White Capitalists Don’t Blog

From today’s Wall Street Journal, a reader survey of the number of blogs WSJ-ers read weekly. The answer? Relatively few:


  1. Yes, but I bet the growth curve is huge.

  2. These numbers mean nothing, as the term “blog” is often used as a generic term for any RSS feed, even if it comes from say the New York Times or PBS. It would be surprising if 14% really read “five or more” non-accredited reporter, non-pundit columnists per week, or if 36% (as advertised) were really willing to wade through the tiresome pile of irrelevance to get to a few facts they might care about.

  3. >>>I bet the growth curve is huge.
    Probably so. If the WSJ reader is better informed than the average newspaper reader then the growth rate would be large. There has to be some natural selection factor, some blog readers have abandoned the WSJ?
    On the other hand WSJ readers are probably more time-constrained than average newspaper readers. If they are so time-constrained what are they doing taking polls? Somehow that huge “none” column doesn’t compute for me, there may be some invisible skewing…

  4. Another example of survivor bias. They are polling people who haven’t left WSJ for blogs.

  5. yes, but how many from the Google/Yahoo/MSN channel read blogs? and much quicker is the Google/Yahoo/MSN channel growing compared to the WSJ, Forbes or Gartner or Forrester channels?

  6. Erik Nwagwu says:

    Come on..! In this day of politically correct speech! How on earth can you a term like “white capitalist”.
    Are you saying that black (or other races at that) don’t read the WSJ ? Or that the WSJ is the exclusive preserve of the “White Capitalist”?
    Why couldn’t you have used the more appropriate term “capitalists” ? Because,I can assure you, a whole lot of “minority capitalists” read the WSJ !