Comments: Readership Statistics on Goring Gorman's Google Grump

hurray for the librarians!

Maybe think of it this way, that's several hundred people that are reading what you write. There's not too many bloggers that even get that many.

Posted by Blake at June 25, 2007 08:53 AM

"that even get that many" - right, which I think goes to show what a deceptive scam blogging is, how nobody besides the tiny, tiny, A-list is heard much.
It's such a rigged game :-(.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at June 25, 2007 09:10 AM

I don't know if absolute number of readers is the best metric for whether blogging is "worth it." Anyway, I hope you don't get discouraged and stop blogging--you're one of the few fresh voices blogging on issues I care about. 90% of the rest are just passing along the received wisdom of the hour.

Posted by Ryan Shaw at June 25, 2007 10:14 AM

Come the day each reader is ranked, those 600 could end up weighing more than 1,000,000 spiders, spambots, and searchers for 'seth'.

Anyway, what do you want?


I'd stick to achievement and affiliation.

Do what you fancy, disseminate it, and attract and discover collaborators.

Aspire to an audience, but abhor its arrival - such is the artist's paradox.

I'm still waiting for your next work of art. I think I, along with others, just have this gut feeling that you're someone to watch.

Posted by Crosbie Fitch at June 26, 2007 03:01 PM

Ryan: Thanks. Unfortunately, I *am* discouraged. While all readers gratefully accepted, still, it's a lot of work for very little return.

Crosbie: Influence, definitely. A certain measure of affluence, yes, I have to make a living, though it won't be by blogging. Rather than "adulation", I'd like "respect". Those don't seem to me like unreasonable aspirations, though of course they may go unfulfilled.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at June 26, 2007 08:32 PM
I'd like "respect".

Yeah, you and Rodney Dangerfield. But in your case, Seth, here's some R E S P E C T.

Posted by aretha at June 26, 2007 09:05 PM