![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
You gotta love people who believe the statistics too literally...
So I just noticed a comment in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
gyzki's journal, that he was randomly selected for a poll of ages of LJ users. The randomized request claims,
Surely this is someone just believing a computer bug, though. If you look at the raw numbers, they claim that there are nearly a million users each at ages 5 and 6 -- and a far-more-believable 800 at age 7. The numbers for ages 5 and 6 must be some kind of glitch; I'd guess that they are buckets that are used for people who don't actually give their ages, but that's just a guess. If you look at the official stats page instead, it shows the main peak at a more likely 18 years old.
I'm really pretty bemused by the whole tempest in a teapot about the average age of the LJ user. Yes, I do suspect that the stats are off, and read a bit too low, because the older crowd are less likely to accurately state their age. But it's not a worldshaking crisis...
gyzki's journal, that he was randomly selected for a poll of ages of LJ users. The randomized request claims,"The official statistics claim that the most common age for LiveJournal users is 5 and two million (out of 10.5 million users) are under the age of 10."I found that a tad preposterous, but was surprised to find that the raw stats page does say exactly that. (Very interesting page, BTW, with things like the raw numbers for all of the most popular interests.)
Surely this is someone just believing a computer bug, though. If you look at the raw numbers, they claim that there are nearly a million users each at ages 5 and 6 -- and a far-more-believable 800 at age 7. The numbers for ages 5 and 6 must be some kind of glitch; I'd guess that they are buckets that are used for people who don't actually give their ages, but that's just a guess. If you look at the official stats page instead, it shows the main peak at a more likely 18 years old.
I'm really pretty bemused by the whole tempest in a teapot about the average age of the LJ user. Yes, I do suspect that the stats are off, and read a bit too low, because the older crowd are less likely to accurately state their age. But it's not a worldshaking crisis...
no subject
no subject
Livejournal is, itself, a form of the "Media". The World-Wide-Web is fast eclipsing Cable in much the same way that Cable eclipsed The Big Three Networks etc.
I almost feel guilty: I read the website for the local paper, and only grab a *paper* copy when I need to cut something out so my wife can turn it in with a Journalism Assignment.
(Wife's a Journalism Major.)