Wednesday, January 23, 2008

PLAYING THE NUMBERS

As you can see, I got back into my boxers, crawled into bed with my laptop, and once again the bf was there to take a picture. Notice the nerd glasses? I almost look like a....mathematician, don't you think?

Wonkette finished today with 154,759 pageviews and 113,307 visits. That is 24,303 less PVs and 18,100ish visits less than yesterday. But many of us were staying away yesterday too, so as some commenters rightly suggested, let's look at the averages for the other Wednesdays of the month. Now keep in mind that Wednesday, January 2 was the day after New Year's Day, and the numbers were very low.

The average pageviews on the other three Wednesdays in January is 191,391 and visits is 141,291. So today was 36,000 less than the Wednesday average for PVs, and about 28,000 less visits than the average.

Since the numbers were so low on Jan. 2, I think you could put those average numbers in a month without a holiday at approx 205,000/155,000, but let's work with what we've got instead of getting all hypothetical.

To me this is something. I realize it is not a big sample, but it would seem to be a statistically significant decrease. Of course, I hated statistics in college, so I don't know. And the only thing I remember about it is that statistics can always be manipulated to look like how you want them to look like. Something 7 years of Bush has taught us well.

13 comments:

melissa said...

Now that's what I was waiting for.

The numbers are interesting too. Let's just keep on keepin' on.

I'll plan to look for the Newell assignment tomorrow.

Over and out.

nojo said...

If you wanna play the home game...

Wonkette SiteMeter

Unfortunately, daily breakdowns are only available for the previous month, and recent months have been holiday-ridden. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable reading the tea leaves until at least March, so we'll have to take our victories symbolic for now.

mw (DWSUWF) said...

You could eliminate the weekday/weekend/holiday factors by looking at a comparison of Wonkette to other Gawker sites, since presumably the other sites would also be affected on the same days in the same way. The best way would be to look at each day of the month and calculate what percentage Wonkette represents of the entire Gawker universe on a day by day basis. But I just don't fucking care that much, so I'll leave this as an extra credit homework assignment for the class.

Instead I compared Wonkette to Jezebel for the same three Wednesdays that our Glorious Leader used in the post, to determine if there is an effect that merits further investigation. If there is an effect, it would be most pronounced in comparing these sites, since the subject of the investigation, code named "Beaver" moved between these sites in this time frame. Results:

Wonkette/Jezebel Viewer Ratios
Date Pages Visiors
Jan 02 32% 30%
Jan 09 39% 37%
Jan 16 40% 37%
Beaver Moves from W to J
Jan 23 29% 27%

Borrowing from the spirit of Climatological Research, I have decided to modify the data in order to better fit the pre-determined conclusion that I want to promote, and am throwing out the results for January second. Obviously Wonkette commenters were far more likely than Jezebel commenters to still be suffering the effects of alcohol poisoning on January 2nd. So that date is a statistical anomaly and should be deleted. With that date out, we have a pronounced clear and internally consistent effect. Somebody notify Al Gore.

Conclusion
There was a statistically significant shift of 10 percentage points in relative viewership from Wonkette to Jezebel over the period in question. I call this the Furry Beaver Effect ™

nojo said...

@dwsuwf: So you're saying the Furry Beaver Effect accounts for our standard deviation?

gurukalehuru said...

Hate to be the bringer downer, but I think those numbers mean we will eventually lose.
They are not down by 90%, they are not down by 50%, they are down by maybe 30%, which means they will likely recover.
And today they were playing dirty with a naked photo of Carla Bruni, world's number 1 FLILF.
But don't hate me for looking, I promise I didn't comment!

Chicago Bureau said...

Sadly, friends, I must focus on work today. So, no play for Mr. Gray. (Or, Mr. Grey either.)

Please send Chicago Bureau's love to Newell for me.

Pvt congcat said...

What the hell do all these numbers mean? Mr. Bong and I are confused. Are we winning? Should I go back to swabbing the deck and not worry? And why is the Hillbot such an ice bitch?
Sorry about that last thing. It's kind of early.

Private cong, breeder division, swabber first class

Nabisco said...

Question: what do 'page views' and a 'hit' translate into in terms of ad revenue? Cuz that is the weathervane for Denton/Layne.

eagerly anticiping my assignment,
Tech. Specialist Nabisco

naked picture of Carla Bruni???? Must. Hold. Back.

ManchuCandidate (on Strike) said...

Christ if they're letting PAULTARDS, they're desperate.

If that's the case then I'm betting if you subtract the newbie Paultards I figure the losses of REGULAR traffic are closer to 40-50%.

litotes said...

Spc Litotes reporting for duty...

Another angle: I saw somewhere that Megan was gradually bringing numbers up after they had tanked. If that trend has stopped or reversed, maybe we have something. But I lack the stats chops to go further.

My expectations for winning are mild. We might gave the Gawker borgs pause the next time they consider treating an editor like shit. We might make Megan's transition easier, impressing whomever hires her with our mass ardor. But I don't think we're going to make Gawker re-hire Megan or even admit they made a mistake, that's a corporate third-rail.

If you touch the king, you have to kill him.

Awaiting orders re Jim's specific post.

Spc 3rd Class Litotes
Musical Propaganda Division

hotsauce said...

HF, are you gonna post here to let us know which of Jim's posts to pile on? I have it penciled in for 11am (ET) in Outlook, and am waiting with bated breath...

Also, I've decided that asteri are too cumbersome and ugly for when I refer to that site-which-must-not-be-typed-into-the-browser, so I will henceforth refer to it with the abbreviation "W'ette", or possibly just "wette". Has a nice ring to it, no?

In fact, in my mind, we are now in the midst of a wette revolution. Everything's better when wette!

I don't think it's fair that only senior staff officers get Wette Platinum, though. Think of troop morale!

Ooh, I just though of a marching song (apologies to Herman's Hermits):

In the Wette,
In the Wette,
We're just about as wet as we can get!
From up near San Francisco
out to New Jersey,
Wonketteers are gettin' all immerse-y!
Boom!
Rah!
Fuck!

Okay, it's time to go take my meds now.

Homofascist said...

@gurukalehuru @litotes @ everyone

I will elaborate on this further at a later time, but we need to think about what "victory" means for the HFA. We also need to be realistic. We are not going to shut down the site. We are not going to get Layne fired (I am sure that will happen in 8 months anyway when Denton's magic 8 ball tells him to do it). Hell, we aren't going to get anyone to admit that a mistake was made. We need to think about what CAN be done and how we can each contribute to those goals. We CAN keep our pageviews from being in the totals. We CAN keep our fun, creative snarky voices off the comments, thus creating a much more sterile (believe you me - one post had 50 comments but was DREADFULLY boring and awful) environment that will slow the addition of new readers. And we CAN create our own spaces (like this) to continue to enjoy each other.

rickushay said...

@nabisco:

Fear not, my brother. I have a soothing salve for your Bruni desires:

http://rangerup.com/giofraup.html

They aint nekkid but that's ok.

Major R