NOTE: The deadline has been extended for evaluation of The Drudge Report until Wednesday, Feb. 18 at 5:45.
Please evaluate and critique The Drudge Report, or www.drudgereport.com. You should pay specific attention to the content of the site--specifically what kind of stories are posted on the site, their sources and any potential biases.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I’ve always disliked the Drudge Report because of how ugly it is style-wise. The font choice is questionable and makes it more difficult from a readability standpoint. There’s too much white space and the ads built into the content lower on the page sometimes blend in with the news story images. There is one ad at the top center of the page, and it sticks out like a sore thumb (which is probably a good thing from the advertiser’s view). More than half of the home page is taken up by lists of links to other blogs, news sites, feeds, etc. Overall I just feel like the page has such little flow to it.
ReplyDeleteDrudge Report filters through conservative leaning content from other news sites and posts them as hyperlinks. The first time I visited the site on Friday, the top story was about the stimulus plan and the division between the parties. Sunday’s top story was just a menacing-looking picture of Hugo Chavez with the letter “V” underneath it. The following day was the same headline with another picture of Chavez. On Monday, the headline was “Dow Dives.” The top of the left column of headlines was a variety of criticisms on President Obama.
There is very little in the way of multimedia on the site. Aside from several pictures, there are just a couple thumbnails linking to videos. I think this could be detrimental for the readership because there is so much video and photo content available on the web – the Drudge Report would probably be servicing their readers a little better if they added more multimedia.
The one thing that I like about the site is the dialog box for sending in news tips. It makes it easy for the readers/viewers to connect with the editor right on the home page.
I also must admit that it’s pretty impressive for Matt Drudge to draw such a huge readership when all he really does is put up links to news from other places. He’s obviously meeting a need for those who follow his site, so he must be doing something right…
Firstly, I would like to say how much I dislike the Drudge Report's layout. It is extremely unprofessional looking! From the font to just the general layout I think it could use a whole lot of improvement. Especially with the random ad right at the top just hanging out with all this white space around it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the content of the site goes, it seems to slant conservative and just links in articles from other websites. Once again, I will never understand why someone would start a website to just bring in content from some where else. That idea really still doesn't make any sense to me.
Also, there is little to no multimedia on the site. There are a few, unprofessional, semi blurry looking pictures but other than that there maybe some small links to videos but thats really all I was able to find. I don't mind that there isn't a lot of multimedia, I just think that the stuff they do have should be more professional looking.
I think it is pretty obvious I don't really like the Drudge Report. But really, I think I would be more apt to read it or at least look at it for a longer period of time if the layout wasn't so horrendous.
My first reaction is that this site must be aimed at a very specific audience—those people know the site and continue to read it and return to it. The reason I saw this is because one time I visited the site, for instance, there was ONE headline visible above the fold. There was also one photo and one link to sign a petition.
ReplyDeleteThen—I still had the page open but hadn’t touched it—it refreshed, and it took awhile! The first thing to show up was an ad for Lane Bryant—which sort of threw off my ‘specific audience’ idea, because I wasn’t thinking ‘people that would shop at Lane Bryant.’ But when the page loaded, still just one headline.
I don’t know enough about the web yet to know whose fault this would be (Drudge or other news site), but when I clicked a headline and was redirected to FOX, ABC, etc., the story took long to load almost every time.
On the one hand, I’ve said before that I like the readout style headlines on news websites. For the top half of Drudge Report I could scroll down and, though my eyes were darting all over the place, get sufficient news. On the other hand, there were not a TON of headlines by any means. The second half of the site was just the lists of links to other sources and different columnists.
Mostly, this site just baffles me. It is basically everything we have discussed as disliking: we talked about the list from one column continuing down so the page scrolls father but it’s just one long list, and people didn’t like that. We have unanimously decided we like multimedia and here there is very little multimedia, few pictures and zero color (besides pictures). Yet for some reason, I stayed on the site for a long time, looking at story after story. It was only after the millionth time the page refreshed on its own that I got a little sick of it and had to leave the site.
Also, I was wondering who runs this site/where it is run from, because many of the links were to British news sources. Is it a British site?
After looking through the drudge report website I can say that this is the most simply designed website that I have seen in a long time and it is certainly the most simply designed website that we have critiqued so far in our class. The design consists of simply html with bold print and pictures to direct viewers toward specific stories. I noticed that some of these pictures have a link to the story they are pertaining to and some of them do not link to the story which can be frustrating when you are trying to find the link to a specific story. The tabs are on the left which list previous posted stories and different areas of news which like the rest of the site is formatted in a small bold faced font that becomes very hard to read on a computer screen when scrolling up and on the web page. The extremely simple format of the entire page first made me think that there was a script error on the page and I thought my web browser hadn’t loaded the page properly. I found myself hitting the refresh button to make sure the page had loaded correctly. This is the most damaging part about the page and that is the fact that it looks like its undergoing technical maintenance and might not be working properly when you first lay your eyes upon it.
ReplyDeleteThere are only two advertisements on the start up page and one of them is located at the very top of the page and another is located in the middle of the page. The fact that there is a limited amount of advertisements is the only god quality that I picked out while critiquing this site.
The views associated with the site are by no means mine but I appreciate the fact that the site caters to a different crowd. The material used for the site is on the conservative side but there is a wide range of information covered and even though it may be twisted to fit the ideals of conservatives.
The drudge report website is almost like the huffington website, gathering information from different news websites. I liked the one line leads and the easy navigation from the leads to the full stories on the sources' websites.
ReplyDeleteIt is a simple, user-friendly website. I didn't like the length of the page which is a result of the numerous sources that could be placed under a sub-menu. This will significantly reduce the length of the page to avoid lengthy scrolling by the reader.
The website tends to report mostly on news about events in New York and its surroundings. Will that be a bias?
The lack of colors on the website made it a little unappealing to the eyes, but better plain than an overload of colors that would reduce the authenticity of the site.
Overall, a good website.
The visual design of the drudge report is terrible. It is not very appealing to the eyes and it is so hard to navigate through the site. It lacks an sort of organization and does not give the reader even the simplest idea to what they are looking at. Once you actually find out what you would like to read about the actual article is just something you would find on any news worthy web page.
ReplyDeleteThe amount of time it took for the main page was ridiculous and it was the same when I clicked upon the articles listed.
I did not like the simple lit format of the stories and how they only give a word or two to describe the article, so it is very hard to even figure out what the story you are clicking on is getting you in to.
Overall, I think this website is terrible. All it is, is a list of clickable links, which gives the website no substance or visual appeal. After critiquing the websites in the past, it has seemed that most people like more colors, to appeal to the eye, and also some multimedia, which gives the reader a little more to look at other than just text. To make this better I would definitely add some color and some more depth to the page. By depth, I mean that I would give the page a bit more organization with pictures and descriptions that allow the reader to see what they are going to star reading. With the links that are on there now, they are just listed names or subjects and you have no clue what it is. I clicked on one, it brought me to a picture like caption, another brought me to a newspaper article and the other brought me to a blog. All this site lacks is organization, which would bring it to the status of other news sites such as USA Today or CNN.
The first thing that stood out on drudgereport.com is how it differs in layout, appearance, and content from other sites the class has critiqued.
ReplyDeleteThe layout utilizes a good deal of white space with no links or menu bar at the top for news beat sections. In fact, they have don’t have them at all. Instead, they have a single advertisement followed by a few stories and a small picture then a headline photo with a link followed by three columns of headlines and pictures. The stories on the page change every day so if a reader misses a story then they have to pull up the previous day’s page (located at the bottom) and then find the headline. It’s very inconvenient. They also use a font that resembles what you might see on a typewriter giving adding a “Unabomber” touch to the site.
It’s simple in appearance and almost bare. The use of white space and the absence of articles make it easy to distinguish stories from advertisements, which I liked. There are only headline links and a few pictures divided among three columns under the headline picture. I liked this feature of the website and thought it worked well for keep a reader interested. However, I kept feeling like I was missing something and there should be more.
Drudge report does not have its own content, rather it’s a website designated to highlighting what stories a reader should know about that day and from where they should be reading them. For example, when clicking on the link “CA on the brink,” the reader is taken to LATimes.com. Each link does not open in a new window or tab, making the process of constantly being navigated away from the site very annoying. So the reader has to be conscious when clicking on links to open them in a new window or be aware that they will have to type in the URL again after they finish reading the article. I did like all the news links, news blogs and news search engines on the page. However, the layout and font for them drove me nuts.
I don’t like a website that does not have any of its own content. This website looks like a prototype for the social networking newsfeed sharing that we have now via facebook, twitter, dig, etc. However, at least with social networking you have your peers and it’s a community of people choosing the stories. On this site there is a single man for which there is no information about anywhere on the site. In fact, when clicking on his name at the top of the links for blog pages, it simply refreshes the webpage. It doesn’t even go to a blog. Most of the work he writes is quotes with a mention of where he got them but no background or explanation of the context the quote was given. I don’t see the journalist aspect of this. He’s taking other people’s stories and setting his own agenda with them. I cannot trust that and it irritates me. However, with the simple layout and the feeling of not being overwhelmed with information, I can see how this site would appeal to so many people. I say that begrudgingly. I just hope these readers have supplemental new sites in addition to this one.
I must admit, when I first came across www.drudgereport.com in class, I felt I spoke too soon. I was ripping and tearing other Web sites apart and faulting them on their overall ambience, lack of creativity, and for not communicating the feel of a newspaper. Well, then came the Drudge Report. I laughed; I gawked at its simplicity and its overall aesthetic. I disregarded it at first glance. But then I started clicking away at the articles and found many that were informative and humorous. I soon realized this is the Web sites charm. Whereas a news aggregate site like Chicago Breaking News is a subsidiary of a professional, well-known, established corporation, the Drudge Report could have been, at least in my head, made by some guy who sits in a wife-beater and brown unkempt slacks all day. I do give credit to how the Web site displays its advertisements. Underneath the cleverly placed advertisements in between columns on the Web site are the words: “Support the Drudge Report; Visit our advertisers.” Something only a blog could get away with and I bet Chicago Breaking News wishes it could do. Although it is a bit disconcerting that when you click onto the Web site all you see is an advertisement in the center of the page. The biggest surprise to me about this Web site is the lack of an op-ed feel to it. Whereas the Huffington Post Chicago had several columnists with their respective blogs, the Drudge Report gives you several links to bloggers’ sites. I am curious to hear what Matt Drudge is all about and I am surprised that this site is so successful without his voice. As far as attribution goes, once you click on the article, the link takes you to the Web site it originated from and has several links towards the end of the page from where Drudge lifts his content. I guess I am not a big fan of news aggregate sites, either, and I probably would not return.
ReplyDeleteI think that we can all agree that the Drudge report website is an eyesore. I really dislike how the main page is a giant advertisement, a few links to headlines, and then an enormous, bold-italic-underlined, capitalized headline, and then "The Drudge Report" in something that looks like it came out of Microsoft Word Art. From looking at this top of the page layout, I expect the headline to read "Aliens are taking over the world!" (right now it says "Obama moves toward 'Swedish model' for banks" and links to the English Financial Times website.) The page scrolls down forever, with the top half providing just a few (not-so-attractive) images and an extensive list of headlines that are written in a hideous, courier font. If there is any sort of organization influencing how the stories are aligned within the three columns, I cannot figure it out--as far as I can tell, the arrangment of stories on the page is totally arbitrary. Also, the headlines do not always provide adequate information, so you are forced to click the link to see what it's all about. And when you click the link, you navigate away from the page, meaning you have to back-browse in order to get back to the Drudge Report website...how annoying!
ReplyDeleteI will say that I think there are a couple cool features of this website, but the hideous visual design distracts from these as well. I like how at the bottom half of the page to the left, he links to a whole bunch of different AP news sites, a host of reputable national and international news sources, world front pages as well as local news by zip codes, and boxes where you can search AP and Reuters for specific news stories. I think this is quite a useful feature and I can imagine that it helps a lot of readers. On the left side of the screen you can also search Google, wires, and the Drudge Report for particular stories as well, which is a good feature. I hate the long list in the middle column of key words--I know that this is only here to make the Drudge Report more search engine optimized, like Amanda Maurer told us about. I like that there is a comment field where readers can send in news tips, and I like that you can e-mail Drudge directly from the site.
Even with those positive opinions, I still think that the Drudge Report is awful. It is visually appalling and it is just an aggregation of news that one guy thinks is important. It's annoying that clicking on any link navigates away from the page and you have to click back in order to return. I hate the layout and the design, and all in all, I hope I never have to return to this site again.
The Drudge Report, if anything, can definitely be called unique. For a fairly well-known news aggregate site it defies all preconceived notions and expectations for what a website should look like. For that, I give it credit. After analyzing the site in more detail, I kept thinking to myself, "Man, this website is really doing whatever it wants. It's not trying to please viewers with aesthetics." With that said, you have to give someone at least some credit when they are going against the status quo and actually making it.
ReplyDeleteAs for content, the website is mainly political. There were a fair amount of articles on the state of the economy, but I lump that in with politics since the two are so closely related.
Although I know the Drudge Report to be a Right leaning website, it was somewhat hard to determine any clear-cut bias in the content. Many of the articles I clicked on were from a wide variety of sources including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Post, Reuters, and the Los Angeles Times, all of which hold conflicting biases. However, there was a direct link to Ann Coulter's page, which almost made me throw up in my mouth.
Surprisingly, the advertisements on the website did not bother me as much than the ones from Huffington Post. Perhaps it was the blank white background or the placement, but the only one that got on my nerves was the first one you see when you open the page. Other than that, I surfed through the site relatively unaffected by the ads.
Overall, although I appreciate the simplicity of the site, I don't think that I will be back on a regular basis. However, as a person who likes to understand the whole picture, I do think that the Drudge Report is a good place to turn to. As Shelby said though, a little multimedia on the website couldn't hurt.
Perhaps I've just become more astute when reviewing these sites, but I have bounced from the Wall Street Journal, to Reuters, to the Financial Times, and somehow, I think I get what's going on. It's the Dow Dive issue!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Drudge Report. Everything is in financial collapse. I am beginning to wonder if the writing style of the online stems of these (aggregated) publications might have changed or be changed due to the potential aggregation of their content to places like HuffPo and Drudge. Yes, the average reader might be an IQ bar above most, but I would, under normal circumstances, avoid financial fender-bender stories. Now that it's a whole national roadway pile-up, I am a little more interested in the claims-to-come. Everyone's losing their money, so it seems, and Drudge is giving a very balanced collection of sources.
If the theme is SKINT, as the Brits say when they' wallet's empty... I can't say my "above the fold" scan has uncovered any bias. Design-wise, I feel like I'm looking at an old newsgroup from 1999. I think it's just minimalist enough to say "ACTUALLY READ THIS."
Plus, I love the Sarah Palin Ad where the nameplate should be. It's like a middle-finger at the media, in a tongue-in-cheek way.
Returning to the site nearly a day later, there is an advertisement at the top asking you to visit something about not supporting nuclear Iran. I still don't think I've encountered any conservatively slanted content, but I will digress momentarily to address my classmates' comment about Lane Bryant advertising. Lane Bryant is for women who are a little heavier who seek trendy, classy attire. Working women. There are high concentration of overweight working (thinking and politically active) women in red states. I think this advertisement might be for them.
The design of the site is not very arresting. I mean, I understand the concept of minimalism. As others have stated, it's a testament to his loyal readership to have maintained such an annoying layout. The list format, the length of time to scroll down the page must mean that readers are willing to search. This makes the HuffPo site look like it could contend for site design awards. This is the template that should be called "penitentiary."
And speaking of, politics are so scandalous right now it's hard to judge the site for it's policy but for its stance on Obama. The 'top story' is that Obama proposes Swedish model for banks. It is, again, a FT.com story. The story discusses how Obama's critics in the senate agree with his ideas about nationalization of the banking industry. And the verdict on Bush?
The first story on our former President is about how angry Cheney is with him over not pardoning his former Chief-of-Staff from DailyNews.com.
I can't figure out the slant of this site. I just wonder, - who would care? Republicans.
No Democrats would care that Bush and Cheney didn't play nice. It still wouldn't redeem Bush that he ever made his own decisions, at least not to any democrats who read avidly enough to visit Drudge.
So MY verdict on Drudge is that he's got a balanced approach to sourcing. I see Ann Coulter, but I also see Anna Quindlen. I see a search engine for Reuters and AP. There are informed, doomsday, and objective pieces. Some pieces are just for human interest. Considering Drudge was the media aggregator prototype, broke the Monica Lewinsky story, and still influences the press, he must be considered a valuable resource. His original audience were those with modems and a palate for online journalism. Maybe those people hated Clinton, but I guess he's gone a bit bipartisan.
My first impression of the Drudge Report's website is it did not have a rather "newsworthy" design to it. Just from the site's homepage appearance, I feel like it is lacking in professionalism and sees more like a gossip source. I don't care for the layout because it is not very user-friendly (overwhelming information) and does not have an 'eye catching' design; however, I think this is the site's intent because of its serious approach to its content. Furthermore, the numerous headlines for the stories presented on the homepage are not well organized.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the unfriendly layout, the site's content and headlines seem to focus on rumor stories. For the most part, the links directly relocate the user to traditional news sites. Once again, I believe these sites should deserve some kind of additional credit for their "contribution" to the Drudge Report.
Moreover, from reading the site's content, it appears to report its stories biased to conservatives. This can lead to untruthful or spun reporting.
Overall, I would not use this site as a source for my news gathering. I would prefer to use sites that have a more unbiased reputation. In addition, I really do not care for the Drudge Report's design; I understand the hard look it is going for, but it's simply not for me.
The Drudge Report's layout is different from every other site we have critiqued thus far. The first aspect that stood out for my other than the giant Swedish flag, was the font used. Type-writer courier new, all underlined. It looks old-fashioned for a website, which may hinder the look because readers equate news with what's current and the image they have created is not.
ReplyDeleteThere is a definite organization to the site. Three columns of the same width. The columns are filled with 15 headlines, six of those headlines have 'Obama' in them, along with the biggest headline, "OBAMA MOVES TOWARD 'SWEDISH MODEL' FOR BANKS."
The advertisments are thoughtfully placed, nothing overwhelming and fit the extremely simple deisgn. The advertisments are, not including the stories, directed towards right-wing individuals. I mean the first ad that appears is to "Support Sarah PAC," Sarah Palin's campaign. I mean, honestly.
Overall, the site is almost too simple, I'm going to go ahead and say boring. The content is perfect for its targetted audience.
Maybe I'm wrong but I think the Drudge Report website is designed for the technologically challenged. It's simplicity and user-friendliness makes it easy for anyone to navigate. Even better for those sitting in their offices and only want to catch a glimpse of the news of the day. I would say I liked the easy navigation, but the website could use a little bit of organization. The front page is cluttered and every topic spread out all over the page when the topics could be organized under specific menu titles. That would reduce the length of the page and unclutter the contents of the page.
ReplyDelete