Look What the Internets Are Doing to the News!

Google Trends shows the readership of online news and blog site The Huffington Post doubling to meet up with the halving online readership of the old-style Washington Post

Notice that the moment the various sources synced up was the 2008 election. One possible interpretation: When the country suddenly developed a voracious appetite for news, they gave all three sources an equal chance. But it was HuffPo, not WaPo, that gave people what they were looking for—super-speedy coverage of the political story-of-the-second, followed by a bikini babe chaser.

You'd need age breakdowns and a few other things to know if that explanation of the trends is right, but President Obama might want to take a gander at this chart before he repeats his recent mention that he might not be 100 percent opposed to a newspaper bailout.

Via TLF

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • JB||

    Huff n Puff is nothing but a circle-jerk meeting ground for Leftists where they can have their retarded fetus logic affirmed.

    They are also comment Nazis and if you post something disagreeing with their warped views, they will delete your account.

  • ||

    Notice that the moment the various sources synced up was the 2008 election.

    no

  • Suki||

    JB,

    Obamuhammad wants me to tell you that you are sexist AND racist.

  • Geoff||

    I usually make a quick stop at the PuffyHo for a good morning chuckle. Perhaps, more people are doing the same.

  • I Am Malcolm\'s X||

    Eight Symptoms of Groupthink

    Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic.

    Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warnings contrary to group thinking.

    Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.

    Excessive Stereotyping: The group constructs negative sterotypes of rivals outside the group.

    Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express arguments against the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing such opposition as disloyalty.

    Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

    Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

    Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

  • Geoff||

    Also, I highly recommend reading the comments on there!!! Select your favorite user that spews the most vile nonsense repeatedly. If they have a really unique name, then you are in luck. Google that username with some progressive/liberal/propaganda keywords, and then bam, a slice of life. Female, erotic novel author, who enjoys frequently ripping into DirectTV because she doesn't understand her TOS, and buys crazy soaps from Amazon.com.
    Now you can "empathize" with her!!!

  • ||

    Geoff your hobbies are kind of disturbing.

  • Naga Sadow||

    I think Geoff is talkin' bout you, Suki. ;)

  • Geoff||

    John,

    I can only read asinine comments from so long before I ask myself, "What kind of person says this?". Thanks to the Google, I can get a much better idea.

    John, either you must be hip to this or you post comments on a lot, and I mean a lot, of sites!

  • TXLimey||

    What I got out of this article is that the WaPo needs to introduce Page 3 girls like the UK tabloids have.

  • ||

    Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

    Let's try this out.

    ...ahem.....

    SugarFree is warm, generous, perspicacious, indefatigable, genuine, clean, handsome, wise, sagacious, pleasant smelling, likable, long, thick (where it counts),

  • ||

    [silence]

  • ||

    They are also comment Nazis and if you post something disagreeing with their warped views, they will delete your account.

    So, they're like DailyKOS and Little Green Footballs?

    -jcr

  • Big Racism||

    "SugarFree is warm, generous, perspicacious, indefatigable, genuine, clean, handsome, wise, sagacious, pleasant smelling, likable, long, thick (where it counts),"

    Suge in a nutshell, baby!

  • Big Racism||

    "So, they're like DailyKOS and Little Green Footballs?"

    I was banned by reason over the Louis Gates issue. When the banhammer hit's it knocks out all opf your comments.

  • ||

    Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

    Got us nailed on this one. We never argue about anything.

  • ||

    Geoff,

    I never look up anyone who comments on the internet. I guess I am too afraid of what I will find.

  • ||

    I was banned by reason over the Louis Gates issue.

    What the hell do you have to do to get banned by Reason? And if they do ban people, who has the job of reading all the posts? Can I have that job? I know how to reed and right.

  • ||

    We never argue about anything.

    Right! We are one big happy family. Where is my huggy munch Warty?

  • ||

    Banning is racist.

  • ||

    "What the hell do you have to do to get banned by Reason?"

    Insult Kerry Howley or question her sexual morality. They get very defensive about their womenfolk.

  • ¢||

    I've insulted Kerry Howley, but I guess whoever bans everybody who does that didn't get it. And I called the other one "hypheny" once. Maybe always being a jerk buys a pass.

  • ||

    Zero cents might be on to something. I've never been banned either.

  • ||

    "[Obama] might not be 100 percent opposed to a newspaper bailout."

    You got to pay the 'service provider' when they're finished sucking you off. It's just one of those universal rules.

  • Big Racism||

    What the hell do you have to do to get banned by Reason?

    Create a top-shelf racist sockpuppet that pisses off someone on the staff.

  • Big Racism||

    "You got to pay the 'service provider' when they're finished sucking you off. It's just one of those universal rules."

    My girls get paid in advance. No exceptions.

  • ||

    I think if Chicago wins the Olympic bid there should be a new event: throwing people under the bus.

    The messiah is a shoe-in for gold!

  • ||

    I once made a comment comparing a reason staffer unfavorably to women I've urinated inside of, but didn't get banned, they just deleted the comment.

  • ||

    to women I've urinated inside of

    I was worried I was the only one.

  • Me Too||

    The look on their faces is priceless.

  • ||

    It does require quick reflexes, though, as by definition one's vulnerable parts are in harm's way when the jig is up. No time for the "final jiggle".

  • ||

    Well, both of mine were accidental. One was a dead fuck and I tried too hard to come and get it over with and the other was the result of way too much beer. It took us a while to figure out what was going on. We thought we had punctured the water bed.

  • Bertha Lewis||

    "We thought we had punctured the water bed."

    You fill your water bed with piss!???

    (keep shredding, Deshawn, keep shredding)

  • ||

    Yes. And let me tell you... it took a while. And a whole lot of apple juice.

  • ||

    Wait, diabetic piss is nice and sweet. That doesn't count.

  • jtuf||

    Technical considerations also affect the site popularities. The WSJ online is very slow to download, because it has way too many pointless graphics.

  • ||

    We don't need a media bailout; if newspapers want to survive in the "internet age" they should wise up and charge for online content instead of giving it all away for free. Why would I buy a newspaper when I can pick and choose my articles online, reading them whenever and where ever I want.

    Furthermore, the media industry doesn't need a bailout, especially not one fostered by the president. What it needs is to not be controlled by five corporations that recycle content over and over.

  • ||

    Something's not right with the numbers in that graph. Are you sure this is daily traffic data -- and not data based on searches?

    You get different trend lines if you look at results provided by alexa.com. The 3 sites still merge -- but there's no significant drop off in traffic for either washingtonpost or wsj.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement