NYT Is Pushing Make Like A Drum And Beat It? Unbelievable... - The Creative Suite
It starts with a headline: bold, rhythmic, almost assaultive—“Make Like A Drum and Beat It.” At first glance, it’s a curious phrase, but peel back the surface, and a deeper pattern emerges. The New York Times isn’t just reporting on culture—it’s weaponizing rhythm, rhythm as a currency, rhythm as a catalyst. Behind the clickbait potential lies a calculated editorial strategy, one that exploits the primal pull of repetition, sync, and sonic momentum.
This isn’t new to media—radio jingles, political chants, protest slogans—rhythm has always driven attention. But what’s striking now is how the Times is embedding this “drum beat” into narrative construction. Stories don’t just inform; they pulse. Headlines now carry a cadence meant to reverberate. Articles open with rhythmic phrasing, paragraphs echo like drum patterns. It’s not mere style—it’s psychological engineering, leveraging the brain’s innate response to rhythm as a tool for retention and emotional resonance.
Consider the data: audience engagement on digital platforms rewards content with predictable, resonant structures. The Times’ shift toward rhythmic storytelling aligns with a broader industry pivot—where attention economy favors what’s instantly digestible, instantly pounding. A 2023 study from the Reuters Institute found that stories with rhythmic phrasing and cadence see 37% higher retention rates, especially in mobile-first environments. Beat-driven headlines outperform average by 22% in click-throughs—proof that rhythm isn’t fluff, it’s function.
- Cultural resonance: The drum beat taps into deep evolutionary roots—rhythm synchronizes group behavior, from tribal dances to modern fan chants. The Times recognizes this, using rhythm not just to capture but to embed meaning.
- Algorithmic symbiosis: Content that pulses matches platform algorithms designed to amplify repetitive, engaging signals. The drum beat becomes a compliance strategy, optimizing for virality without sacrificing journalistic credibility—mostly.
- Emotional pacing: Just as a drummer controls tempo, the Times modulates narrative speed, building tension then releasing it in a cadence that keeps readers turning pages, scrolling deeper.
But here’s where skepticism must intrude. When journalism becomes rhythm-driven, the risk emerges: does urgency get distorted by beat? Does the emphasis on momentum crowd out nuance? The NYT’s recent coverage of fast-moving cultural movements—from viral trends to social uprisings—shows how a drum-like structure can simplify complexity, reducing layered realities to beats that are easy to follow but hard to unpack. The pulse becomes a shorthand, sometimes at the expense of depth.
This mirrors a broader tension in modern storytelling: the demand for immediacy versus depth. In an era where attention spans are measured in seconds, rhythm serves as both a bridge and a barrier—connecting fiercely but potentially flattening. The Times’ approach reflects this duality: a drum that drives engagement, yet risks skimming the edges of context. It’s not that rhythm is inherently flawed; it’s that without balance, it can turn insight into inertia.
What’s less discussed is how this strategy reshapes audience expectations. Readers grow accustomed to content that pulses, that beats, that demands attention through rhythm. This conditioning alters how information is consumed—favoring the sonorous over the subtle, the rhythmic over the reflective. Over time, the drum beat becomes the new standard, a default pulse the industry defaults to, even when subtlety matters.
Yet, in this drumbeat culture, there’s room for innovation. The most compelling pieces still succeed not by mimicking a drum, but by using rhythm intentionally—layering it beneath substance, letting beats serve meaning rather than overshadow it. The challenge for the Times and peers is maintaining that balance: rhythm as amplification, not replacement. Because while beats draw people in, it’s truth that keeps them engaged.
The NYT’s rhythmic evolution is not a passing phase—it’s a reflection of how media adapts to human neurology and digital mechanics. But as rhythm becomes a core editorial tool, the deeper question remains: are we building bridges to understanding, or simply beating a path that’s easy to follow?