Does anyone still think that, for example, Lifesite News: the reactionary Canadian junksite, is irrelevant and ought to be ignored? They just announced that they received over 100 million page views in 2019: a traffic growth of over 50%.
With no advertising or promotion money whatever and being a sole proprietor (relying only on hopefully good placement in Google searches and links and shares and advertisement at Patheos), I have received 625,881 page views this year on my blog, which is 1 / 160th of what they get (or 0.63% if my math is correct).
And (just for the record), I’ve been grinding away for now 18 years as a full-time Catholic apologist, have 50 published books (21 with other publishers, and four of them, bestsellers), a website continuously online now for almost 23 years, with over 2900 posts, innumerable published articles on reputable Catholic websites and 25 or so radio appearances and all kinds of recommendations from important Catholic folks.
I’m not trying to toot my own horn (believe me). I’m simply making the point that I have worked very hard in my field, too, yet can get only 1 / 160th of the page views that these pitiful reactionary clowns get, with their constant trashing of the Church and popes and ecumenical councils alike. This is the way things are these days.
And what are their most popular topics? “Pope Francis, Bishop Schneider, Pachamama.”
A few of us out here attempt to refute the errors of these naysaying, conspiratorial quasi-schismatic reactionaries (with little thanks and a constant stream of insults for our efforts). But it’s like trying to oppose a hurricane with one breath.
Nevertheless, truth is truth, no matter how many read it, and it is worthwhile fighting for. The results are up to God, as always. Sites like Lifesite (by no means the only such site) grow because many people want it and others to grow. They have itching ears, as St. Paul warned about.
Lifesite News is simply announcing (to its readers) that “business is flourishing.” I’m not against that per se, I’m against the damnable nature of their message and content.
Someone noted that they also do good conservative and pro-life stories, and perform a helpful role in Canadian media in that regard. I certainly understand why conservative / traditional Canadians would need and seek for an alternative media outlet, just as we now have in the US. It’s perfectly possible to be great in one area and atrocious in another. If Lifesite News didn’t mix in a lot of truth, they wouldn’t be getting these numbers. Lying sites ironically exponentially grow by doing just that. But the lies are also going out . . .
A venue can have great stuff alongside garbage. When they cover the Church and the pope, it is largely garbage and reprehensible. The general outlook is reactionary. A reactionary can be correct on any number of political views. It doesn’t make their pope-bashing and quasi-schismatic arguments true.
(originally 12-30-19 on Facebook)