An old industry acquaintance Jason Throckmorton, who reminds me he once did PR for Flycast (there’s a blast from the past!), writes me to ask help promoting a client’s survey about corporate blogging. I get a fair number of requests to link to surveys on this topic, not all of which I bother with, but this one looks interesting, particularly given that the producers of BlogOn are behind it. Jason writes:

I’m writing to give you a heads up about a survey focused on corporate blogging that Guidewire Group (producers of BlogOn) is doing with one of our clients called iUpload. We’re asking folks like yourself with strong ties to the blogging/marketing/PR communities to help spread the word.

We¹re going to be announcing highlights of the survey at next month’s BlogOn conference. The goal is to shed light on market demand for corporate blogging solutions, emerging best practices and the role of blogs in key enterprise functions, as well as to identify barriers inhibiting adoption in the marketplace. Obviously, lots of overlap with what you’re covering.

In addition to directly receiving the highlights of the survey, participants can also register for a chance to win an iPod nano or a complimentary pass to the event.

Gartner released yesterday its 2005 Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies. The research firm has pegged Corporate Blogging and RSS as being two years away from mainstream adoption. For now, both are tumbling into Gartner’s Trough of Disillusionment (along with wikis and desktop search) as a result of too much media buzz. If you believe Gartner, Corporate Blogging is already sooo… last year (2004).

They’ve got a point. The media rumble about Corporate Blogging is almost deafening by now. It’s not a “new” story anymore. Which is not to say that blogging isn’t still a “new” thing to many companies.

At any rate, the five stages of hype make a lot of sense. It works something like this: new technologies get overhyped in the beginning; then they go out of favor; eventually they mature and are adopted by the mainstream but by that time they’re no longer news.

The five stages are: Technology Trigger, Peak of Expectations, Trough of Disillusionment, Slope of Enlightenment and Plateau of Productivity. Oh, and podcasting is on the upswing, according to Gartner. It’s sliding up the Peak of Expectations. That sounds about right, doesn’t it?

The way I understand it, the hype cycle is measuring the buzz as well as the adoption rate. It
doesn’t necessarily correspond to the long-term utility – or success –
of a phenomenon like Corporate Blogging. Only time will tell.

Read more about Corporate Blogging’s downward slide into the Trough of Disillusionment…

Although I’ve seen several blogs link in the last few hours to comScore’s "Behaviors of the Blogosphere" study that I posted about earlier (though admittedly not the feeding frenzy I’d expected), I’ve also seen a few questions about the methodology. So I thought I’d take a bit of time to address some of those.

A convenient way to do that is for me to answer questions that Darren Barefoot emailed me today. I haven’t asked Darren’s persmission to answer these questions in this forum, but I figure as a fellow blogger he’ll be cool with it:

* Are there more details about your methodology? I’m no statistician, but page 3 of your report doesn’t describe how data was gathered from "1.5 million US participants", nor how those people were selected. There’s an asterisk in the first paragraph of page 3 which suggests more details, but I can’t figure out what it’s referencing.

Let me start with the most important thing: my opinion is the best information market research can give us is this: "Is it bigger than a breadbox?" This research study satisfactorally answers that question for the blogosphere: Yes.

There is no flawless methodology in market research. It’s an inexact science. Samples get biased, corners are cut trade-offs are made, yadda-yadda-yadda. It’s always directional, at best. Research wonks like myself obsess on the details, and if it’s details you want, it is details you will get. This will be one of my "long posts." It’s late and I’m bored, so I’ll dwell on the details. (Man, rereading it, I went completely OCD on your ass!)

In fact, I’ll begin by sharing a new favorite quote, from the second page of How to Lie With Statistics, a classic work (1954) by Darrel Huff (and wonderful illustrations by Irving Geis):

I have a great subject [statistics] to write upon, but feel keenly my literary incapacity to make it easily intelligible without sacrificing accuracy and throughness.
– Sir Francis Galton

You’re right, Darren, it looks like that there should be some footnote on that page that’s
missing. I’ll call it to comScore’s attention and see if we can get
clarification and update the PDF. I’ll also invite them to elaborate in the comments here. And, BTW, they do offer a Methodology page on their site, though as Cameron Marlow complains it could be more detailed.

I can tell you that comScore’s panel is one of the largest in the world
for media research. By comparison, TV viewing habits in America are
laregely determined by a panel of a few thousand maintained by Nielsen
Media Research.

One funny thing to me is that within the bubble I live —
Internet advertising and media research — no one argues much anymore over the methodology of comScore and their chief rival Nielsen//NetRatings, in part because we’ve heard the explanations before but also because they’re such household names in our sector we don’t think to worry about it much. All the biggest web sites and online ad agencies and advertisers are quite familiar with comScore and their numbers. But apparently in the blogosphere they’re not so familiar.

How the panel members were selected… I’d have to defer to comScore for a thorough explanation there, but I’m sure there was an element of "self-selection" along the lines of recruitment to participate in the panel through banner ads and other "customer acquisition" tactics. So one potential bias could be that they get "joiners" in their panel. They also recruited some people with free utilities, such as a virus detector. Everyone gets a clear explanation, though, that their online surfing will be monitored for aggregate research purposes, which they have to opt into.

But they address the bias in various ways. First and foremost, their panel is really, really huge by conventional research standards. Most opinion polls the results of which you read in the newspaper or elsewhere are based on samples typically of 1,000 (or fewer) respondents on the low-end or 20,000 on the high end. comScore’s 1.5 million research subjects simply shatters most research constructs.

Cameron rashly writes, "Given that they do not justify their sample, nor provide margins of error, the initial sampling frame should be considered bunk." He couldn’t be more wrong. I was the ultimate project manager for this research. Two years ago, I made the well-considered decision to steer this research in comScore’s direction precisely because I believe they have the mother of all research panels. Theirs is really the only one I would trust to project reliably to audiences as small as blog readers.

To the extent to which all that wasn’t made more clear in the methodology section is partly comScore’s modesty and partly time constraints getting this out the door.

You can make statistically sound projections based on relatively small subsets of a population. But with a panel this gynormous, projections are quite sound. So that’s one thing that corrects the sample bias: humungous sample size. The Advertising Research Foundation gave comScore the seal of approval based on that alone.

Also, they weight results from the survey against a regular (quarterly? semi-annual?) random-digit-dial (RDD) phone survey. I don’t know the size of that sample, but it’s sufficiently big to be statistically reliable, and RDD is typically known as one of the best random sampling methodologies for populations, because virtually everyone (in the U.S., anyway) has a phone, and numbers are generated randomly, which gets "unlisted" households (curiously, though, it doesn’t get cell phones, so it does tend to under-sample Gen Y).

(See, this stuff get’s really geeky. But you asked.)

Your question also asked how the data were gathered. ("Data" is plural for "dataum"; use the plural verb form, people!) Again, comScore can correct me, but they use some kind of combination of a "proxy network" (a farm of servers set up to cache all web content panelists surfed) and/or some software on panelists’ machines. They have some mechanism, in any event, for seeing everywhere panelists go and everything they do (including purchases, SKUs, money spent, etc.). Then they suck all that data up into the mothership, a multi-terrabyte (I imagine) datamart thing. Results are recent and highly detailed.

* Why is there no discussion of margin of error?

Uh…an oversight, I guess. The whole reason with going with comScore is their accuracy based on sample size is superior in the industry. With 1.5 million panelists’ behavioral data, they can project with extreme accuracy on thousands of sites. Margin of error, within a certain "confidence level," is a measure of reliability in terms of variance, were the same survey to be administered numerous times. So, for example, a sample size of 2,000 respondents, more or less randomly selected, will represent a given population, say 290 million U.S. residents, within a "margin of error" of 2.19% , meaning, if 20% of survey respondents said "I like gum," it could be more like 18-22% in 95 similar surveys out of 100 times it was conducted (i.e., a 95% "confidence level").

So, to have a panel of comScore’s (1.5 million) represent a U.S. online population of 204 million, at a confidence level of 95%, your margin of error would be 0.008% (meaning "dead on"), according to this margin of error calculator. [comScore folks or anyone else out there, please correct me if I’m misrepresenting or mistaken in anything here. I’m not an actual statistian, I just play one on the Interweb.]

* The first graph on page 6 discusses unique visitors to particular domains. These don’t jibe with the sites’ own reports. For example, Boing Boing claims 4.6 million unique visitors (http://www.boingboing.net/stats/) in Q1 of 2005. Yet, the comScore study only reports 849,000. The same goes for Slashdot, which reportedly sees 300,000 – 500,000 visitors on a daily basis. Surely in three months they receive far more than 911,000 unique ones? Which numbers do you claim to be more accurate–comScore’s or the sites’ own?

Assumption 1: I don’t see where you get the 4.6 million unique visitors figure for BoingBoing. When I look at one of the first sections of that page you link to, I see a monthly range of 1.8 to 1.5 million "unique visitors" (UV). So, in the months of our examination, Q1 2005, BoingBoing’s monthly UV stats range from 1.45 to 1.66 million. So, let’s assume for the three months you’re probably talking about an undupilicated audience of 2-3 million, by their site stats,

Factor 1: How does BoingBoing stat package collect uniques? How does it work at all? I can’t be bothered to find out those answers, as stat packages vary (widely) in methodology and accuracy, but one key question is do they count "unique visitors" by IP addresses, cookies or some other means? Probably IP addresses, which is the most common. At least this package distinguishes "visits" from "visitors," as many don’t and bloggers often get confused thinking "visits" (which is surfing sessions) is the same as visitors (unique people), as visitors can have multiple visits during a month.

In any event, if it is using IP addresses to distinguish uniques, as I bet it is, those can be highly variable. Many ISPs assign IP addresses randomly every time a user logs on, so if you are on dial up or you shut your computer off during a month, you might show up as several IP addresses to BoingBoing on your repeated visits throughout the month. Not to mention the same person surfing from work and home being counted twice. So the likelihood is an overcount due to IP address counting.

comScore doesn’t have this problem when it comes to unique identities, because it knows (at least to the household level) that people are unique visitors, because of its persistent software relationship with the computer. )

Factor 2: International traffic. comScore’s panel used for this study comprises only U.S. residents. For advertiser purposes, that’s what most advertisers care about. Also, because of it’s very construct, it would be nearly impossible to get 100% international panel coverage (e.g., Iraq, Nigeria, Belize, etc.).

So their numbers exclude traffic from international sites. (The Methodology section of the report says the sample is U.S. only, but it doesn’t dwell on the point.) Many U.S. sites may between 10-50% traffic from international visitors. That may also explain a lot of the variance.

There is more I could say here, but I think that’s sufficient, as those are probably the main factors for the differences. That and simply that log files analysis systems can also be quite flaky. I once had a client when I was freelance who had two stat tracking packages installed on her site, and there was a 10x difference between them: one said something like 10,000 visitors a month, and the other said 100,000. Go figure.

* The definition of ‘unique visitor’ in the study reads "The number of individual people visiting a site in a given time period." Meanwhile, the text addressing the most popular blogs says "Examples include DrudgeReport, which drew 2.3 million visitors who visited an average of 19.5 times, and Fark, which drew 1.1 million users an average of 9.0 times in Q1 2005."

What’s the ‘given time period’? Clearly you don’t mean a unique visitor in Q1, 2005, because you discuss each visitor coming to a site x times.

Yes, we do mean for the first three months of 2004, DrudgeReport drew 2.3 million unique U.S. visitors who visited an average of 19.5 times (at total of 44.3 million visits during that period). That means, it’s audience is both large and hugely loyal. Fark had 1.1 million visits who visited 10.1 million times (an average of 9) in the first quarter.

Beyond that, Blogdex’s Cameron Marlow, a would-be friend of mine and Ph.D. student at MIT, raises quite a fuss about the methodology of the study over at his blog Overstated (that’s an understatement), where I have to be honest he gets it pretty much entirely wrong. Most of his concerns should have been refuted in this post, and others I argued in his comments field.

I’m pleased to announce a new report that I expect will shortly by the buzz of the blogosphere, from comScore Networks: Behaviors of the Blogosphere: Understanding the Scale, Composition and Activities of Weblog Audiences (PDF).

I say I’m pleased because I had a hand in it. Actually, this thing has been many months in the making. I first discussed the idea of analyzing blog reader behavior using comScore’s 1.5 million research panel of web users who have given explicit permission for comScore to track them everywhere they go online. Anyway, we finally got it done, and I think everyone with an interest in the scope of the blogosphere will find it interesting.

uhA few comments on the methodology, as I’m a research geek after all. We started by examining "top 100 blog" and "blog ecosystem" lists from sites including Technorati, Daypop, BlogStreet, Bloglines and others, most notably TruthLaidBear, the entire list for which is over 14,000 blogs (I see down at teh level of Insignifant Microbes it’s now more than 34,000 blogs, but for our analysis we went just beyond 14,000 deep).

Based on those thousands of blogs, comScore identified the 400 biggest blogs and blog hosting networks. We further categorized those blogs into various (non-exclusive) categories, including Political, Tech, Hipster, Women Authored, Business and so forth. comScore then looked at all the members of its panel who visited those sites during Q1 2005.

Just to get bloggers all wet, we actually produce a list of the top 25 blogs in the (English-language) blogosphere, by unique quarterly visitors (Q1 2005) and by number of visitations (i.e., user loyalty). It’s sure to generate controversy, as the top bloggers by traffic and visitation are not necessarily the ones that show up at the top of everyone else’s lists by number of in-bound links (or at least they’re not in the same order), but that’s just a question of understanding comScore’s methodology: actually tracking of hundreds of thousands of blog readers and making statistically sound projections accordingly.

Perhaps the more important findings, however, will be those about the size and demographic and behavioral make-up of blog readers. Highlights include:

• 50 million U.S. Internet users visited blog sites in the first quarter of 2005. That is roughly 30% of all U.S. Internet users and 1 in 6 of the total U.S. population
• Five hosting services for blogs each had more than 5 million unique visitors in that period, and four individual blogs had more than 1 million visitors each
• Of 400 of the biggest blogs observed, segmented by seven (nonexclusive) categories, political blogs were the most popular, followed by "hipster" lifestyle blogs, tech blogs and blogs authored by women
• Compared to the average Internet user, blog readers are significantly more likely to live in wealthier households, be younger and connect to the Web on high-speed connections
• Blog readers also visit nearly twice as many web pages as the Internet average, and they are much more likely to shop online

Gawker Media and Six Apart co-sponsored the research. Gawker’s publisher Nick Denton shares his own thoughts on his blog.

3/22/05 UPDATE:

The numbers discussed in the original post below are based on Alexa data, which are notoriously questionable (Alexa’s numbers come from users of its browser toolbar, so by definition it’s a self-selected audience, which in this case probably skews heavily towards bloggers). Tig Tillinghast of MarketingVox read my post and sanity-checked it with Hitwise; those numbers say that NYT’s audience is still larger than Blogspots, but the trend of the data would suggest that Blogspot is soon set to overtake NYTimes.com.

ORIGINAL POST:

Wonking around Saturday night, I found something interesting: collectively, the blogs hosted on Blogspot get more visitors than NYTimes.com, according to Alexa.

Meanwhile, Technorati’s David Sifry reports on various recent trends among blogs with cool graphs, including the rapid growth of the blogosphere, spikes in blog posts based on mapped to news events, and in-bound links to top-blogs vs. mainstream media sources. Good stuff.

UPDATE:

Xanga.com crushes NYTimes.com:

Particularly informative is to look at the two-year trend: Xanga and Blogspot.

BlogAds, a leading ad network for blogs, released its second annual survey of blog readers. Some 30,000 blog readers filled out the survey. I’m too busy to summarize, but suffice it to say blog readers appear to be a high-quality audience that should be attractive to advertisers.

This is must-read for anyone who is trying to sell advertising on blogs. One thing that would make the study better, however, would be to index these questions against average Internet users, so we had a sense of how blog readers are better than average Net users. Still, it certainly makes a case for the value of blog readers.

UPDATE:

I neglected to mention that Gallup just released a survey about blog readership that found that 15% of Americans, or 19% of U.S. Internet users, read blogs at least a few times a month, but the findings of the poll were available online for only a few days before they went behind subscription-access lock-down. Here is a MediaPost article that analyzes the two polls together, including this nugget:

Frank Newport, editor in chief at Gallup
poll, says his results are not inconsistent with Copeland’s conclusion.
Newport compared readers of blogs to readers of The New York Times. "We know that only a fraction of the American public reads the Times, but it affects everyone because that’s what the people who control mainstream media read."

Rok Hrastnik has just produced a huge study on RSS and its power for both marketing and publishing. Price: $39.95. He sent me a preview copy, but I confess to having been too busy lately to have given it proper attention, so I’m just going to rip off what my pal Tig over at MarketingVox said about it:

European e-marketer Rok Hrastnik spent the last year or two researching
an exhaustive review of syndication technology on the web, finally
releasing to Marketingstudies.net
a 550-page definitive ebook on RSS and the marketing uses of
syndication. The advance copy sent to MarketingVOX is written in a
detached, rational tone, in some contrast to the sales pages’ hard sell
copy. Of particular interest will be the technical background
information and the near comprehensive set of interviews of industry
figures, which serves as an indication as to where RSS is heading and
what significance it has to marketers and publishers.

MarketingStudies: Unleash the Marketing and Publishing Power of RSS

The Pew Internet & American Life Project has a new report on the blogosphere:

By the end of 2004 blogs had established themselves as a key part of online culture. Two surveys by the Pew Internet & American Life Project in November established new contours for the blogosphere: 8 million American adults say they have created blogs; blog readership jumped 58% in 2004 and now stands at 27% of internet users; 5% of internet users say they use RSS aggregators or XML readers to get the news and other information delivered from blogs and content-rich Web sites as it is posted online; and 12% of internet users have posted comments or other material on blogs. Still, 62% of internet users do not know what a blog is.

You can see the complete PDF here.

Pew Internet: The State of Blogging

Various blog stats. Use at your own risk.

ClickZ: The Blogosphere By the Numbers

As B.L. noted in her post about a CBS MarketWatch interview on the subject, Forrester Research’s analyst Charlene Li has released an 18-page report that concludes blogs are an effective business tool. From the executive summary:

Although Weblogs (blogs) are currently used by only a small number of online consumers, they’ve garnered a great deal of corporate attention because their readers and writers are highly influential. Forrester believes that blogging will grow in importance, and at a minimum, companies should monitor blogs to learn what is being said about their products and services. Companies that plan to create their own public blogs should already feel comfortable having a close, two-way relationship with users. In this document we recommend best practices, including a blogging code of ethics, and metrics that will show the impact of blogs on business goals.

Forrester: Blogging: Bubble or Big Deal? When and How Businesses Should Use Blogs

This probably spells doom for blogs: Mary Meeker of Morgan Stanley, one of the biggest Internet hypesters of the boom ’90s, thinks the future is bright for blogs as an ad vehicle. See the full PDF report here.

MarketWatch: Meeker Sees Money in Blogs

A few weeks ago, I linked to a survey that a student was conducting about business blogging. I haven’t yet heard back what were the results (though I did just send him a follow-up email today asking about it).

Meanwhile, here is another survey by a student on the topic of business bloggging. (That link is for people who have a business blog; if you don’t but you’re interested in the topic, there is another surve here.)

UPDATE:
I’ve heard back about the earlier survey I noted. Turns out they still haven’t gotten as many responses as they want, so they’re keeping that survey open. Be a sport, and give a click.

Daniel W. Drezner, assistant professor of political science at the University of Chicago and Henry Farrell, assistant professor of political science and George Washington University, have posted a new academic paper on blogs:

This paper addresses this puzzle by focusing on two interrelated aspects of the “blogosphere”: the unequal distribution of readers across the array of weblogs, and the increasing interactions between blogs and mainstream media outlets…
The skewed distribution of weblog influence makes it easy for observers to extract information or analysis from blogs – but the reason they are important is that journalists and opinion leaders are readers of blog.

Link

I just got the following email:

Dear Sir,
My name is Matthew Lin, an MBA candidate at University of New Brunswick at Saint John, Canada. I am currently conducting a research on how weblogs are being used as business tools, and their particular implication for small and medium enterprises. I have designed a questionnaire in order to survey individuals who publish weblogs or can describe the reasoning behind their company’s weblog. The survey will be posted online for one month, starting next week. I am seeking your assistance to promote this survey to your readers, in hope of gathering a good cross-section of business weblogs. Please spread the word!
The survey [“The Blog as a Meaningful Business Tool”] is available at: http://business.unbsj.ca/bblog/
Additional information about this project (e.g., objectives, hypotheses) are available upon request.
Thank you for your consideration. If you are aware of others who might also be interested in posting this questionnaire URL, please feel free to forward this email to them.
Sincerely,
Matthew Lin

Be a sport and help the fellow out: take the survey and spread the word. I’ll be sure to post results when they’re made public.

It’s a long story. The Search Engine Guild sponsored a Search Engine Optimization Challenge to see who could achieve top ranking on Google for the peculiar phrase “Nigritude Ultramarine.” Popular blogger (and director of business development at blog software company Six Apart) Anil Dash decided to enter the contest, making a blatant appeal to his thousands of daily readers to link to his entry, hyperlinking on the term “nigritude ultramarine.” It worked: he won. See for yourself: search ‘nigritude ultramarine’ on Google.

Another good example of the power of blogs.

UPDATE:
Tig Tillinghast of MarketingVox had a better write-up than mine, so I figured I’d just rip it off to clarify more of the story (I tipped him off to the story, anyway, so I feel like I’m within my rights):

A contest held to see who could garner the best search engine rankings for a made up phrase (“nigritude ultramarine”) was taken by well-known blogger Anil Dash. His strategy seems to have consisted of appealing to his many readers to link to his page “in order to prove that real content trumps all the shady optimization tricks that someone can figure out, and because I figure I deserve an iPod at least as much as the Star Wars Kid.”
The contestant with the highest ranking site over a three-day period wins the “Stayer” prize, considered the more prestigious of the two prizes given out. The initial award went to Brandon Suit, an online community administrator.

UPDATE: I’m now linking (in the headline above) to the original source of this data, Dave Sifry’s own blog, the guy behind Technorati. He notes, “We’re currently seeing anywhere from 8,000-17,000 new weblogs created every single day.” Thanks to Olivier Travers for pointing me to this link.

ORIGINAL POST: Jeff Jarvis of Buzzmachine notes that Technorati has just passed 3 million blogs tracked. I don’t know where he got that graphic; I’d link to it directly on Technorati if I could find it, but anyway, Jeff’s a nice guy, so I’m happy to link to him. Note, this doesn’t mean that 3 million is all the blogs there are, but that’s how many Technorati tracks. It’s certainly one good measure, anyway.

Sifry.com: Technorati tracks 3 million blogs

My old buddy Henry Copeland, CEO of the weblog ad network BlogAds, fielded a survey of blog readers. He has some 50+ blogs post a link to the survey and more than 17,000 blog readers filled it out. I’m disappointed and a bit annoyed that he didn’t take me up on my offer to help him design and implement this survey, which we discussed a few weeks ago, but the results are still interesting (but Henry, how much more interesting they could have been if I had help! 😉

Highlights include:

• Average age: 39*
• Percent of all respondents who are male: 79%
• Average household income: $98,000*
• Average number of blogs respondents read daily: 8*
• Percent of blog readers who do NOT write blogs: 79%
• Percent who have clicked on an ad on a blog: 67%

* Noted responses are my analysis of BlogAds’s data, which BlogAds reports differently.

BlogAds: Blog Readers Survey

YASNS stands for “Yet Another Social Network Service,” I assume. Anyway, this is a comprehensive list of dozens of social network services compiled by one of the space’s leading experts, Judith Meskill. Eyeballing it, it looks like she’d identified well over 100 different services, in the follow categories:

• Business networking sites
• Common interest networking sites
• Dating sites
• Face-to-face meeting facilitation sites
• Friend networking sites
• Pet networking sites
• Social networking ‘plus’ and/or ‘edge cases’

thesocialsoftwareweblog: YASNS Meta List

Debbie Weil’s WordBiz organized a teleseminar on the topic of Business Blogs a few months ago, in which I partook as one of the “experts.” She’s done a nice job packaging the audio of that seminar with a companion PDF report. Some of the points she promises you’ll learn from the report:

• Why blogging is better (and easier) than updating a regular Web site
• How blogging is different than sending an e-newsletter
• The best technology for publishing – and subscribing – to blogs
• How a blog fits into an overall marketing and communications strategy
• Plus, the tools you need to start your own blog right now!

Price: $59.

WordBiz: Blogging for Business

This January 2004 survey of 486 bloggers is principally about privacy issues, but it also includes demographic characteristics of bloggers and other findings. Highlights include:

• 55% of respondents use their real names (the rest use some fragment of their own names or psyeudonyms)
• 36% of respondents have gotten in trouble because of things they have written on their blogs (don’t I know it)
• 63% of respondents were male
• 46% of respondents were age 21-30
• 79% were white
• …and so much more!

MIT Media Lab: Blog Survey: Expectations of Privacy and Accountability