Thursday, 25 October 2007
What the CMU study says about blog coverage
You want to know the topics that are exciting the blogosphere. Your time is limited. Which blogs do you read?
That's the question behind a Carnegie Mellon University student paper "Cost-effective Outbreak Detection in Networks," linked by a number of folks. The authors created lists of blogs using several "budgets" (you can only read 100 blogs, you can only read 500 posts, etc.). Bloggers + Lists of Blogs = Commentary. No exception here. Read on, as they say!
What immediately struck me is that the paper's top 100 list[1] appears to "lean right" (or at least libertarian). Here are the first 10:
My quick, off-the-cuff take: It's because the right side of the blogosphere does a better job of watching the left side than vice-versa. If you're trying to track memes, a site that points them out (even if with mockery and derision) is more valuable than one that doesn't. Assuming topics generate equally on both the right and the left, this unbalanced coverage makes the "right side" more valuable.
------
Footnotes 'n' Snarkage:
[1] "If I can read 100 blogs, which should I read to be most up to date? Unit cost (each blogs costs 1), optimizing population affected (PA, we want to be the first to know with many many people coming in the cascade after us)" - quote from the paper's webpage
[2] I was amused by some of the neighbors: #36 Captain's Quarters with #37 Shakesville; #51 Crooks and Liars with #52 Right Wing News; #69 Power Line next to #70 Firedoglake (showing the old Blogspot address).
[3] Of course, the further down the list I go, the more blogs I don't recognize.
[4] Probably explained in the methodology, but I haven't had a chance to read the paper yet!
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
You want to know the topics that are exciting the blogosphere. Your time is limited. Which blogs do you read?
That's the question behind a Carnegie Mellon University student paper "Cost-effective Outbreak Detection in Networks," linked by a number of folks. The authors created lists of blogs using several "budgets" (you can only read 100 blogs, you can only read 500 posts, etc.). Bloggers + Lists of Blogs = Commentary. No exception here. Read on, as they say!
What immediately struck me is that the paper's top 100 list[1] appears to "lean right" (or at least libertarian). Here are the first 10:
- Instapundit
- Don Surber
- Science & Politics
- Watcher of Weasels
- Michelle Malkin
- National Journal's Blogometer
- The Modulator
- BloggersBlog.com
- Boing Boing
- Atrios
My quick, off-the-cuff take: It's because the right side of the blogosphere does a better job of watching the left side than vice-versa. If you're trying to track memes, a site that points them out (even if with mockery and derision) is more valuable than one that doesn't. Assuming topics generate equally on both the right and the left, this unbalanced coverage makes the "right side" more valuable.
------
Footnotes 'n' Snarkage:
[1] "If I can read 100 blogs, which should I read to be most up to date? Unit cost (each blogs costs 1), optimizing population affected (PA, we want to be the first to know with many many people coming in the cascade after us)" - quote from the paper's webpage
[2] I was amused by some of the neighbors: #36 Captain's Quarters with #37 Shakesville; #51 Crooks and Liars with #52 Right Wing News; #69 Power Line next to #70 Firedoglake (showing the old Blogspot address).
[3] Of course, the further down the list I go, the more blogs I don't recognize.
[4] Probably explained in the methodology, but I haven't had a chance to read the paper yet!
Posted by: Old Grouch in
In Passing
at
16:55:36 GMT
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 370 words, total size 4 kb.
70kb generated in CPU 0.0113, elapsed 0.1933 seconds.
51 queries taking 0.1855 seconds, 200 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
51 queries taking 0.1855 seconds, 200 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.