-
Website
http://www.mathewingram.com/work -
Original page
http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/02/16/careful-with-that-data-eugene/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
scrawledinwax
23 comments · 1 points
-
webomatica
35 comments · 5 points
-
howardlindzon
46 comments · 69 points
-
JoeDuck
57 comments · 1 points
-
Karoli
32 comments · 39 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
2 weeks ago · 43 comments
-
Are independent bloggers an endangered species?
2 weeks ago · 8 comments
-
Bloggers, trust, MSM and correction fluid
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
Why media outlets want Facebook Connect
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
First Read: Follow the Breadcrumbs : CJR
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
Some time ago I created my own TC-Feed that delivers only the posts from Arrington, sorta oldschool-TC.
Kinde offtopic, sorry. :)
You're right btw.
Especially helpful with all the successful blogs turning into small teamdriven onlinepublications with more daily posts than actually necessary. (mashable back then was the first blog there I asked myself wether they've forgotten that they also act as a filter etc)
the credit arm.
Their demographics unit has humongous amounts of data from which to extract trends.
So the real question is why, among all the conclusions about behavior they might have drawn, did they choose this one? Why not MSN vs. Yahoo, or any of thousands of other distinctions? Do they have a specific agenda? Is Yahoo! or Google a customer?
profiles from their credit arm -- but how do they know whether people
spent more than 500 dollars online or whether they use Google or
Yahoo? Do they track people's behaviour online and watch every site
they spend money on? I doubt it. In fact, I'm pretty sure that would
be illegal. As far as I can tell, they do surveys. And surveys are
notoriously unreliable. They often tend to show whatever you want them
to show.
http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?requ...
which is, of course, based on virtually no facts and mostly a lot of
conjecture and anecdotal evidence. :-)