The biggest conservative news outlets are seeing a precipitous decline in traffic to their websites, and it's showing no sign of abating despite 2024 being a high-profile election season.On Wednesday, Daily Beast media reporter Justin Baragona tweeted traffic data compiled by media analyst Howard Po...
No I don’t trust their methodology. In fact I am suspicious the numbers are entirely fictitious. I imagine they are highly guarded confidential information which is not public.
You asked where do they get the data from… well, that’s the answer 🤷
The numbers could be fictitious (you didn’t ask whether they get “reliable data”), or they could be doctoring them themselves… but there is a number of companies whose work is to let sites put trackers that gather user data, so they can in turn use it as a point when luring advertisers.
It isn’t “highly guarded confidential” information, websites would happily submit their access logs if that could make them look more appealing to advertisers… but they don’t, because: a) they could be sending fake data, which would make the aggregating company lose face, meaning they won’t accept self-reported data, and b) site logs contain a lot of users’ personal information, sharing which could fall afoul of privacy legislation.
They may still have to pay for access to parse that data, or extract it from the data made publicly available (…which could still be doctored, but 🤷)
The intermediary companies also want to attract clients, whom to sell more detailed data. It isn’t unusual for them to release basic data like total number of users per domain, for free. For further segmentation, like interests, keywords, geolocation, client’s system properties, etc. they do require subscribing.
I’m not speculating, I’ve had a chance to work at server maintenance (where basic data comes from), website design and maintenance (where 3rd part user trackers go), and both offering ad space and contracting ad services (dealing with these companies, ad networks, and website owners).
The overall data flow works the same, but Google has its own ad network, Google Ads.
Analytics showcases to any webmaster what are Google’s data gathering capabilities, Trends showcases comparative segmenting capabilities, while Ads, GA360, and Google Cloud, are what they try to sell.
Google doesn’t publish website statistics, because they don’t want to sell a tool that would enable website owners to shop around for different ad networks.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
That does not answer my question.
No I don’t trust their methodology. In fact I am suspicious the numbers are entirely fictitious. I imagine they are highly guarded confidential information which is not public.
You asked where do they get the data from… well, that’s the answer 🤷
The numbers could be fictitious (you didn’t ask whether they get “reliable data”), or they could be doctoring them themselves… but there is a number of companies whose work is to let sites put trackers that gather user data, so they can in turn use it as a point when luring advertisers.
It isn’t “highly guarded confidential” information, websites would happily submit their access logs if that could make them look more appealing to advertisers… but they don’t, because: a) they could be sending fake data, which would make the aggregating company lose face, meaning they won’t accept self-reported data, and b) site logs contain a lot of users’ personal information, sharing which could fall afoul of privacy legislation.
They may still have to pay for access to parse that data, or extract it from the data made publicly available (…which could still be doctored, but 🤷)
Wouldn’t that be shared only with potential advertisers upon request via a password rather than just making it publicly available?
I am only speculating, are you?
The intermediary companies also want to attract clients, whom to sell more detailed data. It isn’t unusual for them to release basic data like total number of users per domain, for free. For further segmentation, like interests, keywords, geolocation, client’s system properties, etc. they do require subscribing.
I’m not speculating, I’ve had a chance to work at server maintenance (where basic data comes from), website design and maintenance (where 3rd part user trackers go), and both offering ad space and contracting ad services (dealing with these companies, ad networks, and website owners).
Thanks. Google Analytics doesn’t work that way though does it?
The overall data flow works the same, but Google has its own ad network, Google Ads.
Analytics showcases to any webmaster what are Google’s data gathering capabilities, Trends showcases comparative segmenting capabilities, while Ads, GA360, and Google Cloud, are what they try to sell.
Google doesn’t publish website statistics, because they don’t want to sell a tool that would enable website owners to shop around for different ad networks.