Krugman tops list of most influential commentators. Limbaugh is 2nd.
Paul Krugman of the New York Times is the nation’s most influential commentator, according to the Atlantic magazine. Rush Limbaugh is second on the Atlantic’s ranking of the Top 50.
An article on the AtlanticWire.com explains:
These are the most influential commentators in the nation, the columnists and bloggers and broadcast pundits who shape the national debates.
The Top 10:
- 1.) Krugman
- 2.) Limbaugh
- 3.) George Will of the Washington Post
- 4.) Thomas Friedman of the New York Times
- 5.) David Brooks of the New York Times
- 6.) Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post
- 7.) Glenn Beck of the Glenn Beck Program
- 8.) Frank Rich of the New York Times
- 9.) Andrew Sullivan of the Atlantic
- 10.) Karl Rove of the Wall Street Journal
Its methodology:
To compile the list, our team spent months collecting and analyzing data, tracking a group of 400 names that eventually became our 50. Our in-house methodology relies on three streams of information:
Influence: A survey of more than 250 Washington insiders - members of Congress, national media figures, and political insiders - in which respondents rank-ordered the commentators who most influence their own thinking
Reach: Comprehensive data collection and analysis to measure the total audience of each commentator
Web Engagement: In partnership with PostRank, a company specializing in filtering social media data, the Wire analyzed top commentators on 16 measures of webiness, including mentions on Twitter and performance on popular social media sites like Digg and Delicious
The final list is the result of an algorithm that brings together these three factors.
What do you think of the rankings? Who tops your list?
Steve Parker is the deputy managing editor for news, and oversees the Post-Dispatch's front page. STLtoday's online news editors are on his newsroom team. Parker has been at the paper since September 1980. 
–Don’t know who is most influential with the most people, but Krugman is definitely not with me. Yes, he is widely published, (mostly text-books or work on economic theory), but most of his work is retread of previously plowed ground. His “New Theory” of economics is hashed over Keynesian work.
His main ability seems to be convincing others he knows what he’s talking about, nothing new or substantial. He wouldn’t even make my list, as he is for pinheads and not the everyday person.
–Brooks, Beck, Rich, Rove, or Sullivan, would also not make my list. They are inconsequential to most of the real world.
–Exclusions are Thomas Sowell, Michelle Malkin, Jim Hoft, Ann Coulter.
The biggest exclusion is Michael Savage. Revealing.
Together they have said more with less press exposure than anyone out there. Also revealing.
Not surprised too much by the list. Most of the people here are bottom-feeders, which is what appeals to most people. It’s nice to see that someone with the intellect of Will is being followed. But why would anyone listen to one word of what that crook Rove has to say?
Correction: not ‘most’ are bottom-feeders, but several. Of course that includes Tokyo Rush.
Krugman makes the list but certainly not before Limbaugh… not even in the upper 4/5ths
Thomas Friedman is literally a fool… most recently on Meet The Press praising China’s “ability to get things done”
Andrew Sullivan… isn’t he STILL peddling the “Who Is Trig’s REAL Mommy” story? Other than Kevin Horrigan who pays Sullivan any mind?
Would encourage you to drop whatever you’re doing whenever Friedman or Krugman are on a panel show; it’s a treat watching how pathetic they are at thinking on their feet (and unable to defend their policies.)
Likewise Krauthammer and Thomas Sowell — for the exact opposite reasons as above.
“Influence: A survey of more than 250 Washington insiders - members of Congress, national media figures, and political insiders - in which respondents rank-ordered the commentators who most influence their own thinking”
This goes a long way to explaining why more and more Americans hold so little regard for the political class. People actually take bufoons like Frank Rich and Andrew “hot loads” Sullivan seriously?
Krugman’s popularity appears to be inversely proportional to his grasp of political facts and logic. No wonder he’s the liberal’s current favorite. I’ve never been a fan but you can’t argue with Limbaugh’s position near the top of the heap. That he continues to be Public Enemy #1 among liberals proves he’s got their number. The Right lost a great deal of intellectual heft with the death of William Buckley and the earlier retirement of Bill Safire, but Will knows his stuff. Still, I don’t read him nearly as often as I do Krauthammer or Thomas Sowell. I never miss their columns.
Friedman lost what little credibility he may have had with his recent “Hey, maybe we should be a brutal one party police state like China” column. Um, no.
David Brooks is a conservative poser who, like Kathleen Parker and Christopher Buckley, is mostly laughed at. The only reason they have jobs is because they are happy wafting the putrid fumes of the political establishment and don’t pose a threat to anyone. For real news and analysis, Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt run circles around them in their sleep.
Nice to see Glenn Beck get some props. He’s got his fingers on the pulse and is not afraid to call a spade a spade. (Ooops. Is that a forbidden term now that we’re in the Year Won?) He’s also figured out the power of television in conjunction with the New Media. That he and two amateurs are busy scooping the pants off the dinosaur media is no surprise.
Interesting that Rove appears on the list but not an Obamanista or Clintonite. I would expect those with ties to Obama to fall even farther once the indictments come down.
What a sorry list, no wonder our country is in the shape it’s in. There’s no mention of any polling parameters whatsoever-I looked at every link. So where is Jon Stewart? You mean to tell me that of the “more than 250 Washington insiders”, Holman Jenkins ( whover he is ) is more influential than Stewart?
Steve, here is an idea based on the following link: why don’t we hold in higher esteem those who with the passage of time have proven to be correct? Conversely, why don’t we hold accountable those who haven’t? By the way, who ever heard of Peter Schiff?:
http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/06/10/jon-stewart-interviews-peter-schiff/
This seems strange. Just last year Democrats won the presidency and congressional seats in droves. It would seem logical to me that you’d have more left leaning pundits on your top ten. My thoughts on the rankings? Not much and certainly no longer than it took to write this. Oh yes and then to chuckle about the knuckleheads (not all but most) on the list. Perhaps I’ve been misinterpreting the word influential all these years.
Susan… Maybe there’s more conservative commentators on the list because right now they have more grist for the mill. Not tough to figure out.
E.J.
–Maybe it’s because it’s the conservatives whose interests go further than who won last night’s American Idol, or what Lady Ga-Ga is, man or woman.
–sorry, forgot…or both.