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.
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.
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"
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.
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.
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?
Well. There's certainly a linear relationship between SEEDMag traffic and time.
I had followed Science Blogs for some time before I knew that SEED existed. I'm not sure how that happened.
This is odd, right? ODD.
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.
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.
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"
Why the huge spike in April? Is that because of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill?
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.
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.
I suspect the April spike is for Eyjafjallajökull.
Eruptions was the go-to site for all the latest info.
Ohhh yes, I had forgotten about that already. Possibly a combination of both?
I want to see the data for Pepsicopalypse.
Compare the numbers between Scienceblogs.com versus DiscoveryMagazine.com The trend is interesting.
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?
"I want to see the data for Pepsicopalypse."
Well, you're not alone