Online Publishing: Big vs Small
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2011, 3:15PM
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
Comments
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
March 31st, 2011 at 3:35 pm
The media fishbowl remains murky and dark.
It’s not just Big vs small,
It’s Big vs small vs micro.
There, I said it.
(wink)
March 31st, 2011 at 4:09 pm
I just reviewed the big ginormous chart.
It was easily the most fucking unintelligible waste of effort I have seen in a long time.
Thanks for sharing.
March 31st, 2011 at 4:53 pm
I’ll second that motion. Pretty, but I have no idea what it means.
“Traffic Rank Trend” — Is this a rank or a trend? How can it be both? Or is it a ranking of the trend? Wouldn’t a trend be a line or bar graph as measured over time? And what does the trend measure? Page views, unique visitors, length of time on the site? The chart is meaningless.
“Daily Reach (Percent)” — Percent of what? Percent of reach? What’s “reach”? Lessee, I wear a 32″ shirtsleeve, so the BBC has 2.19% of my reach, or the editor’s reach…
March 31st, 2011 at 5:28 pm
There is a thing called Google. Maybe take 3 minutes and do some work for yourselves instead of expecting it to be spoon fed to ya.
March 31st, 2011 at 7:41 pm
Now Chad, what, exactly does that mean?
April 1st, 2011 at 2:52 am
If TECH CRUNCH has more traffic than the NEW YORK TIMES, its people complaining about that chart!
April 1st, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Hey Chad:
I work for a living. I DO expect it to be spoon-fed to me. If we all had time to read the original data and do the analysis ourselves, then what would be the point of all these things we call newspapers and magazines?
TechCrunch can be a good source sometimes, but other times they are so in a hurry to report that they forget that quality is more important than speed. Gawker, Gizmodo are even worse in that regard.
April 1st, 2011 at 12:12 pm
So for every 1.2 people visiting the New york Times and clicking on 89 pages, there are 0.2 people visiting Gawker and clicking on 750 pages?
Is there a button I can click that says “I don’t believe you”?
April 1st, 2011 at 8:13 pm
@Marc P
So, your entire viewpoint and opinion is spoon fed to you by newspapers and magazines? Guess you make a lot of bad decisions in your life since you don’t think for yourself.