By Ryan McGreal
Published January 26, 2010
If you only get the Spectator online, you won't have the opportunity to read today's op-ed by Eric Cunningham, titled "How media can survive: Keep it local", in which he revisits last Tuesday evening's panel discussion on the future of local media.
Cunningham happily reinforces talk show host Bill Kelly's claims about "the essential function that mainstream media provide in terms of the credibility and integrity of their content," in contrast to "the growth of anonymous and often vituperative character attacks facilitated through Twitter, Facebook or dubious websites."
Cunningham writes that Raise the Hammer "attracts 15,000 page views per month", contrasting this with the Spectator's five million page views per month.
That's incorrect. In fact, Raise the Hammer attracts 15,000 page views per day, or nearly half a million page views per month.
As I noted last Tuesday evening, it's less traffic than the Spec gets, but our site is entirely volunteer-run and our operating expenses are a mere $15 a month in hosting fees.
It's ironic that Cunningham would be off by a factor of thirty on a critical measure of the alternative local media's reach among readers, particularly in the context of an evening that constantly reinforced the reliability and trustworthiness of all those professional journalists and editors.
Even better is the fact that Mr. Cunningham's op-ed will not be published online on the Spectator's website, where it might be subject to the immediate and direct accountability of astute readers posting comments to call out the error.