Bowers has a fascinating post up about blog community straw polls and age.
This week, both Dailykos and MyDD held our monthly straw polls. You can see the results for Dailykos here, and the results for MyDD here. For both websites, it was the first straw poll taken without Clark as an option. It also produced the first widely divergent results between our two websites that I have ever noticed. While both blogs placed Edwards and Obama first and second, on Dailykos, John Edwards won a comfortable victory over Obama, 38%--26%, while on MyDD Obama won a narrow victory over Edwards, 36%--33%. Not only is that a large, fifteen point gap between the two websites, it is entirely possible that Edwards is even more popular than that on Dailykos (he was running at 40% after 10,000 votes) and that Obama is even more popular than that on MyDD (considering the Obama poll stuffing incident). While these polls are not scientifically random samples of the readership of the two blogs, I don't think the differences between them can be entirely dismissed on those grounds. Something more fundamental is causing this growing divergence.
In search of an answer, I went looking through the archives of the popular diary series "Demographic Tuesdays" on Dailykos, and through the results of the recent demographic survey of MyDD readers. In most categories, there was broad similarity: education level, income, religion, race / ethnicity, and GLBT as a percentage of the readership. There were only two areas where there was noticeable divergence. First, the readership of MyDD is much younger than that of Dailykos--almost twice as many MyDD readers are under the age of 30 than at Dailykos (30% to 15%), and the median age difference is at least eight years. Second, Dailykos has a much higher percentage of women readers than does MyDD. The Demographic Tuesday poll on the subject indicated a gap of 33%--22%, but previous polls I have seen on both sites suggest the gap is significantly larger than that.
The reason for this difference is probably one of voice. The best research I have ever seen on the subject (non-public research, unfortunately), suggests that even in the supposedly identity-blind world of the Internet, people gravitate toward content produced by those with whom they share cultural and demographic similarity. Looking at the three writers who produce about 95% of the front-page content on MyDD, Matt, Jonathan and myself, we are all dudes and have an average age of just under 29. Looking at the writers of Dailykos, there are six women among the sixteen regular contributors. Further, I am younger than twelve of them, Matt is younger than fifteen of them, and Jonathan is younger than all of them. Dailykos has both an older and a more female group of writers, which I believe is the main reason why they have an older and more female audience. That Dailykos has an older audience, I believe, why Edwards does better on Dailykos, and why Obama does better on MyDD.
Age and gender are both clear factors in 2008 candidate preferences among the Democratic electorate nationwide, so why shouldn't they also be factors within the blogosphere? Consider, for example, that the most comprehensive crosstabs of the Democratic primary electorate to date were published last month by Pew. According to those crosstabs, Obama did vastly better among younger Democrats than he did among older Democrats, while for Edwards the situation was reversed. It is not just Pew, either. Virtually every polls has shown Obama performing particularly strong among younger voters, wile Edwards does better among older voters. I can't prove it definitively, but I think the age gap between MyDD and Dailykos is one of the main causes, if not the main cause, behind the different preferences for Edwards and Obama in straw polls on the two sites. (There may also be a gendered element in the Dailykos preference for Edwards, possibly stemming from many feminist bloggers liking Edwards, although I do not really have any evidence to back that up at this time).
This may have already been obvious, considering Obama's ridiculous success on a generally younger site like Facebook. What was perhaps less obvious, and also only interesting in a meta sense, is that MyDD has a younger readership than Dailykos. Who knew? In discussions in the comments at Dailykos, the most common criticism I read of MyDD is how we are just too damn serious all of the time. Who would have thought that we young guys would also be more "serious." Then again, that might have more to do with the focus of MyDD than anything else, since we are geared toward political professionals, and Dailykos draws on people with a much wider range of backgrounds. People who make a living in politics tend to be on the younger side of things, as it is probably best to get out of this business before it beats you down too badly.
It's Friday, so probably the wrong day to ask, but I wonder what the demographic of this blog looks like? Not that it really matters, but I'm curious if this theory holds up, and that people gravitate towards blogs written by people similar to them.
Corrente's writers are very diverse, I won't say more because some here want to remain anonymous. But trust me when I say we're not all alike, not by a long shot. Readers, why are you here? I can't believe it's just because you like electronica and lesbian pr0n and tabbouli, as I do.
- chicago dyke's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+


Front page





Comments
I enjoy reading smart,
I enjoy reading smart, strong, people who come from "outcast" groups, from "minorities," or marginalized lifestyles. I'll read others who aren't in these groups, but not as much. Doesn't mean I agree with all you [they] say, or that I don't have ideas and philosophies that run their own tracks (and generally are more radical), but that's fine. Yeah...strong, smart, individuals who stray a bit from the contented malaise-ing of the herd.
oooh, nezua- snap!
"contented malaising of the herd."
that fits quite a few blog communities to a t.
What a difference malaise makes...
[Rimshot. Laughter. Dodges zuchinni. Tomato.]
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
hmmmm - do I count as a reader, or reader/writer?
Not that I have posted so much, but you all remain kind enough to keep pushing all posts to the front page.
As a reader, I don't know how to characterize CW
. I do think the people I read here have a unique set of voices, and that is why I continue to read. Lambert and CD are top notch - and that is not to disrespect anyone else, but they post the most.
Part of why I like it here is that it isn't huge - posts don't get 400 comments. Since most of what I do is comment, trying to read and comment on posts with hundreds of comments is wasted time and effort, and that doesn't happen here.
Then, too, I am lazy - the writers here often do the hard work of seeing the insides of things, and I can leverage my learning time through their efforts. I read lots of places, but I only comment at at few, and only here regularly.
I am certainly not marginalized - white, past middle age, engineer, married, 2 grown kids, house in the country - pretty much middle of the road. I even used to be a Republican. I am still registered as one, actually. I need to get that changed before the next primary. Although I continue to debate that move - not because I am uncertain about who are the good guys (or, more accurately and all too often, the worst bad guys) but because maybe my primary vote and voice would be better spent in trying to elminate the most bigoted (and biggest sell outs) of the Republican candidates here in OK. With few exceptions, ANY Democrat would be better than ANY Republican, but if the Republicans are going to win anyway (and the fact we reelected Inhofe remains beyond me) then work on that side of the aisle could be productive - if distasteful. Jake
I think everybody but the superrich is marginalized
Not to trivialize, but income for EVERYBODY except for the less than top 1% has been frozen for quite some time -- thought the 1% got a 14% raise, as I recall. So "the economy"
worked out well for them.
So, my crumb is/was x% larger than yours. What about the whole fucking loaves neither of us will ever see?
In the immortal words of Willie Sutton...
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
so true! one exclaimation one 11 !!!1 !!1
"everybody" who isn't the superrich have been completely and utterly marginalized. from the chinese
slavefactory workers to the unemployed overeducated eurotrash to the american country music fan...we're all left out of the discussion. oil princes, birth lottery winners, imperialists- they make "our" decisions for us.ha ha, some day soon, you will all be like me, and despise the wealthy of today as unworthy masters. we may always "need" masters, but we don't need this bunch. if i may add: the rich have never been more stupid.