I was reading Doug Ross this morning and spotted this post on the top conservative websites. I love lists because they are also categories. If you are ranking things, you are also putting those things in the same category. A list of hottest peppers would includes only things you consider to be peppers. You can also learn about the list maker from reading his lists.
At the same time you learn a lot about what others think about the entries on the list. I see ZeroHedge is on the list at Doug’s site, which is interesting to me. I’ve never really thought of ZH as conservative, more anarcho-libertarian if anything and I’m not sure it is anything ideological. But, it all depends on your definition of “conservative.” I’m probably a bit more granular in my definitions.
On the other hand, I’ve never heard of Western Journalism. That means I need to get out more as it is ranked as the seventh most popular conservative site. Similarly, The Week is top-20, but I have only a vague recollection of visiting the site. That’s the other thing about lists, you often find things that you might like simply because others like them or associate them with things you know and like.
What got my attention is that I’m on the list, coming in at #268 which is not much, but it’s not nothin’ either. Of course, it means there are 968,417 other sites out there pulling in a bigger crowd, but no one starts out at the top. Maybe with hard work and a little luck, I can break the 900,000 barrier! There’s a billion websites out there so I probably should not be dismissive, but this is just a hobby and rankings are not something I think much about.
I am surprised at how unpopular many sites are, relative to my interest in them. National Review Online is the go-to source for establishment conservative opinion on TV so I figured they had a big broad audience. The Hill has a bigger crowd and that caters exclusively to the political class inside the beltway. Rush Limbaugh is way down the list, but maybe he is no longer a thing. I don’t know.
Looking at the list, I think you can argue that the Dissident Right is mostly small sites with small audiences. The Trump surge suggests the middle-class radicals are a big cohort, but only hobbyists target these people. Many of those hobbyists have other agendas like naked racism or crackpottery. A lot of the HBD people engage in race-baiting which will turn off normal people.
Anyway, I’m #968,418, I’m number #968,418!
In your face #968,419!
re: “Rush Limbaugh is way down the list, but maybe he is no longer a thing. I don’t know.” Z-man
Rush charges money to read. ‘Nuf said.
Dan Kurt
That’s something I did not know. I would imagine a list of sites that charge for content would be interesting. My theory on this is that at the extremes is where you see the real numbers. The WSJ is a top paid site which is a bigger deal than Drudge, which is free.
At the other end, Steve Sailer probably has a ton of traffic from big foot journos who pretty obviously borrow from him on a regular basis. I’m not sure how you measure that.
Part of the Rush site is free, the part that is transcripts of the daily radio show. Perhaps Rush has a lock on the “stay-at-home” listeners, and not so much the rest of us. I like to use his site to keep up with him in the evenings, after work.
There are a number of reasons this Z-man site is one of my favorites. The postings are consistently brief, but not too brief, the site loads quickly and easily, especially on my ancient 3GS iPhone (it is amazing how many sites are incompatible with older hardware, they simply get zapped from my list), the commentariat also brings much to the table, without all the chaos (ZH, I’m talking about you), consistent new insights and thoughtful takes on things (I added this one to my list because of the Donald Sterling posts, which contained insights seen nowhere else), new posts during the day and postings nearly every day, and an overall feeling that I am smarter and I have more useful insights from reading this site. On-line time is limited and the number of sites may as well be unlimited, so there will always be a “churn” to readership. For now, this site is one of my top five daily visits, a credit to the author, for whatever it is worth.
I appreciate the kind words. This is a hobby so I keep it light, in every sense of the word. I had script laden sites with a passion. I’ve stopped visiting a lot of sites because they take forever to load and lock up my tablet.
The uber ranked are for DC talking heads, who bobble only with each other. For my ilk and me, we’ll take the great unwashed, below the fold.
Whenever I come here I learn something. That makes me come back.
As #155 at americandigest.org and an early disciple spreading the gospel of TheZMan (whose last name happens to be BDMan.) I would like to thank all the little people.
I saw you on there with the big boys. I bet most of the regulars here came through your site initially. I’d say you’re site is portal for a lot of blogs out there. I know I’ve found a lot of sites by reading your site.
I found Z Blog through American Digest. So these sites are daily reads. Z, I notice that you also frequent other sites and contribute comments; busy, busy.
Non-writers like myself frequent the sites that resonate and, amusingly, are impatient for the next post by the authors on their A List. I suspect that blogs are like gateway drugs – start with Hanson and gradually move to Badder Thoughts. But twenty years ago commentary was much more homogenous. The lateral drift inherent in the internet makes new discoveries and exposure to more original thinking possible.
I don’t have a blog. That means you are not that far ahead of me. Best regards.
Better to be a big fish in a small pond.
All the gold is mined down the list. The fellows at the top decide how much reality humans can take, starting with themselves.