Drudge Generates More News Traffic Than Social Media 216
tcd004 writes "A report released today by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism shows that the Drudge Report is a far more important driver of online news traffic than Facebook or Twitter. In fact, for the top 25 news websites, Twitter barely registers as a source of traffic. The report hits on several other interesting findings about news behavior."
Re:Ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
It beats the hell out of the network news sites, with their pervasive cookies, auto-start videos, and general unwanted flash-a-palooza.
Re:Ugly (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't read the drudge report, but the layout beats the hell out of most sites, slashdot included.
Javascript isn't always a good thing and on news sites (or aggregators), it's just unnecessary.
Re:Ugly (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah. Everything to program the neanderthal Retardicans needs to be right at the front - they have a limited size buffer in those protohuman brains, if you overflow it everything else goes into the bit-bucket rather than into long-term storage.
Way to elevate the discussion there, chief--call your ideological opponents subhuman. I could [i]so[/i] go all Godwin's Law on you right now and we're only 10 posts into this thing.
Attention, Attention! (Score:4, Insightful)
Breaking news: People reading a news site are more likely to read other news sites than people playing farmville, news at 11.
Re:Ugly (Score:4, Insightful)
It beats the hell out of the network news sites, with their pervasive cookies, auto-start videos, and general unwanted flash-a-palooza.
Drudge has a javascript refresh in place, which is how they get their massive page views every month.
I really hate pointless page refreshing.
Drudge generates more inane comment traffic than.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Drudge generates more inane comment traffic tha (Score:4, Insightful)
And other than political orientation - that's different from Slashdot how? (Yeah, I grant most Slashdotters can actually spell.)
Re:How Odd (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, I'd mod this flamebait, but I really don't think you're that smart.
Did it even occur to you that if 90% of the media is contrary to your chosen political view, that it might actually be due to the fact that *you* are the "radical" and there might be a legitimate reason they disagree with you? Or even that your political view itself is too "exclusive" to allow unbiased reporting in *any* news organization?