![](\"http:\/\/cyber.law.harvard.edu\/blogs\/static\/dowbrigade\/boobs.jpg\")
One of the things that most bothers the Dowbrigade about this
\n blogging business is the seeming lack of correlation between the time and
\n effort we put into a posting and the number of people who read it.<\/p>\n
Regularly, some bizarre story catches our eye in a spare moment
\n between errands and classes, and we add a sentence or two of wry commentary
\n and a tangentially related photo ripped from Google image search and
\n slap it up on the Dowbrigade as we run out the door. When we next get
\n to a computer a few hours later we check and see – it has been read 5,000
\n times!<\/p>\n
And then when we sweat blood on a heartfelt missive,
\n doing multiple rewrites, tossing and turning at night to think of the
\n perfect turn of phrase,
\n polish and pare the prose, what happens? We usually get a total of about
\n a dozen reads.<\/p>\n
Case in point: the two postings we ran up the flagpole Sometimes the difference is even more marked. Our all-time most Of course, those 100 readers are the discerning few, One of our savvy confidants tells us the keys are the One of the things that most bothers the Dowbrigade about this blogging business is the seeming lack of correlation between the time and effort we put into a posting and the number of people who read it. Regularly, some bizarre … Continue reading
\n this afternoon.
\n The
\n first<\/a>, a brilliant analysis of the catastrophic failure of big media
\n to hold up its end of the American Compact, has been read a grand total
\n of 39 times. The other, posted a couple of hours later and titled
\n "Slayer Pants onto Phone," a quickie about a woman who taught her German
\n shepard to call 911, has 465 reads!<\/p>\n
\n popular posting<\/a>, a single paragraph form a New York Times story about an eating
\n contest, has been read over 50,000 times. Most of our favorite
\n postings never break 100.<\/p>\n
\n the regular commentor’s and fellow travelers. The rest are carpetbaggers
\n who probably found the
\n Dowbrigade by Googling "Boobs". Rationalization number two is that if
\n a silly post draws 5,000 thrill seekers, and just 1% stick around to
\n read another posting, that is 50 new readers.<\/p>\n
\n headline and the picture. So as way of a sort of experiment, we
\n have decided to pack this posting with as many hot buzzwords in the title
\n as possible. If
\n this friend’s theory is correct, we should get an avalanche of hits. Let
\n the flow begin….<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"