Yahoo is the number one news site, Google is number two. People spend more and more time on fewer sites.
According to November comScore data published on TechCrunch , Google News ranks second in the list of the largest news sites in terms of traffic. The first place is occupied by Yahoo.
Here is a partial comScore list:
If you take a sample of the United States, then Yahoo also ranks first, and Google falls below traditional news sources such as the NY Times and CNN. Nevertheless, according to Nielsen ( published by Editor & Publisher ), the numbers are different, especially with regard to Google News.
Here are the data from the list of world news sites Nielsen for November 2009:
But Compete data for the United States. Again a different picture:
And here is how, according to Nielsen, the seats were distributed in 2004. Amazingly, in the first four all the same sites.
')
At the same time, Hitwise reports an interesting trend in Australia, which is likely to be true for other markets as well - people spend more and more time on fewer and fewer sites.
Despite the mass of content on the Internet, user activity concentrates on sites from the top of the list. How to explain it?
Is this the effect of increasing visibility (increasingly visible) and activity? Or does the amount of resources owned by the largest players affect? Maybe this is due to cultural reasons? Specifically, with regard to Google and news, he can direct his search traffic to his news service.
The same trend is observed in advertising - according to the IAB, the largest sites and networks receive the lion's share of advertising budgets.
Some believe that news brands are becoming blurred (due to the fact that search “equalizes” all news resources), but the above lists paint a different picture. There are a large number of "aggregators" that people prefer for ease of use and breadth of coverage. Among them are Yahoo, AOL, Google and now HuffingtonPost. If this were not the case, the tops would be headed by traditional media sites.
I think brands still mean a lot in the news. Distribution of content in a dominant position of search engines - this is a real problem for them. But here for traditional media, new opportunities open up mobile technology. They know about it and therefore give so much importance to smartphones (especially the iPhone) and the emerging world of tablets and electronic readers.
Here is a partial comScore list:
- Yahoo news
- Google News
- New york times
- CNN
- Chinese QQ.com
- Bbc
- MSN
If you take a sample of the United States, then Yahoo also ranks first, and Google falls below traditional news sources such as the NY Times and CNN. Nevertheless, according to Nielsen ( published by Editor & Publisher ), the numbers are different, especially with regard to Google News.
Here are the data from the list of world news sites Nielsen for November 2009:
- Yahoo! News
- CNN Digital Network
- MSNBC Digital Network
- AOL News
- NYTimes.com
- Tribune Newspapers
- Google News
- Fox News Digital Network
- ABCNEWS Digital Network
- Gannett Newspapers and Newspaper Division
- Washingtonpost.com
- CBS News Digital Network
- McClatchy Newspaper Network
- Advance Internet
- TheHuffingtonPost.com
- USATODAY.com
- MediaNews Group Newspapers
- Hearst Newspapers Digital
- Bbc
- Daily News (NY) Online Edition
But Compete data for the United States. Again a different picture:
And here is how, according to Nielsen, the seats were distributed in 2004. Amazingly, in the first four all the same sites.
- Yahoo news
- CNN
- Msnbc
- AOL News
- Gannett
- IBS
- Knight Ridder Digital
- NY Times
- Tribune Newspapers
- USA Today
')
At the same time, Hitwise reports an interesting trend in Australia, which is likely to be true for other markets as well - people spend more and more time on fewer and fewer sites.
We also see a large concentration of visits in the top ten sites ... The top ten accounts for 29% of all visits in November 2009, in November 2008 they accounted for only 26.3%. In other words, the big players are consolidating.
Despite the mass of content on the Internet, user activity concentrates on sites from the top of the list. How to explain it?
Is this the effect of increasing visibility (increasingly visible) and activity? Or does the amount of resources owned by the largest players affect? Maybe this is due to cultural reasons? Specifically, with regard to Google and news, he can direct his search traffic to his news service.
The same trend is observed in advertising - according to the IAB, the largest sites and networks receive the lion's share of advertising budgets.
Some believe that news brands are becoming blurred (due to the fact that search “equalizes” all news resources), but the above lists paint a different picture. There are a large number of "aggregators" that people prefer for ease of use and breadth of coverage. Among them are Yahoo, AOL, Google and now HuffingtonPost. If this were not the case, the tops would be headed by traditional media sites.
I think brands still mean a lot in the news. Distribution of content in a dominant position of search engines - this is a real problem for them. But here for traditional media, new opportunities open up mobile technology. They know about it and therefore give so much importance to smartphones (especially the iPhone) and the emerging world of tablets and electronic readers.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/287248/
All Articles