Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Where did the Washington Post get their numbers?

In the article about Greg Letiecq, the Washington Post made this claim:

Letiecq's site tallies about 47,000 distinct page views a day and counts 5,000 unique visitors,

I don't really care how many people read Greg's stuff -- I know he gets LOTS of readers with his brand of hysterical gossip and false claims of nefarious conduct of people who have earned his disfavor.

But I happened to stumble across the sitemeter for BVBL, and here is what it said:

Visits: Total: 149442, Average Per Day 1063, This Week 7444
Page Views, Total 375308, Average Per Day 2929, This Week 20,506

Now, these are great numbers. I average 100 visitors and 100 page views a day.

But this was a week when Greg notes he has had a great surge in activity at his blog. So why does Greg's own site meter say he has 2929 page views a day, and 1000 visitors, but the Post says 47,000 page views and 5000 visitors. I mean, those numbers are hugely different.

Anybody have any idea where the Post got the numbers? I poked around on some standard blog tracking sites, but couldn't find anything like the numbers the Post had. Do you think they researched it on their own, or did they jsut take the numbers from Greg?


Doug said...

For what it's worth, Sitemeter is not an entirely accurate measure of actual pageviews or visits.

The tracker that runs on my server, called AWStats, consistently registers as many as twice as many unique visitors per day as Sitemeter does.

Charles said...

I've heard that. But sitemeter was the only site tracker I could find on Greg's web site. If he was running a different counter, I could have checked it, if I had access to his site which I don't.