I’ve been tracking the traffic to the Big Picture lately, albeit far less compulsively than say six months ago.

Wanna hear something really weird about these electoral vote updates?

I typically get between 3000-5000 hits a day — given the rather narrow, market/economic focus of this blog, those are respectable if uninspired numbers. I surmise about 2000 of the regular readers are stock market / media types. The rest are Google hits, followed by Yahoo, and then everyone else. (I apparently have a good Google score).

Any mention by a big blogger — Altercation, KOS, Buzzflash, Cursor, etc. — drives traffic up 3-4k. When any Radio/Music post gets mentioned by Doc A, traffic spikes by 6-8k for 24 hours.

Now here’s the really funny thing: Over the past two months or so, the blog traffic has climbed up to 10-15,000 per day without any major linkage. The vast majority is due to a huge increase in Google/Yahoo searches for “Projected Electoral College Vote.”

I starte excerpting the WSJ’s swing state chart early in the campaign. The Journal is pretty neutral, and the quant in me was attracted to their mathematical modelling.

Over the past week, traffic looking for its been over 15k/day, and today, Monday November 1, without any major linkage, the traffic is at 19,889 for the past 24 hours — with 90% of it looking for “Projected Electoral College Vote, 2004

Category: Weblogs

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

3 Responses to “Recent traffic analysis”

  1. JWC says:

    I started coming here on a link from a blog, probably Angry Bear. But I liked your blog and I come here on my own now. So give yourself credit. Great blog.

  2. David Bennett says:

    Well if you are getting 2,000 daily hits of regulars it does make you commercially viable at least theoretically. I doubt if my small local newspaper gets that many in their business section and yours would be a more select audience, tending to high income and education with interests somewhat specialized.

    The fundamental shift in media structure is just beginning. You are credible in that you are fairly expert in some topics and your positions have been picked up by more conventional publications. If you keep at it you will be a player among many thousands which I suspect is the direction we are going. The newest fad being to note that the “tail” in Internet markets is getting an increasing share of business.

    This includes ideas. While there is some tendency for people to confine themselves to pages which confirm their views thus increasing isolation, I would say on balance the trend is different. I don’t think the net causes this, it’s amazing the degree to which it exists in society and always had. For many people, those who use the medium seriously, there is a diversifying. Similarly for many people use of the net has led to far more personal contacts, it’s amazing the groupings formed around simlar interests. The organizational capacities which automatically occur are almost unbelievable in context of newletters built with copy machines and physical meetings to share ideas in “real time” etc.

    Viewing this thing as a publication I would suggest a more sophisticated comments page, this does extend, perhaps consideration of a wiki for future structure.

    Since whether you like it or not, you are a part of the “open source” system (the “anarchic” revolution of the net is more medium than message) you might also consider some articles in wikopedia, it’s an odd structure, very uneven, excellant in certain technical areas, but weak in most others.

    There are reasons to connect with the larger “community.” It’s methods have built something rather amazing. Just think o the difficulties of bulding a publication with 2,000 readers within the context of conventional publishing.

  3. Rob says:

    I think the Google hits help drive up long-term traffic. I get a ton because, like you, I write in a niche. I figure maybe 10% of those who find me through a link end up becoming regular readers. I’ve been reading for so damn long that I don’t remember where I found your blog. But I remember being attracted to it initially because you actually know something, unlike many people out there who just pontificate.