The Studio Show Scorecard for Week of October 21-27

PT Rnk

TD Rnk

Oct Distr.
(000)
PT Vwr
(000)
LW/LY TD Vwr
(000)
TD HH TD Vwr
LW/LY

1

=

1

=

98891

3055

+14%

1295

0.9

+6%

=

=

85%

3055

+14%

1295

+6%

+9%

3

=

2

=

98861

731

+15%

309

0.2

+4%

=

=

85%

731

+10%

309

+3%

+4%

2

=

3

=

72464

762

-17%

238

0.2

-13%

=

=

63%

1040

-6%

325

-12%

-6%

4

=

4

=

90121

177

-34%

111

0.1

-23%

=

=

78%

194

+33%

121

-20%

+3%

5

=

5

=

79145

154

-25%

83

0.0

+5%

+1

+3

68%

192

+40%

104

+22%

+85%

7

+2

6

+3

75603

98

+44%

81

0.0

+60%

n/a

n/a

65%

128

n/a

106

+132%

n/a

8

=

7

-1

82964

94

+25%

75

0.1

+28%

-1

-2

72%

112

-10%

90

+103%

+25%

9

-2

8

-1

75829

85

+6%

61

0.0

+6%

-1

-1

65%

111

+33%

80

+15%

+28%

6

=

9

-1

59950

114

-7%

46

0.0

-12%

-1

-3

52%

188

-3%

76

-16%

-8%

10

=

10

=

71026

42

+27%

45

0.0

+14%

-1

-1

61%

58

+56%

63

+13%

+34%

Okay, look, I’ll level with you. I thought I had found a way to not have this project monopolize all my time when I started it, but that clearly isn’t the case. These posts are really tedious, starting with scrolling through each week’s schedule and making note of any pre-emptions or modifications, continuing as I go through each individual show – something that seems like it goes by pretty breezily as I’m doing it (so long as I’m not doing a repeating nightly highlight show that’s not SportsCenter, especially if it’s leading out of a live sporting event… shudder) but where the sheer quantity of shows causes it to bog down, all for something of tangential importance at best to what I personally am really interested in, which is the ratings for the actual sporting events.

The week-by-week fluctuations in the shows aren’t very important, and any changes are going to occur slowly over a very long term, other than in-season fluctuations for the sport-specific networks, although I am interested in the short-term bump shows on smaller networks (especially Fox Sports 1) get from popular sporting events. The main reason I decided to do this is because I like the concept, but all my data comes from a single site that anyone can check for themselves (and they are), even if I give the same data in a more user-friendly format, and I’m not getting much of any sort of bump for these posts (not that I’m getting any for the main ratings posts either, but I’m playing a long game there). I’ll do next week’s post, but I have a new Da Blog Poll up asking if I should keep doing these.

All numbers are in thousands of viewers and are from Son of the Bronx.

Read more

The Studio Show Scorecard for Week of September 16-22

PT
Rnk
TD
Rnk
PT Vwr
(000)
PT/
ESPN
TD Vwr
(000)
TD HH TD/
ESPN

1

1

3387

3387

1306

0.9

1306

=

=

-20%

-18%

-16%

0.9

2

2

1393

1920

390

0.3

538

=

=

+6%

+3%

+2%

0.4

3

3

562

562

308

0.2

308

=

=

-11%

-9%

-7%

0.2

7

4

175

208

152

0.1

181

+2

=

+80%

+31%

+37%

0.1

8

5

140

184

98

0.1

129

-2

+2

-8%

+26%

+32%

0.1

5

6

201

220

88

0.0

96

-1

-1

-33%

-19%

-29%

0.1

9

7

64

80

87

0.0

109

-2

+2

-36%

+29%

+30%

0.1

4

8

207

271

83

0.1

109

+4

=

+109%

+17%

-3%

0.1

6

9

196

273

75

0.0

104

-1

-3

-17%

-9%

-14%

0.1

10

10

59

97

26

0.0

43

=

=

+59%

+34%

0.0

Yes, I’m aware I’m a week late with this. Here’s the thing: I’m not sure what role these posts actually have to play in the larger context of the site. I started the Studio Show Scorecard as a sports equivalent of the cable news scorecards regularly put up by TVNewser, and as such I pinned my hopes more on them to actually catch on and become popular. But while I’ve streamlined the process of creating them much more than I did when I first broached the idea, it’s still very tedious; stuff like Quick Pitch and Olbermann in late night are the worst because it’s not always clear what time slot to list them under when they get knocked off sequence.

Not that I don’t find these posts useful in their own way, but I consider the Sports Ratings Reports more useful just for me, even if a lot of what’s on them is fairly often repeated elsewhere, especially Sports Media Watch; the real payoff for them will come at the end of the year when I have a big blowout of the top-rated sports events that’s more comprehensive and balanced than what SMW will have at the same time. The fact that the SSS comes entirely from a single source, even if Son of the Bronx’s tables are very raw and the scorecards help organize them in a more comprehensible fashion, doesn’t help when sports sites like Awful Announcing discover SotB themselves and do analysis directly off it.

I really want one of these posts to catch on enough that my ad revenue gets boosted enough that I can afford an subscription to Sports Business Daily (at $120 a month!) so I don’t have to wait a month for the Top 20 Most-Watched Sports Events and I can make that the entire Sports Ratings Report, but I’m not sure what’s the best road to get there. In the meantime, I hope to take care of two weeks in a single Sports Ratings Report post later in the week.

Meanwhile, it’s probably not a good sign for Fox Sports Live that none of the three or four times it aired at midnight the first week it was normally bumped at that time for a Fox Football Daily re-air did better than any of the three Fox Football Daily re-airs.

All numbers are in thousands of viewers and are from Son of the Bronx.

Approx. 6-10 AM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN: SportsCenter (6-9 avg.) 746 715 582 427 578
ESPN2: Mike and Mike 227 270 218 247 281
FS1: Fox Sports Live (6-9 avg.) 22 7 9 8 17
GOLF: Morning Drive (7-9 avg.) 56 28 27 35 65
NFLN: NFLAM 116 108 107 116 226
MLBN: Quick Pitch (6-9 avg.) 27 27 27 38 23

morganwick.com

Approx. 9 AM-Noon ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN:   SportsCenter (9-12 avg.) 697 505 409 449 445
ESPN2: First Take (10-12) 416 378 405 392 381
FS1: Fox Sports Live (9-12 avg.) 21 25 14 16 24
GOLF:   Morning Drive (9-11 avg.) 83‡ 28 51‡ n/a n/a
NBCSN: The Dan Patrick Show 27 26 21 40 28†
ESPNEWS: Mike and Mike (10-1) 41 46 27 46 n/a
ESPNU: The Herd (10-1) 62 41 50 44 65
NFLN: NFLAM (10-2) 166 73 113 99 201
MLBN: Quick Pitch (9-1 avg.) 18 15 49 33* 24

*9-12 average only
†11 AM hour only; 9 AM half-hour before Formula 1 practice had 33,000 viewers
‡9-10 only due to other programming

3 PM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN: NFL Insiders 564 502† 577 404 532
ESPN2: SportsNation 215 137 169 254 163
ESPNEWS: SportsCenter 48 59 70 47 31
ESPNU: CFB Daily 51 65* 42 55 95
MLBN: The Rundown (2-4) 16 24 32 30‡ 21

*First-run rating for The Experts 1-2:30; 2:30-4 re-air had 50,000 viewers
†Aired from 3-3:30; Mike and Mike’s Best of the NFL 3:30-4 had 560,000 viewers
‡Aired 1-4

4 PM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN: NFL Live 650 625 627 499 719
ESPN2: DLHQ (4-4:30) 205 206 183 247 167
ESPN2: Outside the Lines (4:30-5) 114 75 136 111 59
FS1: Fox Soccer Daily (4-4:30) 43 138* 149* n/a 31†
FS1: NASCAR Race Hub (4:30-5) 137 152* 158* 145* 291†
ESPNEWS: SportsCenter 60 66 71 56 60
MLBN: MLB Now 43 34 38 40 26

*UEFA Champions League coverage 2:30-5; Race Hub aired at 12 PM
†Fox Soccer Daily aired at 3, Race Hub aired at 1:30

5 PM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN: Around the Horn (5-5:30) 929 723 624 677 734
ESPN: PTI (5:30-6) 1253 955 860 922 825
ESPN2: College Football Live (5-5:30) 85 94 121 160 95
ESPN2: ESPNFC (5:30-6) 74 66 76 96 92
FS1: Crowd Goes Wild 70 89 76 54 118
NBCSN: The Crossover (5-5:30) 132 n/a n/a n/a n/a
ESPNEWS: SportsCenter 148 95 93 58 82
ESPNU: College Football Live (5:30-6) 86 81 29 50 94
NFLN: NFL Fantasy Live 199 163 109 252 186
MLBN: Intentional Talk 77 68 69 97 80

morganwick.com

6 PM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

ESPN: SportsCenter 1023† 657 674 631 646
ESPN2: Around the Horn (6-6:30) 87 135 100 95 116
ESPN2: PTI (6:30-7) 195 176 156 207 181
FS1: Fox Football Daily 51 43 38 38 78
GOLF: Golf Central (6-6:30) 114* 59 30 326 300
NBCSN: Pro Football Talk (6-6:30) 108^ 37* 19 72 61*
ESPNEWS: SportsNation n/a 59 93 62 99
NFLN: Around the League Live 223 148 205 155‡ 178
MLBN: MLB Tonight 63 83 93~ 101¹ 73

*Aired from 6-7
†Aired from 6-6:30; SportsCenter on ESPNEWS 6:30-7 had 84,000 viewers
‡Aired 2-5; NFL Total Access 6-8 had 811,000 viewers
^Aired 5:30-6:30
~Began at 6:58 after bonus coverage (78,000 viewers)
¹Bonus coverage; no MLB Tonight

11 PM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

ESPN: SportsCenter 114† 592 225‡ 1311 237‡ 2615
ESPN2: Olbermann 152† 163 117~ 45~ 69~ n/a
FS1: Fox Sports Live 37 35 107 n/a 33 69^
NFLN: NFL Total Access 61* 225 231 3378* 189 82

*Aired 11:30-12
†SportsCenter aired on ESPN2 11-11:45, with Olbermann following
‡Aired on ESPN2
^10 PM airing after UFC had 167,000 viewers
~Aired on ESPNEWS

Midnight   ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

ESPN: SportsCenter 4405 558 144† 1029 1691 1942
ESPN2: Olbermann n/a 104 138 114 122 n/a
FS1: Fox Football Daily 27* 60 96 29* 64 56*

*Fox Sports Live
†Aired on ESPNEWS

1 AM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

ESPN: SportsCenter 178* 629 398 758 826 1154
ESPN2: Baseball Tonight 137* 60 96 86 102 263†
FS1: Fox Sports Live 28 18 47 28 38 62
NFLN: NFL Fantasy Live 137 160 146 666 154 n/a
MLBN: Quick Pitch 78 94 76 51 147 71

*Baseball Tonight aired 12:42-1, followed by SportsCenter on ESPN2 at 1; NFL Primetime had 1.926 million viewers
†Aired 2:30-3:30; College Football Final 1:30-2:30 had 617,000 viewers
‡Aired 1:30-2:30

2 AM ET

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

ESPN: SportsCenter 1437 453 319 449 586 910
ESPN2: NASCAR Now (2-2:30) n/a 43* 84 67 n/a n/a
FS1: Fox Sports Live 14 11 n/a 10 6 55
NFLN: NFL Total Access 99 121 141 520 119 125
MLBN: Quick Pitch 27 45 65 20 99 39

*Aired at 2:30

Saturday Morning
ESPN: SportsCenter 8 ET 742
ESPN2: NFL Matchup 8:30 ET 193
FS1: Fox Sports Live 8-10 avg. 82
GOLF: Morning Drive 7-9 avg. 44
MLBN: Quick Pitch 8-12 avg. 59
ESPN: College Gameday 9 ET 1828
ESPN2: SportsCenter 9-12 avg. 363
ESPNU: Dari and Mel 9 ET 44
FS1: Fox College Saturday 10 ET 50
ESPNU: First Take CFB 10 ET 9
ESPNU: Film Room 10:30 ET 9
ESPNU: Whiparound 11 ET 43

morganwick.com

Sun 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM Noon

SportsCenter

SportsCenter

SportsCenter

Sunday NFL Countdown

633K/.5

941K/.8

1.140M/.9

2.235M/1.6

CFB Final

OTL

SR

Colin on FB

SportsCenter

Fantasy FB Now

325K/.3

266

274

318K/.3

344K/.3

443K/.3

Fox Sports Live

Fox Sports Live

NASCAR RaceDay

Fox NFL Kickoff

46K</.05

52K/<.05

329K/.2

227K/.2

Morning Drive

54K/<.05

CFB Final

OTL

SR

Colin on FB

SportsCenter

SportsCenter

99K/.1

84K

74K

61K/<.05

73K/.1

65K/.1

NFL Gameday First

NFL Gameday Morning

159K/.1

577K/.4

Quick Pitch

Quick Pitch

Quick Pitch

Quick Pitch

Quick Pitch

Quick Pitch

23K/<.05

40K/<.05

50K/<.05

44K/<.05

54K/<.05

54K/<.05

*Aired to 8:30

Afternoon   Post/SNF Bridge
NBC: Hyundai Sunday Night Kickoff (8-8:30) 11.31M
ESPN: SportsCenter (7-8) 789
NFLN: NFL Gameday Highlights (7:30-8:30) 431

morganwick.com

Sunday   Night
ESPN:   SportsCenter 11 844
ESPN:   SportsCenter 12:30 814
ESPN2: NASCAR Now 11:30 214
ESPN2: ESPNFC 12:30 112
FS1: Fox Sports Live 11 33
FS1: Fox Sports Live 12:30 43
NFLN: NFL Gameday Overtime 11:30 252
NFLN: NFL Gameday Final 12 471

morganwick.com

Top 10   Weekly Shows Not Otherwise On Chart
NFLN: Lexus Prekick Show Thu 8p 4810
ESPN: Monday Night Countdown Mon 6:30p 2728
ESPN: NASCAR Countdown (NSCS) Sun 1p 1269
ESPN: E:60 Tue 7p 691
ESPN: Top NFL Matchup Airing Sat/Sun 4a 559
ESPNEWS: NASCAR Countdown (NNS) Sat 7p 334
NFLN: A Football Life Tue 9p 327
NFLN: NFL Gameday Scoreboard Sun 4p 291
ESPN2: Baseball Tonight SNB Pregame Sun 7p 285
NFLN: Playbook NFC Fri 10p 230
ESPN2: NFL Kickoff Fri 7p 224
NFLN: Playbook AFC Fri 9p 199

 

Preparing Da Blog for football season

Football season is just moments away, and that means the busiest period on the site. I’ve finally belatedly updated the lineal titles and here’s what you need to know:

  • Despite the 2010 TCU title being merged with Princeton-Yale fairly early last season, we enter 2013 with one more linear title than we entered last year with, although it probably won’t stay that way for long. Texas A&M took the 2006 Boise State title from Alabama last year in the Tide’s one loss, so Alabama picks up a new 2012 BCS title, and while Ohio State were ineligible for bowls last year they did go undefeated and that at least gives them a claim to a linear title; call it the “Screw the NCAA” title. Unlike with 2009 Boise State in 2011-12, this one will never be “split” because its very existence hinges on bowl-ineligible teams being eligible for linear titles.
  • On the NFL front, the replacement officials led me to keep track of five different NFL lineal titles by the time I dropped off: the main version of both titles, versions of both titles where the replacement-ref games didn’t count, and the Packers’ Super Bowl XLVI title counterclaim. The main and no-replacement-refs Super Bowl XLVI titles were unified by a Dolphins-Colts game Week 9 the Colts won; the Packers counterclaim was unified two weeks later when the Patriots beat the Colts. All three remaining claims made the playoffs, so the Ravens enter the new season with the sole NFL lineal title.
  • Due to circumstances I will not be participating in the FantasySharks leagues this year, and I’m severely cutting back in the other leagues to 6 each for NFL.com, ESPN, Yahoo, and Fox, and one each for CBS and Fleaflicker, for 26 in all, though I reserve the right to add more ESPN/Yahoo/Fox teams as I see fit.
  • I’ll tweet when the first college football rankings of the last season of the rankings are due to come out at a later time, but to be honest I’m not looking forward to dealing with this year’s round of realignment and teams moving up to FBS to chase money and fill spots in depleted conferences.

State of the Sports TV Ratings Landscape

I didn’t realize until recently that Son of the Bronx has been putting up ratings for every single program on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, NBCSN, Golf Channel, and the networks for the three undisputed major sports. Here’s hoping he’ll have Fox Sports 1 numbers by the time that network re-launches in August, because if so it’ll become possible (even if only after the fact) to run a sports version of the daily scoreboards here.

Of course, when I tried to do my own version the time required to create it quickly spun out of hand. Still, let’s see what we can learn from the ratings for a sample week, April 15-21 (admittedly, possibly a bad week due to the Boston Marathon bombings screwing up the schedule on Monday and the X Games on Friday, and because I just skimmed the tables a lot of this analysis is pretty haphazard). Here are the ratings for the ESPNs, and here are the others:

  • About six months ago, Awful Announcing ran a post warning of the challenge viewer “gravitation” to ESPN posed for any potential competitor, and while I was skeptical at the time (since the occasion was people failing to find the baseball playoffs on TBS, which had more to do with no one knowing their shitty Sunday afternoon package even exists), it’s hard to dispute after looking at the numbers. During college basketball season, it’s rare for even a single game on ESPN2 to beat a single game, certainly two, on ESPN; it seems like anything that gets put on ESPN gets good ratings by default. Indeed, in general the highest rated programs on ESPN2 get beat by all but the lowest-rated programs on ESPN; even a late-night re-air of an NBA game beat every single non-NHRA program on ESPN2, and it was the lowest-rated re-air of any kind I could find. And ESPN2’s distribution is actually only marginally worse than regular ESPN, and it typically beats all of the others fairly handily on its own.
  • As such, I think a lot of the hand-wringing over First Take is overblown. Yes, it’s ESPN2’s highest-rated studio show, and yes, there have been times when it’s beaten SportsCenter on ESPN (including Tuesday of this week)… but SportsCenter ratings seem to drop substantially when it goes from re-airs of the previous day’s show to new live editions, which makes me wonder if that has anything to do with the alleged “First Take-ization” of SportsCenter. Moreover, at least when I looked during college basketball season, the entire ESPN2 schedule seemed to undergo wild fluctuations where the order of shows remained the same from day-to-day but their exact numbers varied wildly. When they had the half-hour edition of First Take later in the day on regular ESPN, it was quite possibly the lowest point on the entire ESPN schedule, maybe even dragging down Outside the Lines with it. Maybe First Take is popular because it’s just different from the standard-issue SportsCenter on at the same time and it’s on later than Mike and Mike so more people are up for it.
  • DLHQ is quite possibly doing worse than any other ESPN2 studio show, while Numbers Never Lie did better than Mike and Mike at one point in the week. That’s just depressing. Most of what ESPN2 puts on at 3 ET does better than DLHQ at 3:30, as does SportsNation after, so I have a feeling Dan LeBatard’s long-term prospects are Highly Questionable.
  • I got the sense that college basketball games on NBCSN, in general, did worse than ESPNU games, though that might have something to do with the lack of major conferences on the former, but that once the NHL started NBCSN does better top to bottom than ESPNU, with hockey usually but not always beating basketball. Generally, the Dan Patrick Show beats the Herd, but DP seems to be more volatile, and some episodes of the Box Score actually beat the actual radio shows airing before them. Outdoor programs continue to be the elephant in the living room for NBCSN; it’s hard to justify weekend editions of the Lights given the numbers, and sometimes it doesn’t even beat the infomercials running immediately before, though 6 AM seems to be more popular than later hours. During college basketball season it seemed like 8 AM was substantially more popular than earlier hours, which may be a combination of Dan Patrick and West Coast viewers tuning in at a time that actually remotely works for them; if the latter, that may be an argument in favor of extending the show backwards to 3 AM, midnight on the West Coast.
  • Even by ESPNU standards, UNITE was doing so horribly during college basketball season that ratings not only dropped substantially when it came on, they rebounded when a game re-air came on immediately afterwards, like people were avoiding it like the plague. Now at least some episodes seem to be doing on par with the Herd, and early-morning re-airs (especially those leading in to the Herd) aren’t beating the original midnight airing.
  • All of MLBN’s games fell between NBATV’s two Monday games. Most of MLBN’s daytime studio shows seem to be doing better than anything on NBCSN or ESPNU, but even in the midst of the offseason NFLN has them both beat. You have to scroll down a pretty good distance to find NFLAM, and it’s still beating almost anything on NBCSN or ESPNU. But Morning Drive on Golf Channel is running pretty close to if not beating NFLAM, and considering the struggles NBCSN has had with any studio programming in prime the success of Golf Channel’s original programming is pretty stunning.

I’m adding a new category, because I might start doing more sports TV ratings posts in the future, given all the information available here and elsewhere.

How Windows 8 Changes Everything, Part III: The Nature of Social Media (And What a Blast from the Past Means for the Future of Facebook)

For a lot of people, social media ARE the internet.
John Allison, creator, Scary Go Round and Bad Machinery

It’s becoming apparent to me that most people do not use the Internet the way I do.

I am not a social media fiend. The only social network I’m on is Twitter, and I’m not even sure I use Twitter the same way most people do; I only follow 15 or so people on Twitter and I can’t even imagine following much more than that. I get the sense that for many people, social media completely defines their online life, serving as their gateway to the rest of the Internet, to the point that any attempt to understand the workings of the Internet, from the failure of RSS to catch on to what a post-Web future of the sort Chris Anderson describes might look like even now, has to start with social networking first and foremost.

When Google Plus launched nearly two years ago, it made a big deal about its “Circles” feature, which recognized that people don’t have just one type of friend. Circles allowed you to sort your contacts into groups, such as friends, family, coworkers, more distant relatives, college buddies, and so on. It struck me that this model was the opposite of Twitter: when I first discovered Twitter, I applauded it for recognizing that “following” someone wasn’t necessarily reciprocal like “friendship” has to be on Facebook, but Twitter allows you to follow anyone’s tweets without requiring them to follow you back, while Google+ was effectively allowing you to determine who received whatever messages you sent, without their input.

What would a social network be like that combined the two? Well, anyone could choose to “follow” any of the public postings of anyone else. A person could then organize the people who follow them into groups, like Google+’s circles; perhaps they’d receive a notification whenever someone they followed followed them or vice versa, asking if they’d like to place that person in any of their circles, or perhaps someone could ask to join any of their circles, similar to how Facebook’s “friendship” works now. Some of their posts would continue to be public, while others would be restricted to certain circles. You’d effectively have two different levels of “following”: a basic level allowing you to follow anyone and anything, like how many people use social media now, and a deeper level for your actual friends, indeed as many “deeper levels” as you want. This would serve as a curb on the proliferation of “friends” that plagues Facebook, and it could also allow the social network to be more open; many if not most Facebook profiles are closed to nonmembers, and often even to people who aren’t friends. With this system, anyone could still have a public timeline anyone could view like on Twitter, but they could still restrict some of their postings to people they’re closer to, which Twitter can’t do except in the form of “direct messages” (which no one uses) and restricting the whole account to followers only.

Perhaps we could take this further, and somehow recognize when an actual group of people all (or almost all) count one another as friends, or in analogous circles. The social network could recognize this group as a self-contained group in its own right, enabling them to better organize and converse with one another as a group. This doesn’t have to be limited to an actual circle of friends; in fact, the great shortcoming of most social networks is its inability to recognize groups of people with a common interest and serve as a place for them to discover one another and talk about that interest with one another. As such, people with common interests end up fractured among many different sites, often blogs that become a hub for the community even though they may not work well for this purpose. When I launched the forum, I said that forums still had a place in an era of blogs and social media, as a place for a community to gather and talk about common interests, but why have a forum and a collection of whatever other sites are out there for this purpose when anyone interested in a topic can connect with everything everyone else is doing and saying in that topic in a single place, perhaps one that can accommodate blogging as well?

Being able to serve as not just a site that can be all things to all people, but to specifically connect people with common interests, might be the one great advantage that someone might yet be able to topple Facebook with. The social network that can best Facebook is one that can leverage the network advantages of having everyone on there, yet also cater to specific interests. In that sense, it may be a flashback to the original social network, Usenet, but adapted for the modern web. Were that to happen, it could be the last break from the Web as we know it now and the ultimate realization of Chris Anderson’s vision. Farhad Manjoo thinks this is impossible, that no social network that claims to be all things to all people can also serve as a social network for a particular interest. I think it can if it opens up the toolbox so that the community surrounding a particular topic can customize their own corner of the network with all the functionality they could possibly want. That probably means the social network of the future will have to be open source – and without the ability to monetize it, that will make it very difficult to run.

Perhaps the social network of the future is already under construction, in the form of WordPress’ BuddyPress plugin. This plugin allows any WordPress site to set up their own social network within it, something that seems kind of odd to me; the network effects of social networks are such that any social network for a particular site would seem to have limited utility. But if someone were to set up a competitor to Facebook and run it on BuddyPress, it could catch on like wildfire, if only among people concerned about Facebook becoming just another evil company with little regard for privacy – but that might be enough to attract everyone else in the long term, if it truly embraces the open-source ethos. One thing I know for sure: I’ve finally closed up shop on the Morgan Wick Forum, which had become little more than a wretched hive of spam and villainy, and if and when I relaunch it, it’s probably going to be with BuddyPress installed (if only because that might be the only way to get some of the functionality, like high-level mod tools and private messages, I’m looking for).

Or perhaps the social network of the future won’t be a single site at all, but rather new technologies and protocols to link people together without the need of a central site. This is the dream behind the notion of the “semantic web“, the idea that all you need to do is put all your relevant information in a single place in a common format and it will follow you anywhere, capable of being read and understood by anything – a concept that could be key to a truly post-HTML future. It’s hard to imagine what such a decentralized social network might look like, but that hasn’t stopped some people from trying. The growth of devices like the iPad and Surface that are so tightly connected to the Internet may help bring the semantic web into reality, or at least make it more possible, and in that sense, perhaps the real clue to the social network of the future may lie in the “People” tile in Windows 8 and Windows Phone. As more and more people move to the cloud, and to devices like the Surface that are constantly registered with an account that connects them to that cloud, it’s only a matter of time before the accounts their devices are registered with are used to help form a new kind of social network – one that might not have a single identity at all, and one that might truly define the Internet for its users. All it would take is a way for iOS, Android, and Windows users to communicate with each other seamlessly.

So in retrospect, why did we end up abandoning Usenet, anyway?

Webcomic reviews! That’s a completely original idea!

Back in 2009, during my previous webcomic-reviewing life, I discovered Komix! after that site made multiple appearances in the ads for Da Blog. Though my initial main concern was the ability to add RSS feeds for comics that didn’t have RSS feeds at the time, I got the sense that the real core of the site was its interface for browsing comics’ archives and tracking your progress, which I ended up making use of for my Scary Go Round review. On the other hand, it was essentially run by a single person who gave it a weird gimmick of adding exactly one new comic to the service a day. Eventually, several comics (including Order of the Stick) lost the ability to use Komix to browse their archives (which, since Komix’ browser loaded the full content of each page without stripping out or adding ads, I didn’t quite understand), and the site as a whole inevitably fell by the wayside as its proprietor became busy with real life.

When David Morgan-Mar and his friends started mezzacotta, one of the “half-baked” ideas they trotted out on it was Archive Binge, Morgan-Mar’s attempt at creating a Ryan North-esque webcomic tool. The idea was to make it easier to catch up on webcomics with massive archives by allowing people to create their own custom RSS feeds to read them in chunks of up to ten comics a day. Somewhat paradoxically, the entire point of it was not to “binge” on a webcomic’s archives in a short amount of time, but rather to consume the comic in more sane portions spread out over a period of time. Perhaps something like “Archive Diet” or “Archive Tour” would have been more appropriate. Regardless, I got the sense that the project eventually stalled with a somewhat disappointing number of strips supported.

Fast-forward to about a month ago, when I learn from Fleen that Morgan-Mar has handed over control of Archive Binge to some outfit called Comic Rocket that I’m hearing of for the first time. Comic Rocket turns out to be something akin to a better-supported, more-professional version of Komix. It, too, seems to have as its main feature the ability to bookmark your place in any comic and move it as you go along, which (in theory) makes it a great home for Archive Binge, but it also seems to have considerably more support from the webcomic community, more people working on it than just one, and way more comics in its system than Komix has ever had. (It also recently finished a crowdfunding operation to create a mobile app that ended up surprisingly disappointing, only making its $5000 goal fairly late and barely cracking its $7000 stretch goal for Android support; I wonder if it would have gotten more support if it were on Kickstarter rather than the more obscure, Matthew “The Oatmeal” Inman’s success notwithstanding, Indiegogo?)

One of the things that has long held me back as a webcomic reviewer is my desire to hold some sort of archive binge for all but the most continuity-free strips. Even complete gag comics with zero returning characters or continuity still get archive-binged to a limited extent, because it’s not just having a proper appreciation of the events leading up to the present, it’s also about having a large enough sample of work fresh enough in memory to form an opinion of a comic as a whole. And archive binges are time-consuming things; even Gunnerkrigg Court, which struck me by the speediness of its archive binge, damn near monopolized a weekend, and that’s time I don’t actually have. So I can sympathize with Morgan-Mar’s desire to make it easier to catch up on a long-running strip. Hell, I’ve done it; on at least two different strips (Doonesbury and Sluggy Freelance) I’ve stared a thousands-of-comics-long archive in the face and told myself that just by reading two comics each day I’m already doubling the comic’s update rate and so will have to catch up eventually, no matter how long that takes.

So I’m going to try an experiment. I’ve identified four or five comics I’ve been meaning to review and started Archive Binge feeds for all of them (as well as a few other comics I want to catch up on). Once those feeds are all caught up, I’ll move them to my tryout space for reading as it comes out for however long it takes to get an impression of it in that state, at which point it’ll be time to write the review. I hope this will allow me to write reviews significantly faster than the snail’s pace I seem to have always worked on them at without getting too much in the way of other obligations. That said, I’m a little worried about how this will change the reading experience; I’ll be getting a comic in little dribbles at a time, dribbles that will have to compete with several other dribbles for my attention, and the process of archive binging will be stretched out over a substantially longer period of time. I may be moving substantially faster than the comic’s own update pace, but catching up this way may impede my ability to get that sense of a comic as a whole.

The way Archive Binge itself is set up doesn’t help; although it’s tied in with Comic Rocket’s own interface and now supports every single one of its comics (including more than a few newspaper comics), beyond that it probably hasn’t been modified much from its mezzacotta incarnation, not even affecting the bookmark under any circumstances (while there were times I wished I could decline to advance Komix’s bookmark, not having the option to start moving it when I’m on the same page as it is a major pain with Comic Rocket). To me, the most glaring issue is that there seems to be no way to increase the rate of update beyond 10 comics a day, which seems low. It’s nowhere near sufficient for Homestuck, but even beyond that it seems to cause older webcomics’ archives to take a disturbingly long time to get through (expect me to review a lot more low-continuity gag-a-day comics and meme factories) and doesn’t provide that good sense of a webcomic as a whole I’m looking for, which could exacerbate the reading-experience issues I worry about. 20-25 would seem to be a more realistic cap; I originally intended to set the update rate for each strip at whatever would take no more than 15 minutes to get through, but quickly decided to set them all at 10.

Personally, I have to scratch my head at Archive Binge’s very structure, which dumps whatever number of links you set into your RSS reader. Regardless of the comic, they’re all links, so you have to click on them to bring them up, but you’re not going to be clicking on each link to bring up each comic; you’re going to click on the first link and then you’re going to want to use whatever interface that page presents to move to the others. Naturally, most RSS readers sort entries in reverse chronological order by default, which means the link you’re presented is the opposite of the one you want, and while Google Reader (for example) allows you to sort each feed oldest first, a) setting it for a folder’s full view doesn’t set it for the child feeds, despite the reverse appearing to be true, and b) it only allows you to set whether or not to show read items on a global basis, despite this seemingly being a prerequisite for the oldest-first view to be of any use at all (aside from, well, archive-binging) and thus defeating the point of making the latter something that can be set feed-by-feed (a lingering general issue I have with Reader).

(To be fair, the issues with Archive Binge’s implementation are multiplied by a) two false starts on getting started with this experiment causing unread entries to pile up in Reader and, more importantly, b) other things about Reader that interfere with Archive Binge’s apparent intended workings, namely, the fact that all entries are marked as read automatically as you scroll down, with entries taking a ton of space in a small window. If I were working in Internet Explorer’s RSS reader, all entries would be marked as read as soon as I left the page, and the sort order would, ideally, be completely irrelevant.)

If I were designing it, I would tie it in much more closely with the other functionality of the site, and indeed make it something that was less of an RSS feed and more something that applied to your Comic Rocket account directly, essentially providing a direct reminder (or something) to stop once you reached the end of your allotted pages for the day, and tracking pages still to be read for the day as a subset of the entire unread portion of the archive.

But then, I’m not sure Comic Rocket understands what the point of bookmarks are when it comes to webcomics, because they seem to be trying to give their site a “social” dimension, allowing you to “share” what comics you’re reading (and not allowing you to choose which ones to share except indirectly by content rating), despite the fact that the bookmark function (which is how “reading” is defined) is primarily useful for catching up on webcomics, not reading them as they come out, or in other words, when you’re trying out a new webcomic as opposed to already knowing you like it. As it stands, Comic Rocket is of limited usefulness for tracking comics you’re already reading, especially if you have an RSS reader (which, you know, you kinda need to use the whole Archive Binge thing); if anything, without Archive Binge being more integrated into the main Comic Rocket interface, trying to use it to read comics as they come out just gets annoying because it gets in the way of the comics you’re trying to catch up on.

As such, I’m not sure I know what Comic Rocket is actually trying to do, and I’m not sure they know either. I think they have potential as a “comics page” to keep up with your favorite webcomics as well as those comics you’re trying to catch up on (without losing the aspect of linking to the original site as opposed to simply stealing images from it), but right now they seem to be trying to serve several masters at once and serving none of them well. It is in “beta”, as meaningless as that can seem on the Internet, but there are definitely enough signs of unfinished business, especially where Archive Binge is concerned (besides the above, clicking to set up a new Archive Binge feed doesn’t take you directly to actually set it up; you have to click again to “edit” your new feed to do so, which seems to violate User Interface Design 101) but also in other areas (the site and Archive Binge in particular is damn near useless when it comes to Girls with Slingshots, where its crawler picks up old, outdated news posts along with actual comics, which probably afflicts other comics as well), that maybe it can improve over time.

Regardless, I’m going to give Comic Rocket and Archive Binge a go, and I’m going to press on with this experiment for the time being, so look forward to more webcomic reviews sometime in April; I’ve added a tentative schedule to the Webcomic Review Index that I reserve the right to change at any time (and incidentally, with ArtPatient not updating in ages, I’m running low on ideas for future webcomic blog reviews; any other good webcomic blogs you know of, preferably not podcasts or behind a paywall?). But I do hope the proprietors of Comic Rocket try to figure out why some webcomics had Komix access shut down and avoid those same mistakes; fortunately, their robust system of bookmarklets, partly designed as a way to avoid using the interface, seems like a potentially viable backup plan if they can continue to collect archive links (not to mention being the only competent way to read comics like Girls with Slingshots).

A (very) belated post-apocalyptic blog-day.

So, how’d that Mayan apocalypse go, eh?

Funny story: The idea that the Mayan calendar “ended” last week was always wrong to begin with. I always felt that Y2K was an apt comparison for the whole “Mayan apocalypse” hysteria, since last week actually marked the end of the previous and the start of a new b’ak’tun, a period of about 394 years. The Mayans themselves don’t seem to have ever believed the world was going to end in 2012, referring to future events after that date, but they did have a creation myth that said that the previous world ended at the start of a 14th b’ak’tun, the same one that started a week ago. That previous world was scrapped as a failed experiment that never had humans placed in it, so people who believed the world was going to end last week were a) implicitly believing in the Mayan gods and b) implying this world was a failure despite c) the presence of humans (which should be a mark of success) in it.

Think about that for a second.

Another funny story: The last change in b’ak’tun was in 1618, just a few years after the Catholic Church forbade the teaching of the Copernican heliocentric model of the cosmos, which caused Galileo to stay away from the matter for the seven or so years following. Before that, 1224 was just the year before the Magna Carta became law. 830 saw the foundation of the House of Wisdom, which played a key role in preserving many Greek texts by translating them into Arabic, and roughly corresponds with the decline of the Mayans themselves, or at least their “classic” period; 435 is a couple centuries too late for their rise, but it is smack-dab in the middle of another, more well-known decline, that of the Roman empire, and just five years after the death of St. Augustine (and only nine after the completion of his City of God).

The year 41, less than a decade after the crucifixion of Jesus, saw the formation of the first Christian communities and Jews being given the freedom to worship following Caligula’s death. Alexander the Great was two years old in 354 BC, and it’s possible some of Plato’s later dialogues were being written around that time; as such, the entire b’ak’tun from 748 BC (four years after the traditional founding of Rome, and possibly the rough time Homer lived and Zoroastrianism, perhaps the first monotheistic religion, was founded) to 354 BC corresponds fairly well with the so-called “Axial Age”.

It’s probably engaging in the same sort of over-reading believers in a Mayan apocalypse do to actually claim any sort of correlation between the Mayan calendar and these developments, and even if so it’s hard to figure out what it means given the disparate nature of the milestones involved. It’s worth noting, though, that the last three milestones can be correlated with, respectively, the birth of modern science, the birth of modern notions of freedom and equality, and the birth of the modern intellectual tradition. Now consider that the exact date the Mayans placed the founding of our world at was 3114 BC. This is only 12 years before the start of the Hindu tradition’s Kali Yuga, and right in the middle of the period between the creation of Adam and the Flood in the Bible, suggesting a cross-cultural placing of importance on that time period, and both can be correlated with the unification of Egypt, the start of construction on Stonehenge, and the rise of the Minoans, as well as the earliest writing systems, which some scholars consider the start of “history” itself. It is, in short, the period when what we call “civilization” begins.

Given that history, what sort of period might we be entering now?

It’s possible, as I tweeted a while back, that this is essentially the point when global warming becomes unstoppable and inevitably plunges us back to the Stone Age if not worse. Personally, I prefer to look more optimistically at it, that this is the herald of a change that will make all the changes in human history since the agricultural revolution look like child’s play. Call me conceited, but as a philosopher, I always felt that at this point, I would introduce my own nominee for this change, by starting to increase humanity’s awareness of its own nature. As such, much of the entire history of Da Blog up to this point has been preparation for something to happen on December 21st. I initially planned to release the first of several treatises outlining my philosophy on that date. Later I planned to start my new webcomic then, and even felt, after failing to do much work on that comic over the summer, that I could use one of my classes as an impetus to work on it. When even that failed, leading to me flunking two classes when I hadn’t failed one in over a year, I was all set to settle for writing a rant on America’s reaction to the Newtown shootings and how completely wrong it was in every way.

The day came and went, and what did I do? Bupkis.

You might say I’m going through a personal apocalypse right now. I allowed my e-mail box to completely fill so I could focus with laser intensity on the comic, which of course, didn’t work. Then I planned to write an apology to my teacher, but haven’t been able to work myself up to do it, which also means I haven’t even registered for the new quarter; I’ve been thoroughly depressed throughout the winter break, especially after not doing anything for the 21st, and have wasted most of it on semi-random pursuits. I’m still five classes away from graduation, but that includes probably the two hardest, and I don’t know what’s motivating me to complete them anymore; I seriously considered taking winter quarter off entirely. Flunking two classes means that, for the next three months at least, Mom will cut me off from home Internet access for the entire quarter, reverting me to the state Da Blog was trapped in for much of its history.

Such is a fitting close to Year Six on Da Blog, a year which saw my attempt to recover my early posting frequency with the return of The Streak and a brief return to semi-regular webcomic reviews, yet the former took a far lamer form than it ever had before, with me repeatedly having to finesse and fudge my way to maintaining the streak to a significant extent (often with posts explicitly existing just to continue the streak), and most days posting less than an hour before midnight, leaving me wondering if something was wrong with me compared to the earlier streak, despite the Random Internet Discovery helping sustain the previous streak. Would I have been more able to pull off my goals just a few short years ago; has something damaged my decision-making ability beyond its already questionable levels? That may be unanswerable, and I don’t know whether I want to find it out. As if that wasn’t enough, I finally launched the long-awaited forum, which I saw as the birth of a community that would do much to boost Da Blog’s popularity, yet I might shutter it before it hits its one-year anniversary because it’s gotten to the point I simply assume any new thread was started by a spammer.

A year ago, I felt Da Blog was on its way up. Now, I feel like my future and that of Da Blog has never been cloudier. I still feel the need to do something with my ideas on human nature, if only because I fear the only people who have the clearest vision on human nature lack either the work ethic to share it with the world or the scruples to use it to benefit anyone other than themselves, and I still believe enough in my webcomic idea to do something with it, but it really does feel enough like work that I don’t know how willing or even able I am to do it. There’s something unreal about most of my plans, like they’re all fantasies of mine that I rationalize my way into relying on and which are all disconnected from one another, and they certainly don’t seem to be connected with an actual experience of doing them; I rarely have a clear, realistic path to a concrete goal. I’ve seen myself as a philosopher for years, yet I’ve always found it far easier to think about my philosophy than to actually put it down on virtual paper, and so long as it feels like a job I don’t know if it’s what I’m meant to do after all.

Perhaps my future is in numerical analysis of sports – the SNF Flex Schedule Watch has long been the most consistently popular aspect of the site, and I spent much of my post-failure funk working on several different mathematical formulae with different applications for sports. That’s certainly something I wouldn’t have thought even a month ago when I was thinking of shutting down the College Football Rankings and Flex Schedule Watch after next season. Or maybe not; I knew going in that the FF50 project was going to gobble up a massive amount of time at the worst possible time, but by the end I was finding it so tedious that I doubt I’m going to do much of anything on that front next year. This despite the fact I took 11 of my 42 teams to the championship game – something like double the rate I expected – and won all 11 (after losing my one championship game last year and despite screwing up my ESPN lineups last week knowing ESPN has two-week playoff rounds so I could make it up in Week 17), so let me take a moment to acknowledge my championship fantasy teams: Fox 2, Fox 8, ESPN 3, Fox 3, NFL 6, Split Backs, ESPN 8, Fox 1, ESPN 6, NFL 3, and ESPN 10. (Yeah, Fox leagues don’t seem to attract the strongest players…)

Perhaps that might be the inevitable fate of all my projects, for me to take them up, work on them obsessively for a time at the expense of my other obligations, and then abandon them as they become work and get too tedious. That may have already happened to those formulae I was working on, and it certainly would be consistent with some things I’ve read about Asperger’s Syndrome (including, of all things, an argument that Order of the Stick‘s Eugene Greenhilt has the same thing). Perhaps this site is always doomed to be a holding place for whatever project I take up for some period of time and eventually abandon, my own personal mezzacotta. If so, it doesn’t bode well for its ability to sustain itself, or my dreams of, whatever it is I end up doing in life, being one of the all-time greats at it.

Thanks in large part to The Streak, I’ve written 262 posts since my last Blog-Day post, which is in no way close to a record, as hard as that may be to believe when I couldn’t even hit 100 a couple years ago. I doubt I’ll fall short of 100 again. But I also doubt I’ll ever approach these heights again either. Here’s to Year Seven, a year I can’t even begin to predict.

Some quick stuff

So I lost most of the day because I was going to post on this newfangled Surface thing, but then I slept and then I had less than an hour to put something together.

Between one or two politics-themed posts, being just about ready for a new sports graphics roundup, stuff actually happening in Gunnerkrigg Court, and the impending start of Act 6-4 in Homestuck, next week should have no shortage of material, and maybe even the week after as well… if I can balance it with everything else I’m trying to balance.

Oh, and I can neither confirm or deny that there will be something extra special for Twitter followers in just over a week’s time.

Beyond that, it’s anyone’s guess what the future holds, for the site or for me. How’s that for cryptic statements?

The latest on a potential suite of all-sports Fox networks

So, I said I was going to lay out how a trio of all-sports Fox networks would work, only to find that for the most part, it works with plenty of space to preserve non-live programming, even if you kill FCS. There was one weekend with a multitude of college football games clashing with a UFC event, Premier League soccer, baseball, AND the NASCAR Truck Series, but that’s the exception.

On the other hand, it’s now looking very, very likely to happen, because the English Premier League bidding has attracted as many as five bidders, with a surprising sixth kicking the tires but dropping out. If any but Fox (or marketing firm IMG) win, that is probably the death knell for Fox Soccer. ESPN, NBC, and beIN Sport would all love to be the ones to drive a stake into Fox’s heart, even if they don’t actually pull it off. Oddly, reportedly Discovery Networks, the group mostly known for its networks filled with documentaries (even if verging into the sensationalistic or “reality” these days), was kicking the tires on adding games to its Velocity network, the former HD Theater, one of a number of former HD channels from when HD was a novelty (existing more to show off the technology and lump together several networks’ programming for HD simulcasts than anything else) that now have very little reason to exist, but apparently decided against it.

I’m not surprised NBC didn’t put up much of a fight; I actually hadn’t considered them much of a player to begin with, and for all the pub the Premier League has gotten, F1 might actually net them comparable ratings. On the other hand, I don’t buy the argument that beIN Sport actually picked up too many rights to add the Premier League to that too; I think they’ve shown plenty of signs that they’re willing to launch a second network in each language if circumstances warrant. ESPN would love to get the rights but I think ultimately if they do, they sublicence a number of games to Fox or NBC. My hunch is that it’s a two-horse race between Fox and beIN Sport, with ESPN running a close third that might ultimately form a joint bid with one of the others (more likely Fox). Normally, I might call Fox the favorite, but as always, never underestimate the power of Arab oil money; at the very least, a Fox-ESPN joint bid might be necessary just to fend off beIN Sport.

The FF50 Challenge Power Rankings, and why I’m not posting them

When I started the FF50 challenge, I was thinking I would perform weekly updates on the state of the 42 teams I was playing, finding a way to rank all of them. I decided against it, both because of time constraints and because I had no way to rank them that early in the season, especially given my draft strategy.

So why did I decide to do it now, as I posted on Monday? Because even without the power rankings and even with the number of teams downsized to 42 from my original intention of 50, I have never been able to set starting lineups or submit waiver claims for all teams without running out of time. I had said that I would abandon 0-4 teams after four weeks, but only four teams started the season 0-4, three of them towards the end of the order for me to set lineups and thus more likely to have malformed lineups, meaning I had next to no teams that were completely lost causes. (I may have better luck with the 1-5 checkpoint this week.) And if I’m going to leave some teams behind, I should be doing it with the teams with the least need for it anyway. So waiver claims will start moving from the bottom up, and lineup setting will occur from the top down. But I’m still not going to post the rankings, because this project is monopolizing too much of my time already, and putting together everything I’d want for a post would eat up way too much of my time. I may decide to post them in no-frills fashion later, though.

There were a few other things that I’ve noticed. For one, I often ended up with the same players on the same teams on the same site, and even when I didn’t, the running back/wide receiver balance was often out of whack in the same way on the same site. For example, nearly every single Yahoo team has Garrett Hartley on the roster, because Yahoo’s rankings absolutely buried him. Right now he’s only the 16th best kicker under Yahoo’s scoring system, but he’s remained high enough on most other week-to-week rankings I haven’t had reason to replace him, though that may change this week with him on bye. Also, most Yahoo teams ended up drafting entire benches of running backs with very few wide receivers, which may have something to do with Yahoo’s starting lineup of three wideouts, two running backs, and no flex. For another, there were some teams that, for one reason or another, were almost entirely autopicked instead of picked by me, and those teams have a strong tendency to be the strongest ones, especially after factoring out Fox teams. (I have eight Fox teams; every last one is in the top half, placing fourth or better in their 10-team league, with five in my top 12. The players there aren’t very good, is what I’m saying.)

This convinces me to make a few rule changes for drafts next year should I continue with this. For one, I had been considering limiting my options to the top 25 available players in ADP, but couldn’t find a universal list I was confident in; now I think I’m definitely going to limit myself to the top 25 ADP for that site (possibly top 20 for leagues with 10 or fewer teams). I’m also going to give a site’s native rankings an increased role in determining who I pick.

The median is right where you’d expect, in the middle of the pack for each league… but considering how much I’m dominating the Fox leagues, that just shows how far I have to go everywhere else.