Lies, damn lies and Wings Over Scotland statistics #1

ANOTHER BLOWHARD trumpeting of “readership-stats”, another con-trick from Bath’s fatuously fraudulent ‘reverend’. According to Stuart Campbell, editor of Nationalist Front blog Wings Over Scotland, the site had 293,753 unique visitors in October 2015. Rejoice and raise the saltires, hang the Unionists, beseech the MSM etc. AhDinnaeKen finds itself asking the questions: Can we trust those figures and what benefit are they to Campbell?

Don't believe everything you read in the Nationalist Front media.

Don’t believe everything you read in the Nationalist Front media.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe – Temporary Google Analytics expert

NEVER SLOW to blow his own trumpet and maintain the myth of a massive readership, Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland recently confirmed to his ‘alert readers’ that just under 300,000 unique visitors or “readers” – as he often refers to such numbers – visited his blog in October 2015.

Very impressive and a potentially powerful political influence if the figures were to be believed which, according to web traffic and internet specialists and user analytics experts Incapsula, they can’t.

According to Incapsula’s findings, 62.3% of traffic to medium sites like Campbell’s – with 10,000 plus visitors per day – are bots. Or non-human traffic in human speak.

Doing the math, the impressive figure of 293,753 unique visitors for the month of October, suddenly whittles down to a less impressive 95,400.

Campbells published figures instantly reduced by one info-graphic ©Incapsula

Campbells published figures instantly reduced by one little info-graphic ©Incapsula

It’s still a formidable figure in anyone’s language but, unfortunately for Wings, it’s exponentially less than the 300,000 claim.

Then, of course, the method of recording and reporting those numbers has to be further taken into account.

Each “unique user” or “unique visitor” is actually a little computer cookie known as an _utma Cookie which is recorded and reported by a Google tool known as Google Analytics. According to Yehoshua Coren, a Google Analytics expert, unique visitors are not commensurate with unique people or readers.

He said: “We use the term “visitor,” but technically this means “__utma Cookie.” Cookies are browser specific. So if I, Yehoshua Coren, visit example.com in a 5 minute span from 3 different browsers, GA (Google Analytics) reports that 3 “unique visitors” came to the site. Similarly, if 3 different people in my household visit example.com at different times throughout the day, this is 1 “unique visitor.” Lastly, if I visit a website repeatedly using Private Browsing (Firefox) or Incognito Mode (Chrome), etc, my cookies are cleared on browser close so I’ll be an additional “unique visitor” (with a ‘new visit’) on every subsequent visit.”

Wings has a noisily notable hard core “fringe” following of assorted cybernat oddballs, expatriates, geek loners, paranoid conspiracy theorists, adolescent gamers, ‘superior intelligence’ IT coders, dribbling media illiterates, barren ‘genius’ cat people and intellectually starved SNP politicians.

Many of them will view the Wings blog using anything between 3 to 10 devices such as home computers, mobile phones, work computers/tablets etc. To be generous, we’ve also factored in random different browsers set to varying states of privacy – as referenced by Yehoshua Coren above.

Cutting Wings some slack and opting for the smallest likely average figure of viewings to 3 separate devices/browsers per actual person, that gives the blog a monthly real human being readership of around 31,800.

It’s still relatively impressive in a not really impressive at all kind of way – given the blog’s tediously repetitive ad nauseum formula of; mainstream media bad, Labour party bad/, SNP criticism bad, and anyone and everyone else not on board, a “stupid f**king c**t” bad etc.

But the more realistic figure of just under 32,000 unique readers pales compared to the trumpeted 300,000 readers figure.

There’s a thing.

DDos attacks can add

DDoS attacks can add “unique user” figures in multiples of thousands depending on the sophistication of the attack. Any old Rogue Coder could implement such a phenomenon.

Also, when you further factor in Campbell’s own claim that the Wings blog site is under almost constant DDoS attack – cyber attacks which aim to shut sites down through swamping them with “unique user” hits – then it begins to look positively paltry considering the hype which precedes it.

It also somewhat undermines the alleged authority which a “readership” of 300,000 is intended to convey. So there’s another thing.

DDoS attacks can produce what are known as ‘spikes’ in unique user figures. One site in a Google analytics discussion forum recently complained of a “sudden spike in direct traffic increase of about 30k (30,000)”. And the spike occurred in one day. Who knows how many DDoS “unique user” spikes are an integral part of Wings reported figures?

One thing’s for sure, Wings will never tell you because it would directly interfere with his duplicitous intention to con Twitter and Facebook users into thinking he’s part of some sort of “wonderful” Nationalist internet movement.

As recently laid bare in a Twitter conversation with Herald journalist, David Leask, Wings “hits” or “readers” as Campbell prefers to call them, pale into insignificance beside newspapers like the Herald.

As Leasky was the first to point out – in terms of accuracy and fairness – comparing Wings with the likes of the Herald, in terms of numbers, is “hardly a fair comparison”.

Typical Leasky: straightforward, accurate, factual and devastatingly understated.

Typical Leasky: straightforward, accurate, factual and devastatingly understated.

Readers can make up their own minds. But any Unionist or Nationalist or interested observer who thinks that Wings Over Scotland is a political player should think again.

If you believe that Wings trumpeted figure of just under 300,000 unique users is anything remotely close to individual readers then AhDinnaeKen has some plain and simple advice for you: take a long hard look in the mirror – that’s what a zoomer looks like.

30,000 to 60,000 false

30,000 to 60,000 false “unique user” hits in a day makes a mockery of Campbell’s claims. Maybe some independent corroboration and forensic analysis is needed there.

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under Opinion, Wangs Watch

5 responses to “Lies, damn lies and Wings Over Scotland statistics #1

  1. Again you have hit the nail on the head and shown us with hard facts, just what a duplicitous loser the fake reverend is. Over the least few years he has officially received over a quarter of a million pounds of funding by the SNP and its supporters and a considerable amount more of unofficial funding, to help peddle his lies, half truths and anti English bigotry, even though he lives in Bath and has no ontention of ever returning to Scotland even if it did get independence.

    It is no wonder that he receives so many Ddos attacks, as the majority of the thinking public of Scotland, has had more than enough of the constant diatribe spouting forth from this devious, quarrelsome hate propagandist and totally obnoxious squirt of a man.

  2. Graham

    Yes and the little turd will not come out in the open on WOS and let anyone post –what on earth are his supporters thinking of??.

  3. See Above

    https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/3132/12-things-you-didn-t-know-about-wingsscotland-s-rev-stuart-campbell

    I think the bearded manchild is telling the truth here when he talks about fantasising about being in Press Gang, even though he would have been in his 20s when it started showing on children’s ITV.

    Can someone say arrested development?

  4. Escari

    Your technical knowledge leaves much to be desired…Firstly DDOS and ‘unique visitors’ are not the same. The former pings the server for details resulting in lag from the sheer number of requests whilst unique visitor numbers are calculated from the number of HTTP GET requests – which unlike most DDOS attacks are recorded and these statistics used to generate traffic numbers.
    Secondly, whilst bots can be responsible for user-hits most ISPs and webhosts keep (reasonably) up-to-date ban lists for bot traffic. Either way, if you”re getting visitor stats from your host that’s as close to an actual user-stat number you can hope to get – assuming a similar distribution of bots hit most public websites on the internet, a portion of all website traffic will be automated; so when applying derived stats such as Page ranking these bot contributions cancel out across the board.
    And finally, your suggestion that two thirds of WoS web traffic is bots is quite outlandish though, especially as WoS don’t have particularly vulnerable input fields, or host Javascript applications, large databases or route network traffic. In reality Bots are not evenly distrbuted across the public sites on the internet but often are set to look for vulnerabilities in specific service sites so bot traffic ends up pooling more in certain areas.
    Honestly your entire article seems a bit like ill-informed wishful thinking 😛

    • “..your entire article seems a bit like ill-informed wishful thinking.”

      Hardly. It’s just a demonstration that Campbell’s claim is bogus. And it clearly demonstrates that. One of his fans and donors – a websites administrator by occupation – admitted that Campbell’s claim of 300,000 unique readers would be “nowhere near that”. Keep jogging. Regards. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s