(Pat Woodford pointed this one out – thanks!)
Alan Mutter, one of my favorite reads, had a post entitled “Dead animals, large and small” in which he notes that last week a link from an artist’s blog brought in 1,000 links, where as links in both Forbes.com and Businessweek.com netted one solitary visit.
So, there you have it: Small Dead Animals top Large Ones by 1,000 to 1.
This begs the question: if the web is supposedly the savior of print publications, then wouldn’t this denoted that the content isn’t getting read, or at least it isn’t getting read in depth?
For my money, I believe this is further evidence of the fundamental difference in the way people read online vs. in print. Long traditional articles more infrequently are read in their entirety. We’ve become accustomed to pithy, short posts in blogs, vs. the long and more challenging full blown fact-fact checked and copy edited article.