CNNMoney.com
Companies Economy International Corrections Pre-market trading After-hours trading Winners/losers/actives Bonds Currencies Commodities Money Magazine Retirement Mutual Funds Taxes Ask the Expert Money 101 Autos Loan Center Best Places to Live Calculators Mortgage Rates Personal tech Big Tech blog Techland blog Sectors and stocks Fortune 500 techs Tech Talk 100 best places to launch Ultimate resource guide Small biz makeovers FSB 100 Ask & Answer Fortune 500 Technology Investing Management Rankings Main Create portfolio Edit portfolio Create Alerts Edit Alerts
 
In search of a Web yardstick
The frighteningly insightful Om Malik addresses a question this week that has been rolling around The Browser's head recently: Why is it so hard to get reliable figures about Web traffic? He specifically goes after Alexa, with some arguments we've heard before (that the Alexa tool bar doesn't capture Firefox users), and some that are new to us (that Alexa apparently goes down for substantial periods, up to a day a month).

But the problem is actually much bigger than that, and has begun to move from the griping stage to something approaching an industry revolt. Anybody who publishes a big site like ours can tell you that there is a massive discrepancy between the audience we measure and the audience reported by professional outfits like Nielsen/NetRatings and comScore Media Metrix - and not a discrepancy, from the publishers' point of view, in the right direction!

On some level, there is a legitimate philosophical debate about what should be measured: Web publishers tend to emphasize page views, mostly because that number comes out sounding really big. By contrast, the yardstick firms focus on unique visitors, arguing that measuring page views brings in all sorts of noise, like counting pop-ups or even pages viewed by robots. It's also worth remembering that arguments about how to properly measure audiences are hardly unique to the Web business.

But there's another dynamic at work here worth thinking about. For all of the arguments about how information wants to be free and how the Web makes our world more transparent, it's pretty ironic that very basic data - like how many people visit which sites - are available only to those willing to pay.

Malik suggests that a kind of consortium of Google (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT) and Yahoo! (YHOO) could come together to address traffic, an approach that strikes The Browser both as unlikely - too much proprietary info at stake - and oddly corporatist. Web 2.0 advocates in particular like to talk about outside disruptive technologies (think Napster) exploding entire industries; imagine how disruptive it would be to find a technologically sound way of measuring Web audiences, and then making that data freely available. Is anybody working on that?
Posted by Jim Ledbetter 12:16 PM 1 Comments comment | Add a Comment

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Posted By Tony Smith : 7:55 PM  

To send a letter to the editor about The Browser, click hereTop of page

Got a news tip? Send it to The Browser


© 2008 Cable News Network. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 BigCharts.com Inc. All rights reserved. Please see our Terms of Use.
MarketWatch, the MarketWatch logo, and BigCharts are registered trademarks of MarketWatch, Inc.
Intraday data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and 20 minutes for other exchanges. All Times are ET.
Intraday data provided by Interactive Data Real-Time Services and subject to the Terms of Use.
Historical, current end-of-day data, and splits data provided by Interactive Data Pricing and Reference Data.
Fundamental data provided by Hemscott.
SEC Filings data provided by Edgar Online Inc..
Earnings data provided by FactSet CallStreet, LLC.