Myspace users are getting older according to Comscore. Danah doubts it.


Myspace users are older than you think says a new comscore report. Yet Yahoo and Berkeley’s Danah Boyd, almost certainly the sharpest and most knowledgeable researcher in this space, is challenging Comscore’s finding.

It’s good to question methodology, but I think Comscore is “correct” here though Dana’s right that we need more slicing and dicing of data to assess the significance of this finding.

1) I’m pretty sure the methodology is very strong in terms of demographic specifics. I think they have a pool of people they interview or measure regularly and then mine this data from this controlled and “known”, but very large online population.

2) Users *are* visitors! They are using the term “users” in the normal metrics sense of “unique visitors to the site”. Dana is making a distinction between users and visitors as active vs passive participants.

We’d want to see more info about time spent at the site to generalize more about this but I don’t think this time issue would refute the “user demographic” they are talking about.

Of course, if young users spend 10x the time at the site as older ones it would make the Comscore finding less important. They don’t seem to suggest this is the case however, so until further notice I’m going to keep thinking “wow, Myspace is getting to be an olderspace!”

Update: Fred’s take on this seems to be that method is OK but this needs more elaboration in the press which he thinks is “conflating” the terms user and visitor. He agrees with Danah that “user” and “unique visitor” are not the same. I’ve never seen anybody make that distinction but perhaps we need a new term?

Seems to me that they have been working with *subscriber data* and thus are surprised by this user data. Subscribers are probably are younger than visitors and spend a lot more time at the site. Relevant, but does not dismiss the Comscore findings.

Update:  Mike Rubin at Comscore comments here.     Appears my analysis was correct – Comscore’s data is solid but reflects visitors and not registered users, and young people stay on longer.

NYT summarizes the Google Youtube deal


Here’s a good summary of the Google YouTube deal from the New York Times.    They note that one analyst suggests this is not a spreadsheet valuation as much as a way to keep competitors away from all the juicy eyeballs at YouTube.

I still just don’t understand how any big player could not put the money to better use and grow their own.  I was under the impression that many used YouTube rather than Google Video because the latter took longer to post – presumably because they screened content more aggressively -I would have thought that Google Video would have tried the same configuration as YouTube before spending so much, but this also supports the idea that this was a way to keep MS and Yahoo (who is currently the video stream leader), from gaining the market share Youtube will now provide to the Google family of sites.

I don’t think this is a shark jump by Google, but I think this may go down as the most expensive “junk content” site aquisition in history.

Danny Sullivan says he does not have much to say about it over here at Search Engine Watch.  (Hey, I thought you left SEW Mr. King ‘o Search Optimization?!)

Mark Cuban to Google – you are crazy! JoeDuck to Google – just show me some money!


Mark Cuban, no stranger to online video having made about a billion in that field, challenges Google’s sanity in the YouTube deal here.

It seems to me Cuban’s been the most insightful of those reviewing this deal and my first reaction is “brilliant stuff from an insider”, but I also respect how clever Google is and will continue to be at re-railing the online train.

Big producers will do big deals with Google as they are right now.   The growing community of small time content producers (e.g me) is a lot more willing to share and forget about copyright encumbrances *as long as you cut me in on the action*.

If Google can monetize my stuff better or close to as much as I can then more power to Google.   I’m rooting for Yahoo! winning the monetizing battle though because …. I like them better and have stock.   But there’s room for both, and I think we’ll see in the coming years that the rising tide of online ads will lift most of the ships.

I’m confident I’m speaking for 80%, and probably 98%, of the long tail when I say that the long tail, especially in video, is going to attach to the entity that can best monetize their work be it professional full length movies or stupid cat trick clips.

Can the other 2% of content people sue them?  Sure, but not painfully enough to stop the online video train o’ progress, a train that’s sure to bring us the most garish, irrelevant, superficial, and poorly produced video yet seen on earth and then find a way to turn a few bucks on showing it off to people.    God bless America!

Online News Association to Arrington: Hey, let’s get Mikey!


Poor Mike Arrington. From his blog it sounds like Mike was the token sacrificial lamb at the recent Online News Association conference where his comments were not taken well by the crowd of what sounds like mostly conventional journalists (or conventional *thinkers*) hoping to get a grip on the sea change going on, and going online, right now. They should listen to Mike carefully, because he’s been good at seeing the future. (ummm except Edgeio, which probably won’t fly).

There’s a lot of news in the news business but journalists are often missing the critical factors which include blogs, user interaction, and emphasis on real time reporting in real time from real people who are making that news themselves or direct witness to that news (e.g. who really wants a journalist in the middle when you have webcams on all the parties in the dispute?)

I remember how intense Mike got at Mix06 in his remarks about the future of offline Yellow pages, telling them “You are DEAD!”, and I can only imagine how the ONA folks reacted to his insights about the future of news and media in the online world.

His real sin was to become an expert early on in the Web 2.0 world and to profit from that expertise. Nothing pisses people off like somebody figuring things out early and profiting from that knowledge.

Good for him, but he better stick to events like Yahoo Hack Day or Mashup Camp if he wants a warm reception from like minded folks….folks who also understand that the changes are only beginning and will rock the news world like it’s never been rocked before.

Google to buy Youtube for 1.6 billion


It’s now almost official that Google will buy Youtube for a whopping 1.6 billion. They’ll announce it after the close today.    Here’s the NYT take on things. I’d have listened to Mark Cuban because it seems to me he’s in a very unique position to analyze the prospects here, but they didn’t and soon Google will have a huge video footprint. Google Video has about 1/4 the traffic of Youtube. Combined I think they’ll dwarf the competition – at least initially, though this market, which should really be called “American’s stupidist and most mundane home videos” is still in it’s infancy.

It’s not clear to me that people will continue to spend hours and hours surfing and watching for the few gems in an ocean of crappy short clips but Google seems to think so, and it’s also true that there is an enormous amount of advertising money now spent on network TV that may flow to this venue. Google’s recent talk about NOT producing their own content and moving into offline advertising venues may relate to this decision – they want to become a key source to soak up as much of the dumb money now spent on extravagant, low ROI offline campaigns.

Blog readers vs writers III – Cicarelli’s fleeting fame


Even thanks to a highlight by A-list blogger Jeremy of my AOL lawsuit post yesterday it looks like my Cicarelli “test post” is by far the top interest item here at Joe Duck, and it appears this is due to high placement at MSN for the term … Cicarelli.

This little Cicarelli experiment is suggesting to me that the gap between readers and blog writers is much wider than I’d thought, and it may change my approach to blogging.   Perhaps throwing in junk topic posts every so often is a good way to shake up search prominence even for non-junk topics.   Hard to test that but it seems to be happening – presumably as people who come for Cicarelli stay to read about …. Web 2.0 or Global health and welfare?!

But alas at Technorati we see that Cirarelli is down to search term number 9. I fear her fame, and mine, shall be as fleeting as a teenager’s search preferences.

Posts that contain Cicarelli per day for the last 30 days.
Technorati Chart
Get your own chart!

AOL lawsuit over data release and, more importantly, storage of search database of intentions


Over at TechCrunch there’s a discussion about the lawsuit against AOL for releasing search data and also challenging their right to store the search histories of AOL users. I’m surprised this took so long because Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc have been storing all of our searches for some time and probably are using that data to adjust the search experience including refinement to advertising and organic results.

It frustrates me (or I should really say it pisses the heck out of me) that 1) Search engines think they should have rights to my search info with no obligation to tell me what they do with my info and 2) there is a lack of concern in the online community about this. John Battelle has been one of the few voices pointing out that this issue is big and getting much bigger, that these privacy issues need a lot more clarification, and that search companies are sneakily dodging many key issues with search and privacy.

Contrary to many comments I read from other onliners, the Government viewing my data is low on my list of privacy concerns because I doubt they’ll choose to or be able to effectively process the information in sinister ways. However it bothers me a LOT that my search “fingerprint” is getting used without my consent, understanding, or permission in an effort by Google, Yahoo, et al to sell me things and adjust my search and internet experiences.

If they want to do that they need to let me know the process they use to do it. If they think sharing that process violates their need for commercial secrecy then…do NOT use my stuff. I never gave you permission, and you should not assume you have my permission. In fact few people even know that Google and Yahoo and MSN store every single one of their searches – Google, Yahoo, MSN cannot reasonably claim they have implied permission for the search storage identified to individual computer level when very few people are even aware they are doing it!

Blog readers and blog writers redux. Cicarelli still rules


Gee, the top blog search is still Cicarelli.

 

My earlier post with these technorati search terms seems to be getting a some attention for the term “Assparade” rather than the post I thought entitled “Cicarelli“, but I don’t have good stats yet.

 

I shall say with great pride and elitism that at Technorati this morning I was the top search result for “Assparade”, apparently simply because I put up the technorati list on my blog.

 

Today’s technorati terms are different but still indicative of the chasm of diversity between blog readers and blog writers.

 

 

Top Technorati Blog Searches September 23 (or maybe Sept 22?) – what are blog readers trying to find?

  1. Cicarelli
  2. Jonny
  3. Xing
  4. Pinky
  5. Openbc
  6. Bin Laden
  7. Bitacle
  8. Hugo Chavez
  9. Assparade
  10. Asian
  11. Axis of Sketchy…
  12. Grey’s Anatomy
  13. Richard Hammond
  14. Daniela Cicarel…
  15. Google

Top Technorati tags – what people are writing about.

  1. Bush
  2. Islam
  3. Pensieri
  4. Comedy
  5. Microsoft
  6. youtube
  7. Amore
  8. iPod
  9. sexy
  10. fashion
  11. foto
  12. Politica
  13. wordpress
  14. Politik
  15. torture

 

Although I do understand the diversity to some extent, particularly interesting is that “real” news like “Hugo Chavez” is not getting written up as much as it’s getting searched for.   I’m guessing that the blog writer demographic is still very narrowly “tech focused” but I wonder how it is politically?    Probably polarized, such that people with “strong” political views are far more likely to blog in that space.

Blog readers are not blog writers.


Check out the top Searches at Technorati for today:

 Top Searches

  1. Cicarelli
  2. Pinky
  3. Facebook
  4. Chavez
  5. Onewebday
  6. Hugo Chavez
  7. Bitacle
  8. Grey’s Anatomy
  9. Black
  10. Daniela Cicarel…
  11. Myspace
  12. Melinda Duckett
  13. Youtube
  14. Assparade
  15. Sophia

 Now look at the top Tags, which I would think are a reasonable proxy of what bloggers are writing about:

Top Tags

  1. Bush
  2. youtube
  3. Islam
  4. Microsoft
  5. Politica
  6. Pensieri
  7. Iran
  8. torture
  9. vlog
  10. chavez
  11. Riflessioni
  12. Terrorism
  13. Amore
  14. Segway
  15. Israel

They are totally different, which is very interesting for several reasons.   Readers are clearly a very different blog interest demographic from writers.  The two groups are not even close in the subjects that interest them.

 

It also suggests that bloggers are not after viewers as much as they are writing their own interests.  I predict this gap will narrow  as the barriers to entry approach zero and the advantages of blogging things of interest to the masses goes up (ie blogs are better monetized than now).   However I doubt it will ever close completely since the guy who just wants to surf for blog porn is unlikely to become much of a wordsmith.   It suggests that bloggers have a more ‘refined’ set of interests in the sense that “assparade” is lower brow than, say “Segway”, though I suppose some would indeed call a Segway convention an ass parade if they were trying to double entendre the scooter crowd.  Hmmm – maybe I’ve got this all ass backwards?

Clinton Global Initiative


The Clinton Global Initiative is tackling the world’s major problems. It’s a great effort with the backing of one of the world’s most effective superpower schmoozers, Bill Clinton. Although I’d suggest that the Copenhagen Consensus is a more rational way to prioritize spending, Clinton’s group is far more likely to bring big money and big corporations and Government interests to the table.

Today’s announcement is that Richard Branson will donate 3 billion towards reduction of Global Warming via the Clinton Global Initiative. Although I’d much rather see the group put more towards current catastrophes at least this donation is consistent with the notion that big providers of greenhouse gasses like Branson’s many transportation interests should do the most to alleviate the effects of those gasses on the environment.

Perhaps my friend Linda was right to suggest that some people will support Global Warming initiatives in ways they won’t get behind those confronting global poverty. If we can do it all that’s great and for the first time in my life I do think there is a great, driving force on the part of most people, policy makers, and even Governments to initiate “Global Improvements”. Let’s do it!