Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Feeding frenzy: 'This blog has jumped the shark'

[Updated at 9:16 a.m. ET, with final traffic and comment data]

Regarding Gannett Blog's readership, Anonymous@7:37 a.m. said yesterday
: "We are keeping track of all posts and the numbers of them. Jim claims that his visitor count is increasing and staying at such high levels, BUT the amount of 'posts/comments' per visitor on a daily basis is very low. I think this blog has jumped the shark. Looks like Jim will really need to find a REAL job."

My count of comments on posts today, yesterday and a week ago, above, doesn't show the big drop-off you claim, @7:37 a.m. When can we see your numbers, please?

Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write gannettblog[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green rail, upper right.

25 comments:

  1. This is an example of simple computer-assisted reporting. I dumped the data into a Google Documents spreadsheet, ran a couple formulas and: voila!

    Today's comment rate will fall by midnight, ET, because most comments arrive early in the day, while visits continue piling up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Plus, the midnights and after are usually drunk, which is apparent when you try to decipher their posts.

    And yes, I work nights.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Plus, anybody in the news business should know that news drives blog visits and commment just as surely as it drives single-copy sales and web traffic. It ebbs and flows.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Some of those are our junk comments, though, Jimbo. So your numbers are inflated.

    You really weren't much of a reporter, were you?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The blog is absolutely declining in readership. Apparently Tara Connell has people modeling out all the numbers each day and tracking areas where individuals access the blog from office locations.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You all are barking up the wrong tree. Look in the mirror if you want to see inflated numbers, Gannett papers grossly inflate their circulation.

    "Apparently Tara Connell has people modeling out all the numbers each day and tracking areas where individuals access the blog from office locations"
    How pathetic if this statement is true. With all the problems facing Gannett they would use resources for tracking this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've been told not to go on the Blog from work -

    ReplyDelete
  8. So silly.
    Everybody who comes here wants to comment. Even the person who insists the comments per visit are falling.
    How silly is that?
    We all want out say.
    We all have an opinion.
    This is the best place for us to express it!
    Go, Jim, go!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Gee, could comments on a blog be event-driven? Just trying to think of the simple solution here. Things happen, people comment. Nothing happens, people peek in the window and move along.

    The whining comments from some posters make me really glad I don't sit across a desk from them.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Who cares if this blog is teeming or taking a rest. Most of that has to do with the day's news, and we all know there are hot and cold news days.

    What's most important is that this blog even exists and serves as a conduit for information cutting across all levels, locations and departments within Gannett. When Gannett transfers a hatchet man manager from one paper to another, the workers at the former will be able to apprise the workers at the latter of what to expect. When layoffs begin, we all get the Paul Revere heads-up that Gannett brass and local management won't give. We find out about papers ousting and not replacing publishers, consolidating business functions and regional VPs, Gannett execs playing golf after telling people they're about to be canned, Gannett execs using Foundation money to support schools outside the scope of the scholarship program mission. On and on. Just disregard the mindless chatter and pay attention to what's important. Above all, share what you know and hear.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Just disregard the mindless chatter and pay attention to what's important."

    That would mean closing the blog and never returning.

    You first, Pedro.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 4:38

    I agree---I really wouldn't even care if it were just a conversation between Jim and one person. There are some who never ever comment.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Some people just don't realize that this was a big holiday and vacation time.

    I took a computer and cell phone "holiday" as well for the week, which made me remember how life was when I was growing up in the 60s: simpler, happier, and carefree. I highly recommend it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This has to be a first: People who presumably don't care about this blog taking time to rip Jim's alleged readership numbers.

    If it's dying, stay away and do your part to hasten the alleged decline!

    It's like the Player Hater's Ball around here. I LOVE IT!

    ReplyDelete
  16. If only the "GANNETTBLOGSUCKS" blog was still around to tell us the real answers behinds Jim's blog.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Everyone knows that Tara's communication staff spends their entire day counting and summarizing the blog comments for Dubow and Martore.

    Why is this so shocking?

    ReplyDelete
  18. It would make sense that fewer might comment or view the blog after more former Gannett employees get canned. At least that's my take. This is my first comment, BTW. I have no connection whatsoever with Gannett other than now viewing the free online version of the Freep.

    It seems rather apparent to me that some of the Freep's copyeditors still left in its employ are rather inept, including some lead editors who post their own opinions and blogs. So many obvious errors left unedited...

    And then there's the growing absence of objectivity there when their reporters/editors carry the water for the Detroit Three, Governor Granholm, and the Obama administration and editorialize in their "news" stories throughout the rag.

    When critical viewers politely post their comments about the Freep's proneness to error or about political views that they do not appreciate, their censors get right to "work" and delete those critical posts, while leaving those from inane posters remain. Several former posters appear to no longer post there or else they might have had their accounts terminated, as many comments have a relatively short half-life--so it seems.

    I like viewing the Gannett Blog, occasionally though. Even if it did jump the shark, of which I have no proof. The Freep had jumped the shark though, years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Not dying.
    Not dying. It isn't dying.
    Those who wish to witness its demise, however, are rising.
    A force for good must stand up against the forces of evil.
    Not dying, not dying, not dying.
    Flourishing!
    That's it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. For a more accurate comparison, shouldn't we be looking at blog traffic now vs. the year-ago period?

    ReplyDelete
  21. The real value this blog could have is to serve as THE communication vehicle from the workers to the management/board/investors, as the management does not appear to have a viable plan for the future of the company. Comments and posts should be directed at what needs to happen to make this work for ALL of us, and yes, Jim, your work on stock options and favorite charities adds to the discussion. To serve as a gripe room with idiotic comments does us no good. This blog should be an excellent read for management/board members/investors to put pressure on them to do something constructive and abandon this suicidal cost-cutting that has gutted any value from the products. BOARD MEMBERS: Please READ the papers. LOOK at the web sites. Do you see anything here worth investing in? What is being done to maintain market share, much less expand on it? What is management doing to keep the business as a going concern? If you're not satisfied, what are you going to DO about it?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Alex@8:24 am: Excellent idea!

    I've added the year-ago comment and traffic data. To confirm: the total number of comments a year ago -- April 14, 2008 -- was, indeed, only six.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Jim wrote: "I've added the year-ago comment and traffic data. To confirm: the total number of comments a year ago -- April 14, 2008 -- was, indeed, only six."

    Jim, based on those figures, isn't it obvious your blog is dying last year. Shouldn't you give up back then? ;-)

    (Word verification: seeasm!)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Arizona Journo4/15/2009 7:14 PM

    Tara and Company are too busy counting blog beans to respond to "real" media requests, which, I believe is their real job?
    Whenver Tucson media call her, she's unavailable for comment.
    That's a PR person's number 1 no-no.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I certainly hope Tara Connell has better things to do with her time than monitor this blog – if not, we need to cut her pay! I find it very hard to believe corporate could care what people are saying on this blog. They are concerned about the stock and revenue. That's it. The workers bees are the least of their concerns.


    The blog is absolutely declining in readership. Apparently Tara Connell has people modeling out all the numbers each day and tracking areas where individuals access the blog from office locations.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.