The Chicago Review of Books “Notice Us for hating Milo” Play

Readability

The Chicago Review of Books "Notice Us for hating Milo" Play

Then some itin­er­ant Jew­ish exor­cists tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those with evil spir­its, say­ing, “I adjure you by the Jesus whom Paul preaches.” When the seven sons of Sceva, a Jew­ish high priest, tried to do this, the evil spirit said to them in reply, “Jesus I rec­og­nize, Paul I know, but who are you?”

The per­son with the evil spirit then sprang at them and sub­dued them all. He so over­pow­ered them that they fled naked and wounded from that house.

Acts of the Apos­tles 19:1316

As you might have heard Simon & Schus­ter gave a big book deal to Milo Yiannopoulos

Milo Yiannopou­los has par­layed his ban from Twit­ter — and some con­tro­ver­sial appear­ances on col­lege cam­puses and cable TV shows — into a $250,000 book deal with Thresh­old Edi­tions, an imprint of Simon & Schus­ter, The Hol­ly­wood Reporter learned on Thursday.

“They said ban­ning me from Twit­ter would fin­ish me off. Just as I pre­dicted, the oppo­site has hap­pened,” Yiannopou­los told THR, con­firm­ing the upcom­ing book with­out com­ment­ing on finan­cial details.

Lib­er­als aren’t happy and the vir­tu­ous folks at the Chicago Review of Books aren’t tak­ing it lying down.

If you are a per­son who only casu­ally fol­lows the news, this might sound like a big deal, but folks who deal in the world of real­ity like Milo and Simon Schus­ter real­ize that this Twitchy post notwith­stand­ing their coura­geous stand isn’t about shut­ting down Milo or pun­ish­ing Simon & Schus­ter, it’s a des­per­ate attempt to be noticed.

Let’s put it this way. Here is the Twit­ter page of he Chicago Review of Books at 12:07 AM EST on Dec 30th 2016 10 hours or so after their coura­geous tweet

Now there are two things that jump out at me here that any expe­ri­enced twit­ter user will notice right off the top.

1. They fol­low more peo­ple than they have fol­low­ers mean­ing they aren’t very popular.

2. They only have 4200 twit­ter fol­low­ers and that’s 10 hours after their most famous tweet drew over 8000 likes.

Now let’s con­trast that with Instapun­dit a site whose twit­ter feed is almost cer­tainly going to pro­mote Milo’s book

As you can see Glenn has over 74,000 fol­low­ers and fol­lows less peo­ple than the review of books has fol­low­ers. Clearly that state­ment in Pro­fes­sor Reynolds pinned tweet about not need­ing twit­ter applies to him but can’t apply to the Chicago Review of books.

But DaT­e­chguy”, you ask. Isn’t that a tad unfair, Glenn is a big name, why don’t you com­pare it with some­one smaller, OK let’s com­pare them to my own Twit­ter numbers.

The Chicago Review of books can take com­fort in the fact that they have nearly but not quite 200 more fol­low­ers on twit­ter than me, and that even if you add my fol­low­ers on Gab which I joined last month

they still edge me. How­ever given that I have made absolutely no effort to solicit fol­low­ers on twit­ter other than one but­ton on my web site since I joined (nor have I on Gab in the month or so I’ve been there) that feat seems much less impressive.

But that’s just twit­ter, and Milo’s banned from that. Surely both Milo and Simon & Schus­ter must be wor­ried about the drop in web traf­fic from the Chicago Review of Books web site if they boy­cott them in 2017? That is they would if they didn’t bother to go to Alexa and check their rank­ings like I did.

Appar­ently not only has their traf­fic dropped like a rock over the last few months but they’ve only recently bro­ken into the top 2,000,000 sites world­wide. Now com­pare that again to Instapun­dit which is the biggest part of PJ media which Alexa measures.

You’re talk­ing a top 7500 world­wide and top 2000 US site vs a top 2 mil site world­wide. And remem­ber mul­ti­ple PJ media writ­ers are almost cer­tainly going to be review­ing milo’s book.

I’ll wager Simon & Schus­ter is shak­ing in their boots, but if you’re grip­ing that it’s not a fair graphic because PJ media has mul­ti­ple web pages, fine, let’s com­pare them to this site right here.

While we are no instapun­dit those fig­ures aren’t bad for a blog based in Fitch­burg Mass­a­chu­setts a city of 45,000 whose only inter­na­tional noto­ri­ety is for being the home of the fic­tional Fitch­burg Finches from the Harry Pot­ter books par­tic­u­larly when com­pared to a site based in Chicago Illi­nois home of the World Cham­pion Chicago Cubs and one of the most famous cities in the entire world.

In other words if I hired a blog­ger to review one Simon & Schus­ter book a month it would likely send them more traf­fic than a year’s worth of plugs from the Chicago Review of Books.

That’s why Simon & Schus­ter isn’t going to worry about this “boy­cott” because, while it’s likely true that the folks at the Chicago Review of Books hate Milo and are both out­raged and jeal­ous of his big book deal, they know this “boy­cott” of them is more about try­ing to make The Chicago Review of Books rel­e­vant than to take a stand against Simon & Schus­ter. Or let’s put it another way:

Given our rel­a­tive traf­fic rat­ings The Chicago Review of Books web site is likely to get more traf­fic from this blog post than from any­thing they will write them­selves next year.

It’s not virtue sig­nal­ing, it’s just sig­nal­ing desperately.

Clos­ing thought: Any­one want to make book at which MSM will pick up this story, see the words “Chicago Review of Books” and breath­lessly report­ing this “boy­cott” with­out both­er­ing to check the stats?

Update: Bazinga!


Speak­ing of stats with two days left to the year we are at $8923 toward our Tip­Jar goal of $22,000 for 2016. With 2 days to go the odds of us pick­ing up the remain­ing $13,077 are rather tiny.

How­ever it is entirely pos­si­ble that we can get man­age $1,077 to fin­ish the year in five fig­ures and if some­how we man­aged to raise $2077 and make it to $11,000 I promise to hire one more blog­ger specif­i­cally to review at least one Simon & Schus­ter book every month just to drive the Chicago Review of Books peo­ple crazy.

So if you’d like to help sup­port inde­pen­dent non MSM jour­nal­ism and opin­ion from writ­ers all over the nation like Baldilocks, RH, Fausta, JD Rucker Christo­pher Harper, Pat Austin, and John Ruberry plus sev­eral monthly & part time writ­ers work­ing here and want to help pay their monthly wages (and the Car­toon­ist I’m look­ing to hire, details here) please con­sider hit­ting DaTipJar.




[olimome­ter id=3]

Please con­sider Sub­scrib­ing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaT­e­chguy blog for as lit­tle as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 208,968 unique vis­i­tors who came in 2016 .07% sub­scribed at the same lev­els as our cur­rent sub­scrip­tion base we would make our cur­rent annual goal with ease. If we could boost that num­ber to 260 I could afford to go to CPAC and cover major events in per­son all over the coun­try and maybe take some of Da Mag­nif­i­cent Seven writ­ers with me.

Remem­ber all sub­scribers get my weekly pod­cast emailed directly to you before it goes up any­where else.


Choose a Sub­scrip­tion level



Then some itinerant Jewish exorcists tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those with evil spirits, saying, “I adjure you by the Jesus whom Paul preaches.” When the seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish high priest, tried to do this, the evil spirit said to them in reply, “Jesus I recognize, Paul I know, but who are you?”

The person with the evil spirit then sprang at them and subdued them all. He so overpowered them that they fled naked and wounded from that house.

Acts of the Apostles 19:13-16

As you might have heard Simon & Schuster gave a big book deal to Milo Yiannopoulos

Milo Yiannopoulos has parlayed his ban from Twitter  — and some controversial appearances on college campuses and cable TV shows — into a $250,000 book deal with Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, The Hollywood Reporter learned on Thursday.

“They said banning me from Twitter would finish me off. Just as I predicted, the opposite has happened,” Yiannopoulos told THR, confirming the upcoming book without commenting on financial details.

Liberals aren’t happy and the virtuous folks at the Chicago Review of Books aren’t taking it lying down.

If you are a person who only casually follows the news, this might sound like a big deal, but folks who deal in the world of reality like Milo and Simon Schuster realize that this Twitchy post notwithstanding their courageous stand isn’t about shutting down Milo or punishing Simon & Schuster, it’s a desperate attempt to be noticed.

Let’s put it this way. Here is the Twitter page of he Chicago Review of Books at 12:07 AM EST on Dec 30th 2016 10 hours or so after their courageous tweet

Now there are two things that jump out at me here that any experienced twitter user will notice right off the top.

1. They follow more people than they have followers meaning they aren’t very popular.

2. They only have 4200 twitter followers and that’s 10 hours after their most famous tweet drew over 8000 likes.

Now let’s contrast that with Instapundit a site whose twitter feed is almost certainly going to promote Milo’s book

As you can see Glenn has over 74,000 followers and follows less people than the review of books has followers.  Clearly that statement in Professor Reynolds pinned tweet about not needing twitter applies to him but can’t apply to the Chicago Review of books.

“But DaTechguy”, you ask.  Isn’t that a tad unfair, Glenn is a big name, why don’t you compare it with someone smaller, OK let’s compare them to my own Twitter numbers.

The Chicago Review of books can take comfort in the fact that they have nearly but not quite 200 more followers on twitter than me, and that even if you add my followers on Gab which I joined last month

they still edge me.  However given that I have made absolutely no effort to solicit followers on twitter  other than one button on my web site since I joined (nor have I on Gab in the month or so I’ve been there) that feat seems much less impressive.

But that’s just twitter, and Milo’s banned from that.  Surely both Milo and Simon & Schuster must be worried about the drop in web traffic from the Chicago Review of Books web site if they boycott them in 2017?  That is they would if they didn’t bother to go to Alexa and check their rankings like I did.

Apparently not only has their traffic dropped like a rock over the last few months but they’ve only recently broken into the top 2,000,000 sites worldwide.  Now compare that again to Instapundit which is the biggest part of PJ media which Alexa measures.

You’re talking a top 7500 worldwide and top 2000 US site vs a top 2 mil site worldwide.  And remember multiple PJ media writers are almost certainly going to be reviewing milo’s book.

I’ll wager Simon & Schuster is shaking in their boots, but if you’re griping that it’s not a fair graphic because PJ media has multiple web pages, fine, let’s compare them to this site right here.

While we are no instapundit those figures aren’t bad for a blog based in Fitchburg Massachusetts a city of 45,000 whose only international notoriety is for being the home of the fictional Fitchburg Finches from the Harry Potter books particularly when compared to a site based in Chicago Illinois home of the World Champion Chicago Cubs and one of the most famous cities in the entire world.

In other words if I hired a blogger to review one Simon & Schuster book a month it would likely send them more traffic than a year’s worth of plugs from the Chicago Review of Books.

That’s why Simon & Schuster isn’t going to worry about this “boycott” because, while it’s likely true that the folks at the Chicago Review of Books hate Milo and are both outraged and jealous of his big book deal, they know this “boycott” of them is more about trying to make The Chicago Review of Books relevant than to take a stand against Simon & Schuster.  Or let’s put it another way:

Given our relative traffic ratings The Chicago Review of Books web site is likely to get more traffic from this blog post than from anything they will write themselves next year.

It’s not virtue signaling, it’s just signaling desperately.

Closing thought:  Anyone want to make book at which MSM will pick up this story, see the words “Chicago Review of Books” and  breathlessly reporting this “boycott” without bothering to check the stats?

Update: Bazinga!


Speaking of stats with two days left to the year we are at $8923 toward our TipJar goal of $22,000 for 2016.  With 2 days to go the odds of us picking up the remaining $13,077 are rather tiny.

However it is entirely possible that we can get manage $1,077 to finish the year in five figures and if somehow we managed to raise $2077 and make it to $11,000 I promise to hire one more blogger specifically to review at least one Simon & Schuster book every month just to drive the Chicago Review of Books people crazy.

So if you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion from writers all over the nation like Baldilocks, RH, Fausta, JD Rucker Christopher Harper, Pat Austin, and John Ruberry plus several monthly & part time writers working here and want to help pay their monthly wages (and the Cartoonist I’m looking to hire, details here) please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 208,968 unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to go to CPAC and cover major events in person all over the country and maybe take some of Da Magnificent Seven writers with me.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level