New York Timesissä kirjoitetaan erilaisista lähestymistavasta kävijämäärien seuraamiseen:

Looking to the public for insight on how to cover a topic is never comfortable for newsrooms, which have the deeply held belief that readers come to a newspaper not only for its information but also for its editorial judgment. But many newsrooms now seem to be re-examining that idea and embracing, albeit cautiously, a more democratic approach to serving up the news, particularly online.

“How can you say you don’t care what your customers think?” asked Alan Murray, who oversees online news at The Wall Street Journal. “We care a lot about what our readers think. But our readers also care a lot about our editorial judgment. So we’re always trying to balance the two.”

[…]

Rather than corrupt news judgment by causing editors to pander to the most base reader interests, the availability of this technology so far seems to be leading to more surgical decisions about how to cover a topic so it becomes more appealing to an online audience.

Sarjassamme ”ei ehkä saa kaikkea sanottua yhdessä blogipostauksessa”. Elitismin ja populismin ristiveto on olennainen osa joukkoviestimiä, ja usein aika harmillinen osa.

Ehkä se on osasyynä siihen, että pienten yleisöjen viestimet kiinnostavat minua.

Edit: Juho Makkonen vinkkasi Howard Kurtzin samaa aihetta käsittelevästä kirjoituksesta Appeasing the Google Gods.