Now on ScienceBlogs: Technology Review Magazine Poised to Return as Festival Sponsor!

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Search

Profile

profilepic9-09a.jpg

My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com


Buy the 2009 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Research Blogging Awards 2010


Find me on...


Homepage

FriendFeed

Twitter

Facebook

Nature Network

YouTube

Flickr

Dopplr

Stumbleupon

LinkedIn

Make Me Happy

Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!

Make Me Solvent

A Blog Around The Clock swag store

I Support

Quail Ridge Books

Carrboro Coworking

Project Exploration

Project Exploration

Bloggie Stuff

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.

« The PepsiGate linkfest | Main | Clock Quotes »

Another interesting graph....

Category: BloggingMedia
Posted on: July 11, 2010 12:22 AM, by Coturnix

Click on image to check stats, play around...

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook
Find more posts in: Information ScienceTechnology

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/143486

Comments

1

Well. There's certainly a linear relationship between SEEDMag traffic and time.

Posted by: Jason G. Goldman | July 11, 2010 1:47 AM

2

I had followed Science Blogs for some time before I knew that SEED existed. I'm not sure how that happened.

Posted by: Roger Austin | July 11, 2010 9:54 AM

3

This is odd, right? ODD.

Posted by: DrugMonkey | July 12, 2010 12:02 AM

4

Odd? It was always like that. Seed IS scienceblogs, and the magazine is one of their several failed side-experiments. I wish their office recognized this, and allocated staff and funds accordingly. Everything at Seed should be set up to be in service of Scienceblogs: administrators, legal staff, editors, and most importantly a large, powerful, innovative technical staff.

Posted by: Coturnix | July 12, 2010 12:31 AM

5

So yes, this says that all stuff should be set up toward us. I think we can say this is NOT the case, but what exactly is the discrepancy? Do they pay individual writers for SEED? Individual editors? Does SEED have a tech support person at all?

If the answer to all these things is yes, it makes me rather sad. That's about 30% more site views in a month than I made here. It'd be like having a huge support staff for a blog slightly bigger than mine was.

Posted by: Scicurious | July 12, 2010 7:26 AM

6

Did you see the things people search for when they end up at either site? For ScienceBlogs they type in "Bora Zivkovich" but people visiting SEED were looking for "time magazine profile on stravinsky, by philip glass" or "monkey having sex with humans"

Posted by: ImNotTypingMyNameAtCommentsAboutMonkeySex | July 12, 2010 9:45 AM

7

Why the huge spike in April? Is that because of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?

Posted by: EcoPhysioMichelle | July 12, 2010 11:17 AM

8

The seedmagazine.com stats are bit depressing. After the last print edition in September 2009, you'd expect at least some transition from print to online readership, but, in reality, it plunged for most of the Fall and Winter and has only now passed the readership from last Summer. I'll note that, looking at a single year, it's difficult to say whether this is seasonal, but that seems unlikely since it doesn't affect scienceblogs.com

According to wikipedia, the original issue has a circulation of 105K in 2001. Could it really be that the online visits 9 years later are even lower than that value? (I'm now noticing that the magazine is every other month so I guess that 150K unique visits every two months.) Still pretty sad. As someone how hasn't followed the magazine and had trouble getting into most of the articles I found through links, I guess this isn't overly surprising.

Posted by: bsci | July 12, 2010 11:21 AM

9

Seed IS scienceblogs... Everything at Seed should be set up to be in service of Scienceblogs: administrators, legal staff, editors, and most importantly a large, powerful, innovative technical staff.

Like I said, this is very odd. I am intensely curious as to what Bly thinks his business IS.

Posted by: DrugMonkey | July 12, 2010 12:42 PM

10

I suspect the April spike is for Eyjafjallajökull.

Eruptions was the go-to site for all the latest info.

Posted by: dominich | July 13, 2010 3:57 AM

11

Ohhh yes, I had forgotten about that already. Possibly a combination of both?

Posted by: EcoPhysioMichelle | July 13, 2010 9:15 AM

12

I want to see the data for Pepsicopalypse.

Posted by: theshortearedowl | July 13, 2010 9:22 AM

13

Compare the numbers between Scienceblogs.com versus DiscoveryMagazine.com The trend is interesting.

Posted by: DPSisler | July 13, 2010 1:21 PM

14

You might want to try discovermagazine.com not discoverY. It's fairly close to scienceblogs.com, though science blogs is bigger and discovermagazine.com is the address for their magazine AND blogs. SB is also close to nature.com (magazine) and blogs) and ahead of sciencemag.org (just magazine)

Of interest, discover seems to be steadily increasing their traffic since January 2010. Is this when they started to seriously invest and enlarge their blogger base?

Posted by: bsci | July 13, 2010 4:13 PM

15

"I want to see the data for Pepsicopalypse."
Well, you're not alone

Posted by: ranggaw0636 | July 15, 2010 6:14 AM

ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.