April 4, 2006 7:56 PM   Subscribe

Linkology is a neat little graphic that shows how the top 50 blogs link to one another. Direct to the pdf.
posted by ChasFile (20 comments total)
Part of my never-ending shouting-at-the-rain quest to get MeFi to recognize that there are magazines on this planet other than the New Yorker. This should represent an easy first step, I think, because it has 'New York' in the title.

Plus, a cool little graph. OTOH, single-link crap. I post, you decide.
posted by ChasFile at 8:00 PM on April 4, 2006

It's a neat idea, but the graph is completely uninformative.
posted by empath at 8:06 PM on April 4, 2006

This paper has some much more interesting graphs that really illustrate extensive crosslinking on the left and rights sides of the blogosphere.
posted by empath at 8:09 PM on April 4, 2006

Beautiful and informative *he said through tightly clenched teeth*.
Worth doing.
Now lets see it in 3D please.
posted by uni verse at 8:15 PM on April 4, 2006

the article that accompanied the graphic in the print issue of New York was pretty good, but I can't seem to find it on the site
posted by pruner at 8:40 PM on April 4, 2006

Circlejerkology. It's called the blogosphere because it's small, self-contained, and isolar*.

*isolar is a new word I coined; a portmanteau of isolated and insular. You can read all about it in my blahhhhhg...
posted by Eideteker at 9:07 PM on April 4, 2006

Atypically for Ben Fry, that graphic says just about nothing.
posted by adamgreenfield at 9:08 PM on April 4, 2006

Shall we play a game?
Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War.
Wouldn't you perfer a nice game of chess?
Later. Right now lets play Global Thermonuclear War.

posted by icosahedral at 9:31 PM on April 4, 2006

It's a fairly silly graphic; why represent what is naturally a web in a flat line? Also, it is very odd that they included sites not written in English, as half the article and half the graph is therefore irrelevant to 99% of its readers. And finally, why only include links 'within the last 90 days'? Age of links is only really important to Google, in which case the older the better.
posted by MetaMonkey at 9:43 PM on April 4, 2006

The 28th most-linked-to blog on the net is "of one pensive-looking Japanese boy with photos that highlight his 6-pack and pecs"?


I don't really care to go find out what that's about. Does anyone have a clue?
posted by spiderwire at 9:52 PM on April 4, 2006

51. Metafiler
In English.
posted by mullacc at 9:58 PM on April 4, 2006

Also, the watchdog site for LittleGreenFootballs is, huh? Is it like an impressionist watchdog site or something? Or do you think they meant this one?

We read the New Yorker 'cause they have editors, apparently.
posted by spiderwire at 9:59 PM on April 4, 2006

52. Metafilter
Also in Engllish.
posted by mullacc at 9:59 PM on April 4, 2006

please hope me
posted by mullacc at 9:59 PM on April 4, 2006

The line representation is a pretty clear sign that NYMag does NOT get what teh intarnets are at all.

This should be all springy and reactive. And I have to download the PDF to actually be able to read it? What is this? 2002?
posted by fenriq at 10:05 PM on April 4, 2006

Metafiler: This should be all springy and reactive
posted by spiderwire at 10:08 PM on April 4, 2006

Not only does it not particularly convey much information visually, it seems a bit unlikely that Kottke went for a 3 month period without linking to anyone (or vice versa). This piece came from a lazy editorial meeting. "Filler article people who's got an idea?"
posted by peacay at 11:06 PM on April 4, 2006

Well, they do say right on the page that the data is derived from Technorati. And, all due respect, but we all know what that's worth.
posted by adamgreenfield at 8:32 AM on April 5, 2006

*in condescending tone*
In my opinon, the web itself is isolar, and uninformative, except for metafilter, and other codified locales.
posted by uni verse at 8:33 AM on April 5, 2006

*fwap fwap fwap fwap fwap*
posted by Baby_Balrog at 11:09 AM on April 5, 2006

« Older ..and that's a good thing.   |   From small acorns, can great oaks grow? Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments