the “capture” of The Drudge Report. That is, both projects helped achieve the same goal - which is throttling potentially influential dissent.
(I actually wonder if Substack has already been targeted for a similar operation - for similar reasons. If so, this would be just another media-control operation of the Deep State).
If the public could find out why Drudge really changed - and who might have been behind this operation, such knowledge would qualify as very important information. This would show citizens what these people and organizations are capable of doing - and what their true goals are.
Of course, the alternative scenario is simply that Drudge - on his own volition - suddenly experienced a massive ideological transformation. That is, he woke up one morning and apparently said, “I’ve been publishing all the wrong stories for decades and I’m now going to run stories that the NY Times and U.S. government would approve of.”
This, I guess, is possible. But, somehow, I doubt it.
In my opinion, What we have here is an obvious "Standard Operating Procedure" being executed by members of the Deep State. That is, there's a "pattern." Past behavior suggests future actions and behavior.
"If the public could find out why Drudge really changed - and who might have been behind this operation, such knowledge would qualify as very important information. This would show citizens what these people and organizations are capable of doing - and what their true goals are."
In retrospect and upon further reflection, what happened at The Drudge Report is hugely significant. So it's weird (maybe not) that no journalists are trying to answer these questions (except for Mr. Moody, who started a podcast where he's trying to find out what happened to Matt Drudge).
There was a noticeable change in The Drudge Report LONG before 2020. I checked the DR multiple times a day between 2008 and 2018, and then I gave up. It had changed enough to where I found the articles not newsworthy or interesting, and definitely not directed at a conservative audience. Does anyone else remember the DR hardcore pushing for Martin O'Malley during the 2016 Democratic Primaries? What was the point of all of that? It seemed clear that Matt Drudge had sold his website to someone, and that's what I thought had happened. I guess that was just a rumor.
Also, around 2008 timeframe or maybe earlier, the DR regularly featured the precursor to BreitbartNews, BigGovernment.com (at least I think that's what it was called). They regularly featured Breitbart articles. I rarely check DR today. I check maybe once a week, and I've been that way since around 2018. I essentially migrated from DR to zerohedge from 2015 to 2017.
When Drudge "changed" would be great information. Someone could probably answer this question with an in-depth analysis of Drudge-linked headlines/stories. My impression is that this editorial transformation started to become somewhat noticeable and then, almost overnight, was undeniable.
And btw, I stopped watching Fox News around 2009-10 after realizing 90% or more of their stories came from the Drudge Report. It saved me a lot of time to just read the interesting stories during the day. Then the news shows started covering things on social media more and more. That's why a lot of people migrated to twitter.
This was obvious at the time, immediately following the election. It's now "controlled opposition". They either destroy something, or they control it, if it is important to reach their goals.
Thanks. Very interesting. This is NOT the same Drudge that is (allegedly) producing that website today. I also noted the video interview is "no longer available."
I hadn't thought much about what happened at Drudge until I wrote this story. But I now believe this was not an insignificant development or just something that occurred organically or at random. It was part of a larger program.
One of my subscribers made a great point in an email to me: The major players are Google, etc ... and the computer search and share algorithms. The obvious goal is to throttle the influence of the dissident community.
Basically, I now suspect that the "hostile take-over" of the Drudge Report was simply one part of a multi-pronged, on-going strategy to stifle or thwart conservative or freedom-supporting dissent.
I think everything that is happening is an effort to control/minimize the "influence" of dissidents. It's a pro-active campaign to stop the influence of the dissident community before this community grows too large. If this happened, the future programs of the globalists and ultra liberals might not be possible. Also, the "public" might come after some of these villains with proverbial pitch forks. So it's a protection operation too.
Several important changes in the "media landscape" occurred in, roughly, the same time frame.
1) The Censorship Industrial Complex was created, funded, coordinated and activated in scores of organizations around the world.
2) Some kind of "take-over" or "capture" of The Drudge Report (probably) happened.
3) Tucker Carlson, the world's most influential journalist, was fired from the No.1-rated news talk show in North America.
The counter or work-around to these trends/changes was the creation of Substack, a platform where "contrarians" could pursue taboo stories. Several alternative media websites were also created and rapidly grew - most significantly, in my opinion, The Brownstone Institute.
Again, it would seem to fit the m.o. of our Shadow Rulers that if they DO perceive Substack as a "threat," they would probably implement some program to throttle the influence and reach of the most-threatening dissident voices.
Another famous Drudge incident from the old days was revealing that NBC Dateline had a solid interview with Juanita Broaddrick about being raped by Bill Clinton. NBC had done a thorough investigation, verifying dates, places and witnesses who saw Broaddrick's torn lip after the incident.
They were comfortably sitting on the story but Matt Drudge revealed that the interview existed. Based on that tip Wall Street Journal published an editorial with a summary of what happened and questioning NBC about it.
A couple of New York City FReepers printed hundreds of copies of that editorial and stood in front of NBC New York building, passing them out to everyone going in and out of NBC. The network couldn't take it. They held out until after Clinton's Senate impeachment vote, then published on Grammy night hoping as few as possible would notice.
For the next decade a battle raged on the internet to scrub the NBC Dateline interview. They almost succeeded but failed in the end. For a long time it was really hard to find. Now Juanita Broaddrick has a book "Better Put Some Ice on That."
Our real rulers also hold the ultimate trump card (no pun intended or, maybe pun intended): The number of accomplices in the greatest scandal of our times (the non-vaccines, the iatrogenic deaths and the lockdowns) is mind-boggling. Nobody who "matters" can investigate and "prove" this scandal, which qualifies as a genuine crime against humanity. If the villains in this tale were exposed, the whole system would crash, nations that are "united" might break-up. This knowledge must give our "Shadow Rulers" or "leaders" great peace of mind. They know they can keep-on-keeping on.
... But they can never allow genuine free speech because this would quickly or inevitably expose them all.
Great article Bill, highlighting one of the greatest news stories of the 20th century. Would love to know the real story on what happened to Matt Drudge...
Just to say, this article alone was more than worth the price of a subscription.
About gatekeepers of the news. I take all your points.
Speaking as a reader / consumer, I have come to the conclusion that the best strategy, if one wants to have an at least somewhat more accurate sense of what in the whatever is going on that one would need to know about, is to curate the incoming information flow, aka news, oneself. Therefore I read a wide variety of people I can identify as individuals (even if they use a pseudonym, such as A Midwestern Doctor)-- I mean, I can trust and it shows in the consistency that it's written by a real person, and, crucially, I have good reason to believe that that person isn't answering to an owner.
The MSM and these aggregators are too heavily gamed-- that always has been true, but with covid times it's gotten to a whole new level of 1984-ism.
Also key to my personal strategy is staying away from TV and from FaceBook. If there's anything really important being yammered about on there, I'll hear about it anyway.
Thanks. This is one of my stories that, upon reflection, might be more significant than I thought. I'm now thinking about all the behind-the-scenes machinations that must have occurred ... and why they occurred. Admittedly, this is no "deep dive" and features no original reporting. However, I think I did highlight a subject that needs far more investigative journalism. What we have here is a probably sinister unsolved mystery ... one that will never be solved by authorities or the "watchdog" press.
I wish people that provided new and important knowledge (aka unknown "truths" or facts) obtained more influence by doing this. But they rarely do ... by design.
I was a Drudge junky before he sold out (by whatever method or metric you might define).. sad to lose that source of contrarian perspective.
Found CFP early thereafter, and Kane was a super alternate, posting with fast-loading, image-free direct links to news.
I refuse the trackers (a browser choice), & my comments go to moderation and have for the past year been 'disappeared.'
CFP links to its own X account, understandably building clicks & monetary value in rewriting a headline to repost.
Not so much a fan now, and noticing a shift in Kane's sources. Bigger is not necessarily better. Hope his actualized success doesn't turn him into Drudge. I wish him well but I don't go there as often.
We all have egos, huh? 😂
He's just an aggregator (an alum of UVA & an Indiana res, so that's a bit of windshield grit!)
YOU have journalism & 'Bama and a good helping of Grace!
I've noticed some pretty significant changes at Citizen Free Press as well. This said, for some reason, he posted many of my articles in my first 14 months as a Substack author and I greatly appreciate that. I still check out CFP several times a day, but it looks like the days of getting my stories linked to this site might be over. (But maybe not. I hope not). I'm not sure what opinion or story threads I might have shared that could have led to my future articles not being considered for publication.
Very likely. Either positive or negative incentive. I hear that Alex J. Said years ago that Drudge talked to him, shortly before he took his 180 degree turn, and told him that if he didn’t ’sell out’ too, that he would be crushed.
Drudge could report one of the biggest scoops in the world if "they" really got to him - and he honestly told the world how this happened and who got to him. It's possible he is genuinely afraid for his life ... if he is even alive. We need "proof of life" (just like we needed with Biden two weeks ago).
The main source - Drudge himself - has gone completely silent. Like Mr. Moody asks, where is he? If he had some big change of heart that caused him to adopt new political views, why doesn't he tell us what prompted this conversion?
I didn't know anything about this meeting, but would like to learn more. I also remember some cryptic tweets Drudge made right before he flipped to the Left (if he flipped).
Seriously, Drudge showed up in the INFOWARS studio while Alex was broadcasting and totally surprised him and left him speechless for once. I heard this live.
Why did I write an article on this topic?
My answer: Because I think what happened to the Drudge Report is significant and is telling us something important about the nefarious nature of the world’s “shadow rulers.”
I usually start an essay thinking about at least one (observable) “known knowable.”
In this case, the “known knowable” is that the editorial ideology of the Drudge Report suddenly - and dramatically - changed.
This observation prompts several follow-up questions such as: How did it change? Who actually orchestrated this change? And WHY was this change deemed important or necessary to some group?
My hypothesis is that the Drudge Report, which was very popular with tens of millions of citizens, was perceived as a threat to the continued rule of our Shadow Rulers … and/or if the website continued as it was, the site’s “contrarian” or skeptical articles might thwart some of the Deep State’s planned initiatives.
Obvious solutions to this “problem” would include changing the owner of the site (buying out the site and changing its ideological bent to align with all the other captured corporate media) or, perhaps, blackmailing or extorting the proprietor in some manner to force him to change his ways. (This could probably be accomplished via a combination of money, carrots, or threats, aka sticks or “leverage” … or intimidation/coercion).
Who might have orchestrated such a change? We don’t know, but we can make several educated guesses that would include the “usual suspects.”
I’ve already referenced why and how these people/organizations might have accomplished this goal.
What’s obvious is that Drudge, almost over-night, changed dramatically and is certainly no longer viewed as a “threat” to the Powers that Be. Thus: “Problem solved.”
My bigger area of concern: If shadowy forces DO possess the motivation and ability to dramatically change a perceived threat - at a popular media site like The Drudge Report with tremendous potential influence - this scenario would strike many people as sinister.
This thought exercise makes one wonder what other organizations our Shadow Rulers might have similarly attacked or captured … or what other “narrative-control” projects they are currently pursuing.
Indeed, the rapid growth and influence of the Censorship Industrial Complex largely overlaps with the “capture” of The Drudge Report. That is, both projects helped achieve the same goal - which is throttling potentially influential dissent.
(I actually wonder if Substack has already been targeted for a similar operation - for similar reasons. If so, this would be just another media-control operation of the Deep State).
If the public could find out why Drudge really changed - and who might have been behind this operation, such knowledge would qualify as very important information. This would show citizens what these people and organizations are capable of doing - and what their true goals are.
Of course, the alternative scenario is simply that Drudge - on his own volition - suddenly experienced a massive ideological transformation. That is, he woke up one morning and apparently said, “I’ve been publishing all the wrong stories for decades and I’m now going to run stories that the NY Times and U.S. government would approve of.”
This, I guess, is possible. But, somehow, I doubt it.
In my opinion, What we have here is an obvious "Standard Operating Procedure" being executed by members of the Deep State. That is, there's a "pattern." Past behavior suggests future actions and behavior.
"If the public could find out why Drudge really changed - and who might have been behind this operation, such knowledge would qualify as very important information. This would show citizens what these people and organizations are capable of doing - and what their true goals are."
In retrospect and upon further reflection, what happened at The Drudge Report is hugely significant. So it's weird (maybe not) that no journalists are trying to answer these questions (except for Mr. Moody, who started a podcast where he's trying to find out what happened to Matt Drudge).
There was a noticeable change in The Drudge Report LONG before 2020. I checked the DR multiple times a day between 2008 and 2018, and then I gave up. It had changed enough to where I found the articles not newsworthy or interesting, and definitely not directed at a conservative audience. Does anyone else remember the DR hardcore pushing for Martin O'Malley during the 2016 Democratic Primaries? What was the point of all of that? It seemed clear that Matt Drudge had sold his website to someone, and that's what I thought had happened. I guess that was just a rumor.
Also, around 2008 timeframe or maybe earlier, the DR regularly featured the precursor to BreitbartNews, BigGovernment.com (at least I think that's what it was called). They regularly featured Breitbart articles. I rarely check DR today. I check maybe once a week, and I've been that way since around 2018. I essentially migrated from DR to zerohedge from 2015 to 2017.
It changed hands immediately after the 2016 election.
When Drudge "changed" would be great information. Someone could probably answer this question with an in-depth analysis of Drudge-linked headlines/stories. My impression is that this editorial transformation started to become somewhat noticeable and then, almost overnight, was undeniable.
And btw, I stopped watching Fox News around 2009-10 after realizing 90% or more of their stories came from the Drudge Report. It saved me a lot of time to just read the interesting stories during the day. Then the news shows started covering things on social media more and more. That's why a lot of people migrated to twitter.
This was obvious at the time, immediately following the election. It's now "controlled opposition". They either destroy something, or they control it, if it is important to reach their goals.
And, they HAVE to do this. It's self-preservation. What's taking place - and why - is obvious to me.
You seriously need to research what he told Jones. I thought that would be common knowledge by this point.
I'll try to. There's probably not much I can find in search engines at Google, right? Please provide any links you might have.
Search in Tor browser. You’ll find it. Here’s a sample:
https://www.businessinsider.com/matt-drudge-report-alex-jones-hillary-interview-video
Thanks. Very interesting. This is NOT the same Drudge that is (allegedly) producing that website today. I also noted the video interview is "no longer available."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj5OWLM9tTg
The still shot of the clip shows up, but I can't play it on my computer. The notation says it got one view. WTH?
Also, Drudge was right about Hillary having serious health issues that were covered up by the press. Just like Biden's dementia and Parkinson's.
To steal a line from the Demorat propaganda machine, "that's weird!" Drudge does a 180? Follow the money.
Always follow the money.
I hadn't thought much about what happened at Drudge until I wrote this story. But I now believe this was not an insignificant development or just something that occurred organically or at random. It was part of a larger program.
One of my subscribers made a great point in an email to me: The major players are Google, etc ... and the computer search and share algorithms. The obvious goal is to throttle the influence of the dissident community.
Basically, I now suspect that the "hostile take-over" of the Drudge Report was simply one part of a multi-pronged, on-going strategy to stifle or thwart conservative or freedom-supporting dissent.
I think everything that is happening is an effort to control/minimize the "influence" of dissidents. It's a pro-active campaign to stop the influence of the dissident community before this community grows too large. If this happened, the future programs of the globalists and ultra liberals might not be possible. Also, the "public" might come after some of these villains with proverbial pitch forks. So it's a protection operation too.
Several important changes in the "media landscape" occurred in, roughly, the same time frame.
1) The Censorship Industrial Complex was created, funded, coordinated and activated in scores of organizations around the world.
2) Some kind of "take-over" or "capture" of The Drudge Report (probably) happened.
3) Tucker Carlson, the world's most influential journalist, was fired from the No.1-rated news talk show in North America.
The counter or work-around to these trends/changes was the creation of Substack, a platform where "contrarians" could pursue taboo stories. Several alternative media websites were also created and rapidly grew - most significantly, in my opinion, The Brownstone Institute.
Again, it would seem to fit the m.o. of our Shadow Rulers that if they DO perceive Substack as a "threat," they would probably implement some program to throttle the influence and reach of the most-threatening dissident voices.
Another famous Drudge incident from the old days was revealing that NBC Dateline had a solid interview with Juanita Broaddrick about being raped by Bill Clinton. NBC had done a thorough investigation, verifying dates, places and witnesses who saw Broaddrick's torn lip after the incident.
They were comfortably sitting on the story but Matt Drudge revealed that the interview existed. Based on that tip Wall Street Journal published an editorial with a summary of what happened and questioning NBC about it.
A couple of New York City FReepers printed hundreds of copies of that editorial and stood in front of NBC New York building, passing them out to everyone going in and out of NBC. The network couldn't take it. They held out until after Clinton's Senate impeachment vote, then published on Grammy night hoping as few as possible would notice.
For the next decade a battle raged on the internet to scrub the NBC Dateline interview. They almost succeeded but failed in the end. For a long time it was really hard to find. Now Juanita Broaddrick has a book "Better Put Some Ice on That."
Thanks, Wayne. That's another telling anecdote.
Yep, check the news Friday nights, and and also Oscars night... those are the good bury-it opportunities.
Our real rulers also hold the ultimate trump card (no pun intended or, maybe pun intended): The number of accomplices in the greatest scandal of our times (the non-vaccines, the iatrogenic deaths and the lockdowns) is mind-boggling. Nobody who "matters" can investigate and "prove" this scandal, which qualifies as a genuine crime against humanity. If the villains in this tale were exposed, the whole system would crash, nations that are "united" might break-up. This knowledge must give our "Shadow Rulers" or "leaders" great peace of mind. They know they can keep-on-keeping on.
... But they can never allow genuine free speech because this would quickly or inevitably expose them all.
Great article Bill, highlighting one of the greatest news stories of the 20th century. Would love to know the real story on what happened to Matt Drudge...
Me too, Jeffrey. That would be a helluva story.
It just might be outside most people's Overton Windows.
Matt Drudge and James Taranto were my news sources from late 90s to early 00s. Wish they made through to the other side. But they did not.
Just to say, this article alone was more than worth the price of a subscription.
About gatekeepers of the news. I take all your points.
Speaking as a reader / consumer, I have come to the conclusion that the best strategy, if one wants to have an at least somewhat more accurate sense of what in the whatever is going on that one would need to know about, is to curate the incoming information flow, aka news, oneself. Therefore I read a wide variety of people I can identify as individuals (even if they use a pseudonym, such as A Midwestern Doctor)-- I mean, I can trust and it shows in the consistency that it's written by a real person, and, crucially, I have good reason to believe that that person isn't answering to an owner.
The MSM and these aggregators are too heavily gamed-- that always has been true, but with covid times it's gotten to a whole new level of 1984-ism.
Also key to my personal strategy is staying away from TV and from FaceBook. If there's anything really important being yammered about on there, I'll hear about it anyway.
Thanks. This is one of my stories that, upon reflection, might be more significant than I thought. I'm now thinking about all the behind-the-scenes machinations that must have occurred ... and why they occurred. Admittedly, this is no "deep dive" and features no original reporting. However, I think I did highlight a subject that needs far more investigative journalism. What we have here is a probably sinister unsolved mystery ... one that will never be solved by authorities or the "watchdog" press.
Most people online aren't looking for truth or new knowledge, but influence.
I wish people that provided new and important knowledge (aka unknown "truths" or facts) obtained more influence by doing this. But they rarely do ... by design.
Howdy Bill.
I was a Drudge junky before he sold out (by whatever method or metric you might define).. sad to lose that source of contrarian perspective.
Found CFP early thereafter, and Kane was a super alternate, posting with fast-loading, image-free direct links to news.
I refuse the trackers (a browser choice), & my comments go to moderation and have for the past year been 'disappeared.'
CFP links to its own X account, understandably building clicks & monetary value in rewriting a headline to repost.
Not so much a fan now, and noticing a shift in Kane's sources. Bigger is not necessarily better. Hope his actualized success doesn't turn him into Drudge. I wish him well but I don't go there as often.
We all have egos, huh? 😂
He's just an aggregator (an alum of UVA & an Indiana res, so that's a bit of windshield grit!)
YOU have journalism & 'Bama and a good helping of Grace!
Hope you get your Pulitzer soon.
♥️
I've noticed some pretty significant changes at Citizen Free Press as well. This said, for some reason, he posted many of my articles in my first 14 months as a Substack author and I greatly appreciate that. I still check out CFP several times a day, but it looks like the days of getting my stories linked to this site might be over. (But maybe not. I hope not). I'm not sure what opinion or story threads I might have shared that could have led to my future articles not being considered for publication.
Perhaps Kane's hired help have been instructed to adjust their focus on building the CFP proprietary revenue stream i.e. the relabeled X page.
Substack is not part of the equation.
*news* is just a $ sign. ;)
I believe he was blackmailed or someone threatened to expose his secret(s). Same as what I believe happened to John Roberts.
Very likely. Either positive or negative incentive. I hear that Alex J. Said years ago that Drudge talked to him, shortly before he took his 180 degree turn, and told him that if he didn’t ’sell out’ too, that he would be crushed.
Correct. Said some Judges told about it.
Drudge could report one of the biggest scoops in the world if "they" really got to him - and he honestly told the world how this happened and who got to him. It's possible he is genuinely afraid for his life ... if he is even alive. We need "proof of life" (just like we needed with Biden two weeks ago).
Quite possibly, yes....
I haven't even considered his name since long before the Covid Controversy. As far as he's concerned, I don't care if I ever encounter his name again
If Mr Drudge simply did a 180 on his political beliefs, then why would he not publicly just say so? Seems much more suspect when he just disappeared.
The main source - Drudge himself - has gone completely silent. Like Mr. Moody asks, where is he? If he had some big change of heart that caused him to adopt new political views, why doesn't he tell us what prompted this conversion?
How did you leave out the surprise visit and warning he gave Alex Jones directly in September 2015? It was downright eerie.
I didn't know anything about this meeting, but would like to learn more. I also remember some cryptic tweets Drudge made right before he flipped to the Left (if he flipped).
Seriously, Drudge showed up in the INFOWARS studio while Alex was broadcasting and totally surprised him and left him speechless for once. I heard this live.
That incident and what he told Jones is closest to revealing why he checked out.