Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Web Metric Likely To Hurt Google

Posted by kdawson on from the bye-bye-page-views dept.

StonyandCher write(s) with news that one of the largest Net measurement companies, Nielsen/NetRatings, is about to abandon page views as its primary metric for comparing sites. Instead the company will use total time spent on a site. The article notes, "This is likely to affect Google's ranking because while users visit the site often, they don't usually spend much time there. 'It is not that page views are irrelevant now, but they are a less accurate gauge of total site traffic and engagement,' said Scott Ross, director of product marketing at Nielsen/NetRatings. 'Total minutes is the most accurate gauge to compare between two sites. If [Web] 1.0 is full page refreshes for content, Web 2.0 is, "How do I minimize page views and deliver content more seamlessly?"'"

12 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Google announces acquisition of Nielsen/NetRatings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Moments ago, Google purchased Nielsen/NetRatings for approximately $135 million in cash. The new metric ranking was immediately disabled for further work.

  2. Love the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "New Web metric likely to hurt Google, help YouTube." - very insightful. YouTube better watchout! With this kind of headlines they're likely to get bought. Oh wait.

  3. My God! by mastershake_phd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now all those people who choose their search engine by its Nielsen/NetRatings ratings are going to stop using Google.....why that might be a few dozen people at least!

    --
    Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
  4. Re:Google announces acquisition of Nielsen/NetRati by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now THAT's what I call American resistance to the metric system.

    --parasonic

  5. The new Google NetRatings is in beta now! by SlappyBastard · · Score: 2, Funny

    And will remain so for many, many, many years to come.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  6. Re:But by Verte · · Score: 5, Funny

    On the other hand, we will be seeing sites with a lot of completely useless content that make you search around all day to find what you're looking for.

    --
    We at slashdot are scientists, specialists and kernel hackers. Your FUD will be found out.
  7. Google in great peril! by SlappyBastard · · Score: 3, Funny

    The guy who operates the backhoe in the accounting department has said that Google may see two or three fewer truckloads of hundred dollar bills each hour.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  8. Re:No good can come of this (a new slower web) by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 3, Funny

    ~~begin quote~~
    PHB: "How can we get people to stay longer?"
    Eager-Beaver Designer: "Let's put everything in Flash, put fewer words per screen and longer pauses between new screens."
    PHB: "Great!"
    ~~end quote~~

    Hmm, I think they've already done this ... it's called Web 2.0

    In other news, Amazon has decided to allow worldwide royalty-free use of one click, whilst simultaneously patenting their new 'one hundred click slo-purchase' system.

    --

    The Digital Sorceress
  9. Re:But by snowraver1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Are we talking about the same internet?

    --
    Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
  10. Re:How does the "Web 2.0" metaphor work with Porn? by AxminsterLeuven · · Score: 3, Funny

    If 1.0 is surfing one handed while jerking off, Web 2.0 is having a USB pocket pussy connected to an interactive AJAX interface. Next time, please post a link to where I could purchase said USB pocket pussy.
    Thank you in advance.
  11. Doubleclick by benhocking · · Score: 2, Funny

    Remember, these ratings are used by advertisers to determine on which site to put their ads.
    You mean advertisers like Doubleclick? :D
    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
  12. Re:More likely Google doesn't give a shit by drew · · Score: 2, Funny

    Imagine how horrible Google Maps would be if you had to wait two seconds for the whole page to refresh every time you dragged the map a quarter of an inch.


    Yeah, then it would be MapQuest... (Or what MapQuest used to be, anyway.) We don't have to imagine, we've all used it before.
    --
    If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?