On Drudge: Jealousy thy Name is Diller

omg, what a big pussy. Barry Diller. First in giving the HuffPo credit for stuff she so didn't do. She came to the party super late and jumped on the tail end of the blog train. "Huffingtonpost has done a very good piece of original work, in being early at organizing the dread word blogs, and it’s expanded from there." Original, my ass. Blog original is Powerline and Rathergate, Little Green footballs and the smoking memo, Zombietime and the anti-Israel ambulance fraud, not to mention Qana and stuff like this :)

Her, uh, "brilliance" is getting celebrity idiots to write posts and drive traffic. The back of Britney's thighs drives millions of hits ......uh, so what? The huffpo is not even a blogger.

But Diller only mentions her. He is loathe to throw any other blog a Barry bone. Mentioning other sites, "I mean, there have been the attempts we all know about, but nobody really has pulled that one off," an obvious swipe at Pajamas media - the first in corralling the disparate voices of the blogs. But he never mentions, afraid he might drive some traffic to their site.

Wait it gets ........... worse. His jealousy of Drudge is palpable. Diller's sites can't touch Drudge. The Drudge Report wipes the floor with him but he has the chutzpah to say, "He [Drudge] doesn’t have much more traffic than the Washington Post. He has huge traffic. I don’t know what his uniques are a month." uh, what? You just said you don't know what his numbers are, so how would you know? Hellooooooooo.

Here in the Executive Column of Portfolio - Conde Nast, The World according ....., Lloyd Grove lobs the softest of balls and unabashedly kisses ass in an interview with Velvet Mafioso, Barry Diller, in his "sun dappled" office. Diller, overrated for his brilliance in acquiring QVC - which, in the interest of full disclosure, I lost a fair piece of change on when Diller alleges the going was good, over 10 years ago - uh, it wasn't.

L.G.: —wrote recently that he pitched you on his Newser.com site and you didn’t bite. Do you think any of these are viable? I mean, obviously, you’re involved with Huffingtonpost.com, but what’s your interest in these sites?

  B.D.: Well I think everybody’s interest—and probably I have a little more interest because I think maybe we can participate, but our chances of figuring it out are probably slim—is somebody is going to figure it out at some point. Huffingtonpost has done a very good piece of original work, in being early at organizing the dread word blogs, and it’s expanded from there. But someone is going to figure out between aggregating news, and adding to the aggregation of news, editing, and making a product that uses the tools of the internet, uses the resources of what the internet does, to deliver a news product that is compelling for people. I mean, there have been the attempts we all know about, but nobody really has pulled that one off. I think it’s inevitable. And no newspaper has done it, I don’t think any newspaper website. Some are far better than others. Washingtonpost.com is one of them, but the I’m biased because I’m on the board. No newspaper, I think, has done an interesting job online.

L.G.: Of course, Matt Drudge will claim that his news site is the sixth most visited.

B.D.: Matt Drudge is purely an aggregator—an aggregator and quasieditor. It’s certainly edited. But Drudgereport.com is a great resource for lots of people. It doesn’t really use the internet—I mean, it uses the internet as a distribution mechanism, it doesn’t really use the internet tools...

L.G.: He has more traffic than People.com. He has much more traffic than the Washington Post.

B.D.: He doesn’t have much more traffic than the Washington Post. He has huge traffic. I don’t know what his uniques are a month, but look, I take Drudgereport as a very important Web resource.

L.G.: What news sites do you visit?

B.D.: Oh my god, too many. A lot. I’m a scavenger.

Why does Grove let him get away with that? G-d forbid Diller drives any traffic to any other site. He would not mention  even one. Yech.

Diller plays so coy in the interview like a ninth grade girl on a first date. It's exhausting and boring. Vanity Fair = vanity press.

  L.G.: Let’s talk about the future of newspapers. You’re on the board of the Washington Post, as you’ve mentioned. It’s been losing circulation for, what, 15 years now solidly?

B.D.: Not solidly. I think that you have to say “solid” is in the last period, when for every newspaper it’s been particularly tough, it’s very difficult. I don’t think there are easy solutions. It’s hard when you use the word newspaper. If you mean news-gathering, or just news, take the paper off, then I’m very hopeful. But the current print system is going to continue to decline.

I'll say bud, you don't know the half of it. Keep lunching with those self deluded schmucks at the NY Times and keep telling each other that you are the kings!

L.G.: But they’re also losing revenue sources. Classified advertising is dropping, with Craigslist and suburban newspapers.

B.D.: Sure, all of those things. It’s part of the creative destruction of the internet.

lol! Check that out. The creative destruction! Next we'll be hearing the Islamists describing terror attacks like that!

And read how he made [Dreamworks CEO] Stacey Snider cry! The leftards said Bolton was a meanie [which btw, never happened - leftist propaganda] This Diller guy is really cruel! Where is the leftarded moral outrage?!?

There's more but I wouldn't waste my time. It is all spin. All stock propping and dismissal of what's really relevant. Barry Diller is so .............. 80s.