Dr. Ambiguous wrote:I'm not sure about Google Trends or Alexa, but Cracked has mentioned a few times that it gets paid by it's advertisers based on unique page hits, so refreshing doesn't help there. I suspect that Google Trends and Alexa also go by unique page views.
As much as I loved the Cracked comments section circa 2011-2013, I highly doubt that the comments section plays a significant role in their unique page hits. There's probably a small handful of people they'd lose over nuking it, and have lost given the comment section's decline over there, but I'd be honestly shocked if it was a significant amount.
The trend on Alexa reflects Google Trends:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/cracked.com.
Yes, advertisers - or more importantly, the companies which place advertisements, which is Google - measure on unique views, click-throughs, and so-on. To learn more, run Ghostery and watch what comes-up (Cracked has 10, according to Ghostery). TCS has two.
Another popular site, The Chive, has 14 trackers, and ranks like so:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/thechive.comNote that Alexa is owned by Amazon (the logo is on the homepage, so they aren't being shy about it).
In any case, the most meaningful numbers which correspond to revenue for a site primarily earning from adds are between Google - who ain't saying shit - and the owners of the site. Site owners work with trackers because they need to know the content that 'hits' versus 'misses'. Maybe that's appealing to people who don't run AdBlock, maybe it's appealing to the masses, maybe it's something in between.
For example, I have noticed more sites detect and overlay/mask content if the browser is running and AdBlock-esque plug-in (Ghostery qualifies). Yet, that's an 'ask' of a relatively small percentage of viewers, and a small percentage who aren't likely to be moved - or move - revenue one way or the other.
If you want to have a laugh at the expense of , have a look at this:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/drudgereport.comOr this:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/breitbart.comOnline media is a very fickle beast.
A quantum state of signature may or may not be here... you just ruined it.