Watch Out For Heavy Traffic

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: Mega-Media Trends

(GETTY IMAGES/Peter Kramer)

Bridget Moynahan, the former girlfriend of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, is having a baby. The Boston Globe put the story on its front page – above the fold, no less. As Adam Reilly notes, the placement prompted outrage from some boston.com users. Wrote one:

"My view is that for the Boston Globe to think this is news of the slightest interest to the public, let alone put it on the front page, is just one more sign of the slow, relentless death of a once great newspaper. If I wanted to read the National Enquirer, I would buy it. What I want is a newspaper, a daily journal that covers the meaningful local, national and international events of the day, provides analysis and context, investigates what the powerful wants to hide from us, and helps us be informed and effective citizens. Instead we get this voyeuristic trash. For shame."

Only one problem: As Reilly points out, "the Brady story is currently the most emailed item on Boston.com. Also, 'Tom Brady' is the most popular search."

He adds: "So maybe Boston's just getting the journalism it deserves here."

Media outlets are increasingly turning to their traffic stats to measure what stories their audience is interested in, which may be part of the reason the she's-having-her-ex-boyfriend-Tom-Brady's-baby story got such good play in the paper. Howard Owens looks at the dustup and wonders: "Are we in danger of letting reader stats dictate coverage?" Notes Owens: "There has always been an underlying conflict in journalism — readers complain about sensationalism, but accidents, crimes, natural disasters and gossip help sell papers and spike TV ratings. On the web, we just get to witness the conflict in real time. Journalists want to be high minded, but they also want an audience."

Will Sullivan is also weighing in, though he focuses on a slightly different topic: Bald Britney.

"Does Britney Spears' shaved head really warrant being on the home page for three days straight?" he asks. "You don't need to preach to me about using click-throughs as a tool for users to tell us what they want (which for so long most newsrooms have ignored, instead just force-feeding their definition of what's 'news') … But it's really a slippery slope. Just because there are stale editors that don't want to acknowledge that people's interest are different than everything traditional journalism preaches, doesn't mean [journalism] should swing the total other direction and just become E! Entertainment Television."

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

2 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by joycewest February 21, 2007 4:12 PM EST: Heaven help us if our greed for gossip destroys the great American newspapers, as if corporate greed hasn't already done that to a large degree. Heavy traffic on some websites has as much deep meaning as the gawkers who slow down to stare at a car accident. They look; they move on. It doesn't mean they've forgotten their obligations to go on to work, take care of children and the elderly, be informed about the war and vote in the next election. Why should front-page editors change news priorities just because frivolous gossip grabs the imagination for a few seconds?
But this is not the world as it is. So clearly we must taken action. If we refrain from clicking on gossip and we vote and are good boys and girls, by golly, we'll get the journalism we deserve. Well, I will do my small part by solemnly pledging that I will not click on any celebrity or non-celebrity gossip ever again. (Not just for Lent, but EVER again!) I will not be lured in by screaming headlines or the radio news blurbs about you-know-who that have woken me up the past three mornings. Let's all boycott the gossip and save journalism! Are you with me? Anybody?; Reply to this comment


by hs_nc February 21, 2007 1:16 PM EST: I have been shocked at the relentless coverage of Anna Nicole Smith. It seems to be consuming all media outlets--there are nightly cable news shows that have been devoting full hours to it--for several days in a row. The ongoing drama is front page on all media web sites I have visited, most newspapers I read--and why? No one can possibly want this much Anna coverage. I certainly am sad that she passed away and it seems she had an unfortunate last few years and I feel sorry for the little girl that she left behind...but come on. She wasn't exactly a celebrity--and when kids ask who she is--I doubt their parents are pulling out a magazine and showing them her centerfold. It is unbelievable. I am to the point where I can't watch the news or read the "news" web sites.; Reply to this comment