Blogosphericity
Hello world!
Dec 13th
Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!
stop presses on previous post
Nov 4th
OK … NOW I’ve seen everything. And I have a new favorite blog.
It all started when I was doing research at work. For real, on the clock. I had Googled a new product our client is testing, and came upon a reference to it in showmeblog.com. I was about to alt+left back, when I noticed the “recent photo” (at right) that put a whole new double entendre spin on the site.
I initially wrote this off in the “crazy naked guy” folder, but now I’ve gotten hooked on the site. First off, you gotta love any blog with the last four entries of “still no Internet.” Throw in claims about inventing blogs, lots of crotchety criticisms of Bush et al, and a storied history in BBS, and you’ve got a blog damn well worth reading. Renews my faith in the Interweb.
Thanks naked stormwatching guy (aka Jim Howard).
blog readers: UR young, rich, and beautiful
Aug 10th
comScore Networks just released a study that attempts to profile the blog audience in much the same way that Nielsen measures TV viewers. comScore’s approach is different from the ratings offered by Technorati and others who typically count links in that they are observing online behavior directly through panelists.
Based on the habits of 1.5 million US surfers in Q1, comScore extrapolates the total domestic blog audience to be 49.5 million people, which represents about 30% of the total US Internet population. And they conclude that it’s not just any 30% of us, but it tends to be the younger, wealthier, and more connected users who support the blogosphere. Oh, and most importantly, the blog reader is more likely to shop online (51% vs. 39%) and spend more money online ($199 vs. $145) when compared to the average Internet slob.
Fatted calf, thy name is blog reader!
But it’s not all peaches and cream for us blogger ilk. As you might expect, readership is highly concentrated among a few blog sites. Only a few sites, such as the freepers, drudge, and fleshbot, drew over a million unique visitors between January and March. Things quickly tail off from there, meaning Joe Blogspot is relegated to a pretty small and segmented audience.
It’s also an uphill battle for readers if you’re not pitching news commentary or current events. Almost half (43%) of readership flocks to kos, wonkette, and the like, but non-hosted visitation is otherwise highly fragmented among sites that are dedicated to “hipsters” (17% … is that us?), tech (15%), women (8%), media (8%), and so on. Even further down the food chain you have your multitudes of moblogs, fetishes, and esoteric commentary that compose the vast personal miscellany of blogdom. In other words, the blogosphere is still very much a chaotic landscape of opinion, with relatively few properties that have mass on par with established media.
Blogs are clearly growing, but visitation is only one form of impact; it doesn’t address content quality and the subsequent influence on readers or other media. For every big-time scoop that comes from a blog, there are innumerable red herrings or listings that resemble gossip more than news. And then there’s the whole incestuous nature of blogging that tends to use inter-site links as a substitute for investigation and thought. There is value in aggregation, but at some point blogs need to be about more than communal head-nodding if we/they are to gain credibility and retain a meaningful audience.
And finally, it’s important to evaluate the findings of this study (and any others) based on how it was conducted. The research may be based upon the web trails of 1.5 million users, but these are users who agreed to allow a third party to observe their online usage. comScore, like most market research companies, argue that their panelists “look” like the greater web audience demographically, and they go to great pains to include a wide variety of users in their sample. But no matter how many left-handed dentists or albino gamers you recruit, the nature of the recruiting itself attracts certain types of users who will participate and excludes others who will not.
In general, those who participate are more active and more interested in the Internet, but they also do not object to being “watched.” Does this describe you? It certainly doesn’t describe everyone who uses the Internet, and that has implications for the results that comScore is reporting. My guess is that their blog visitation estimates are elevated overall, based on an assumption of hightened awareness and surfing behavior of their sample against the general online population. I’m also willing to bet that most of their conclusions that pertain to relative (as opposed to absolute) usage are correct. Even if the overall sample is biased towards increased usage, the relationships observed across users (i.e. between blog readers and non-readers) are likely to hold true for the population in general.
You can read comScore’s 11 page report here.
couldn’t happen to a nicer site
Aug 8th
There are very few big ideas that I could claim to having on my own, regardless of who ultimately got credit for it. I suppose if anyone starts selling a Diet Coke-flavored Pizza I’ll have grounds for suit, but the closest I’ve come otherwise would be Metacritic.
Some movie reviewers offer consistently skewed perspectives. Or more accurately, their ratings are predictably high or low for certain types of movies. If you took a reviewer’s entire catalogue, it would be easy to account for the persistent biases in their ratings; you could ratchet scores up or down based on positive / negative leanings, or go even deeper and adjust based on things like movie type, foreign origination, MPAA rating, or the presence of Brendan Frazier. Ultimately, you could create standardized movie ratings that give a “true” critical read across reviewers.
The main hurdle is that many top reviewers do not provide quantified ratings, which means you either exclude those reviewers from consideration, or come up with a process of assigning ratings based on their qualitative review. Hassle > payoff, so I tanked the idea.
Oh, that and I found out that Metacritic already does most of the work. They don’t correct for biases or any such nonsense, but they did the tough part of quantifying the top reviewers, which really solves the bias issue because it comes out in the wash if you can consistently average across 25 national reviews. Despite my crushing disappointment and rampant jealousy, Metacritic has become one of my favorite sites.
More recently, they’ve expanded into ratings for music, games, and books using the same methodology. It’s really a handy resource to get a quick read on the critical gestalt for any of those media. The site has apparently been rewarded for its insight and persistent, getting purchased by C|Net. Since I also read C|Net regularly, I suppose this is a good thing. Both sites offer consistently good content, although I’m not sure I see an obvious fit between them. I just hope that the “big money” of C|Net doesn’t tarnish the pure heart of Metacritic.
Now if only we could get Paul Tatara in on the deal, things would be perfect.
25 bands you’ve seen live
Apr 20th
Meme Time: Copy this list, leave in the bands you’ve seen perform live. Delete the ones you haven’t and add other ones you’ve seen until they total to 25. The asterisk means that these are bands that the previous person had on his/her list. Two asteriks mean the last 2 people that did this had this band on their list, etc..
(in no particular order, from Tim)
- Starfish *
- Tool *
- Tomahawk *
- Bob Mould *
- A Perfect Circle *
- Rocket From The Crypt **
- AC/DC
- Black Rebel Motorcycle Club
- Wilco
- Reverend Horton Heat
- Jet
- The Grim Northern Social
- Son Volt
- Chemical Brothers
- Ryan Adams
- … Trail of Dead
- The Replacements
- Beck
- The Cult
- Willie Nelson
- Martin Sexton
- Ben Harper
- Jason and the Scorchers
- Mogwai
- Audioslave
- Smithereens