Blowing the whistle

In my recent post, Referee in a catfight, commenter Joe Albero smugly brags that Salisbury News has “always” been in the top 10 since becoming involved with the Blognetnews website. Unfortunately, Joe’s a little bit incorrect in that rash assertion because I have tracked the numbers since the Influence Ranking’s inception in June 2007. And the numbers don’t lie – there was a period of several weeks last fall when Joe’s site was outside the top 10 and one week it wasn’t even ranked. (On the other hand, I can correctly note that only two sites have been ranked in the top 20 each week since the ratings were introduced – mine and Brian Griffiths’.)

The other factoid I think is worth pointing out was following up on ShoreThings’ note about the conservative and liberal blog rankings. Joe can only dream about the streak of #1 ratings my readers and commentors have allowed me and my humble little monoblogue to compile in the conservative blog rankings – how about 14 times in 16 weeks?

While I hesitate to cast myself anywhere close to William F. Buckley, the comparison of National Review vs. National Enquirer comes to mind when I compare my site to Joe’s. Two different styles for two different audiences. (And we both read each other’s sites for different reasons too.) I just didn’t want to leave the loose end too long since I took my short vacation so soon after the catfight post came out.

So I ask the indulgence of my readership in setting this straight and thank them again for helping me to achieve the solid record I’ve compiled thus far. Because I did this post so late, you may get three today as it’s SotW night as well.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.

5 thoughts on “Blowing the whistle”

  1. Michael,

    You seem to be quite obsessed over this one and are stooping to a level so beneath yourself that I am amazed you even put up such a Post.Nonetheless, the fact that you continue to take back the promise to your readers that you’ll stick to politics only and then lie, well, it also takes away your credibility to your loyal reader.

    Michael, Salisbury News is the number one resource for News and Information on the Eastern Shore any more, like it or not. I think the fact that you know this is what really ticks you off. Say whatever you like about me. I highly doubt you’re going to stop people from visiting my Site several times a day.

    On a closing note, you can rate me a 1 out of 10 once a day like you already do but haven’t you learned it’s not working Michael? I do not crosspost to anyone else’s site. I rarely get linked to, yet I’m #1 most weeks. It’s because I’m good at what I do and to prove it, Blognetnews rates the most influential. The mere fact that you’ve lied to your readers by promissing you’ll never go to this level again and actually did, clearly proved I am the most influential Blogger in the State of Maryland. Thanks for proving that Michael.

  2. I’ve said it before, but it’s worth repeating. BlogNet is a bunch of crap. They don’t have a site meter attached to individual sites, thus they really have no idea about how much traffic one site gets over another. Some people keep their site meters public. I can plainly see I am getting 2-3 times as many unique readers as them, yet they are consistently listed higher than me. It’s laughable that a site that doesn’t even average 50 viewers a day can be thought of as even somewhat influential.

    BlogNet can be maniuplated by clicking your own stories, or in the case of Albero, having all of your contributors click from various IP addresses. People blatantly hyper-link their selves. In turn, some desperate folks (and I’ve figured out some are) rate themselves 10 while giving others a 1.

    Personally, I don’t play the silly BlogNet game. I only use the site to generate a few more hits a day. Their ratings are meaningless.

  3. Well good morning to both of you.

    The reason I did the post was because you made the assertions that I knew weren’t true, Joe. Words mean things, and I knew you hadn’t “always” been a top 10 site. Also, I don’t have the time to go to BNN and rate you a 1 constantly so that’s another charge I refute. It’s not my fault your style alienates a lot of people – I thought you were going to turn over a new leaf. While it doesn’t happen every day, I do run into people who like my website because it’s not yours. It’s not something I’ve consciously chosen sides on, but when those who’ve had my back in various run-ins tend to also dislike your attitude, I’m just assumed to be an “anti-Albero” blogger and that’s only true insofar as disagreeing with your assertions on a regular basis.

    And don’t worry about what I write, since my guess is that better than 80% of it deals with political issues over the course of a year. But when you write stupid comments that challenge my integrity, I’m not prone to turning the other cheek.

    Bud, while you’re probably correct in your assertions insofar as the meaninglessness of BNN rankings, they at least bring a perception of gravitas to the sites – and you should know as well as I do that in the political game perception is reality. I’d be curious to know just how much of a bump you get from traffic redirected from BNN, something tells me that it’s not all that large, less than 20 percent.

  4. Since when does catering to the lowest common denominator equal influential? Everyone slows down to rubberneck at a car wreck, but that doesn’t mean that they like them.

    Shocker that Little Joey resorts to personal attacks and obfuscates when he cannot intelligently and honestly defend the garbage and lies that come from his mouth.

  5. michael must be close to the truth because joe has unleashed the figurative fangs of a cornered animal…

    watch your back michael…

    t

Comments are closed.