<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Did Web 1.0 begin dying in September 2008?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/</link>
	<description>A conversation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:29:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilgherrian</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13922</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 03:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13922</guid>
		<description>I ended writing a piece for &lt;em&gt;Crikey.com.au&lt;/em&gt; about this. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/26/is-social-media-killing-the-web-as-we-know-it/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Is social media killing the web as we know it?&lt;/a&gt; It does appear that similar downward trends are affecting Australian websites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I ended writing a piece for <em>Crikey.com.au</em> about this. <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/26/is-social-media-killing-the-web-as-we-know-it/" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/26/is-social-media-killing-the-web-as-we-know-it/?referer=');">Is social media killing the web as we know it?</a> It does appear that similar downward trends are affecting Australian websites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilgherrian</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13921</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:44:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13921</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t you just hate it when you screw up the formatting of a comment? Paul, I can thoroughly recommend the WordPress plug-in &lt;a href=&quot;http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/live-comment-preview/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Live Comment Preview&lt;/a&gt;. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t you just hate it when you screw up the formatting of a comment? Paul, I can thoroughly recommend the WordPress plug-in <a href="http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/live-comment-preview/" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/wordpress.org/extend/plugins/live-comment-preview/?referer=');">Live Comment Preview</a>. <img src='http://onlinejournalismblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilgherrian</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13920</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13920</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;@nicolas:&lt;/strong&gt; I wonder if you&#039;re right about Google Trends changing their methodology. I&#039;ll follow that up with Google. Stand by.

&lt;strong&gt;@Paul Bradshaw:&lt;strong&gt; I&#039;m seeing a similar audience decline, albeit not necessarily starting in September 2008, for the websites of &lt;a href=&quot;http://trends.google.com/websites?q=guardian.co.uk%2Ctimesonline.co.uk%2Ctelegraph.co.uk&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;some random UK newspapers&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://trends.google.com/websites?q=smh.com.au%2Cdailytelegraph.com.au%2Ctheage.com.au%2Cheraldsun.com.au%2Cnews.com.au&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;major Australian newspapers&lt;/a&gt; and, quite recently, for &lt;a href=&quot;http://trends.google.com/websites?q=thepunch.com.au%2Ccrikey.com.au&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Australian political comment websites&lt;/a&gt;.

Apart from possible explanations like the global financial crisis or changes to Google&#039;s secret sauce, it could perhaps also be a change in things like users&#039; security software or ISPs&#039; proxying methods which produce a systematic error -- but then Google presumably tries to filter out those artefacts?

Over at &lt;em&gt;Compete&lt;/em&gt; I&#039;m seeing roughly equivalent declines in some sites, like the &lt;a href=&quot;http://siteanalytics.compete.com/smh.com.au/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sydney Morning Herald&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&#039;s, but not others.

Mind you, I&#039;m doing this all &quot;by eye&quot; rather than downloading the numbers and doing a proper statistical analysis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>@nicolas:</strong> I wonder if you&#8217;re right about Google Trends changing their methodology. I&#8217;ll follow that up with Google. Stand by.</p>
<p><strong>@Paul Bradshaw:</strong><strong> I&#8217;m seeing a similar audience decline, albeit not necessarily starting in September 2008, for the websites of <a href="http://trends.google.com/websites?q=guardian.co.uk%2Ctimesonline.co.uk%2Ctelegraph.co.uk&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/trends.google.com/websites?q=guardian.co.uk_2Ctimesonline.co.uk_2Ctelegraph.co.uk_amp_geo=all_amp_date=all_amp_sort=0&amp;referer=');">some random UK newspapers</a>, <a href="http://trends.google.com/websites?q=smh.com.au%2Cdailytelegraph.com.au%2Ctheage.com.au%2Cheraldsun.com.au%2Cnews.com.au&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/trends.google.com/websites?q=smh.com.au_2Cdailytelegraph.com.au_2Ctheage.com.au_2Cheraldsun.com.au_2Cnews.com.au_amp_geo=all_amp_date=all_amp_sort=0&amp;referer=');">major Australian newspapers</a> and, quite recently, for <a href="http://trends.google.com/websites?q=thepunch.com.au%2Ccrikey.com.au&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/trends.google.com/websites?q=thepunch.com.au_2Ccrikey.com.au_amp_geo=all_amp_date=all_amp_sort=0&amp;referer=');">Australian political comment websites</a>.</p>
<p>Apart from possible explanations like the global financial crisis or changes to Google&#8217;s secret sauce, it could perhaps also be a change in things like users&#8217; security software or ISPs&#8217; proxying methods which produce a systematic error &#8212; but then Google presumably tries to filter out those artefacts?</p>
<p>Over at <em>Compete</em> I&#8217;m seeing roughly equivalent declines in some sites, like the <a href="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/smh.com.au/" rel="nofollow" onclick="urchinTracker('/outgoing/siteanalytics.compete.com/smh.com.au/?referer=');"><em>Sydney Morning Herald</em></a>&#8216;s, but not others.</p>
<p>Mind you, I&#8217;m doing this all &#8220;by eye&#8221; rather than downloading the numbers and doing a proper statistical analysis.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nicolas.</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13919</link>
		<dc:creator>nicolas.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:55:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13919</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been seeing that a lot in France &amp; the EU recently, too. But this Google Trend data contradicts almost every other traffic analytics.

My guess: Google modified the way it computed its traffic estimations in late 2008.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been seeing that a lot in France &amp; the EU recently, too. But this Google Trend data contradicts almost every other traffic analytics.</p>
<p>My guess: Google modified the way it computed its traffic estimations in late 2008.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Where do I find reliable Internet marketing people in Kolkata? &#124; Relevant Business Cases</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13918</link>
		<dc:creator>Where do I find reliable Internet marketing people in Kolkata? &#124; Relevant Business Cases</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:40:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13918</guid>
		<description>[...] Did the internet begin dying in September 2008? &#124; Online &#8230; [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Did the internet begin dying in September 2008? | Online &#8230; [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Bradshaw</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13917</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Bradshaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13917</guid>
		<description>@Stilgherrian Yes, I was a little uncomfortable with the use of the word &#039;internet&#039; so have now replaced it with &#039;Web 1.0&#039; which is more accurate if a little buzzwordy.
As for cherry-picking, his blog post suggests that he saw one trend, checked a whole bunch of sites and kept seeing it, with the exception of a few sites that are shooting up. The presentation is asking a question, not pushing a particular agenda, so less likely to be cherry-picked. The easiest way to check, of course, is to look at similar data for other sites using Google Trends.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Stilgherrian Yes, I was a little uncomfortable with the use of the word &#8216;internet&#8217; so have now replaced it with &#8216;Web 1.0&#8242; which is more accurate if a little buzzwordy.<br />
As for cherry-picking, his blog post suggests that he saw one trend, checked a whole bunch of sites and kept seeing it, with the exception of a few sites that are shooting up. The presentation is asking a question, not pushing a particular agenda, so less likely to be cherry-picked. The easiest way to check, of course, is to look at similar data for other sites using Google Trends.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13916</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13916</guid>
		<description>September is only a couple of months after the release of the second generation iPhone - I wonder if this has anything to do with the trend away from those sites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>September is only a couple of months after the release of the second generation iPhone &#8211; I wonder if this has anything to do with the trend away from those sites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stilgherrian</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13915</link>
		<dc:creator>Stilgherrian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13915</guid>
		<description>&quot;The web&quot; is not &quot;the internet&quot;. Internet traffic and participation continues to rise, as it always has done. What is shifting is the balance of usage between big-brand centralised sources of information which people passively consume, and people participating in their own conversations with the people that matter to them -- friends and family.

The graphs are only &quot;impressive&quot; because he&#039;s cherry-picked them to illustrate a theme. Factoids like that are not insights.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The web&#8221; is not &#8220;the internet&#8221;. Internet traffic and participation continues to rise, as it always has done. What is shifting is the balance of usage between big-brand centralised sources of information which people passively consume, and people participating in their own conversations with the people that matter to them &#8212; friends and family.</p>
<p>The graphs are only &#8220;impressive&#8221; because he&#8217;s cherry-picked them to illustrate a theme. Factoids like that are not insights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aion release date confirmed &#124; Aion news &#124; Aion Summit</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/11/21/did-the-internet-begin-dying-in-september-2008/#comment-13914</link>
		<dc:creator>Aion release date confirmed &#124; Aion news &#124; Aion Summit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:23:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/?p=3921#comment-13914</guid>
		<description>[...] Did the internet begin dying in September 2008? &#124; Online &#8230; [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Did the internet begin dying in September 2008? | Online &#8230; [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

