I don't know how much traffic you draw with your provocative article titles, but I employ the same tactic on a regular basis, because it works.

The difference between us, I think, is that when I do it, it's funny or it's tacky, but I'm writing about something I take very seriously. When you do it, you just come across as an unserious panderer.

And what impact do you suppose that had on recent developments here?

That's a moniker that may well stick, I think.

Dawn:

I had written about the articles back when they first came out. More akin to "Saletan's Believe It or Not." I do not spend oodles of time analyzing what is here because much of it is hype and meant to draw attention. Superficial at best. I think Omnibus1reader has it well in stride along with doodahman.

I hate to say it, well actually I don't at all, but that statement is an insult to Drudge, at least the Lewinsky story turned out to be true.