Comments on: The Los Angeles Times’ Michael Hiltzik Abuses Web Stats For Fun and Profit

By: LA Observed: Tuesday, 4,18.06

LA Observed: Tuesday, 4,18.06 — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:28:35 +0000

[...] ations to Jan. 23. ♦ LAT watchers on the right: Blogger Independent Sources checks up on LAT blogger Mike [...]

By: Patterico’s Pontifications » Is Hiltzik Censoring Critical Comments (Again)? Help Me Find Out!

Tue, 18 Apr 2006 03:54:05 +0000

[...] osting this again. Independent Sources effectively debunks the factual premise of this post here: http://independentsources.com/2006/04/16/the-los-angeles-times-michael-hiltzik-abuses-web-stats-for-fun-and-profit Looks like there has been some che [...]

By: chad

chad — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:04:33 +0000

I agree nicely done, but unfortunately it will probably be an unproductive effort. I have found that it doesn’t really matter how much evidence you show people like Mr. Hitzak, they can always justify theiir thought process. Check out Joel Connelly in the Seattle Times sometimes for our equivalent.

By: Patterico

Patterico — Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:56:37 +0000

Nicely done.

By: Patterico’s Pontifications » Hiltzik Mocks Hewitt’s Site Meter

Patterico’s Pontifications » Hiltzik Mocks Hewitt’s Site Meter — Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:46:13 +0000

[...] hat not every reader of the L.A. Times reads him. UPDATE: Independent Sources effectively debunks Hiltzik’s post [...]

By: Winds of Change.NET

Winds of Change.NET — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

and validate (or, in this case, invalidate) our claims. Here’s the actual link to Hugh’s Site Meter. Go ahead and click through and let me know if you see a secular decline. Patterico hammered Hiltzik for misrepresenting the numbers (amplified byIndependent Source’s look at Hugh’s Alexa ratings, which go back further than his Sitemeter numbers do. I want to pile on, and suggest that while I’ve looked at some of Patrick’s more aggressive claims about Hiltzik’s intellectual honesty as a bit over the top, I was

By: KURU Lounge

KURU Lounge — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

. Insider and Senior Administration Official have had some really good stuff lately, starting with the Charlie Sheen conspiracy post and it’s follow-ups, and running up through the entire Michael Hitzikscandal (also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here). Full Disclosure I have posted on Independent Sources, but not on these two subjects. I will be working on a conspiracy post with Insider and SAO soon. Not that the amount of traffic

By: The Discerning Texan

The Discerning Texan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

By: L'Ombre de l'Olivier

L'Ombre de l'Olivier — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

had been trying to point out the error of his ways without much success so I decided to see what a neutral 3rd party could do. My first comment was successful, my second – an attempt to post precisely thesame link that Patterico was trying to post – failed miserably. It seems that Hiltzik is not just a bad scientist but a bad journalist who is unable to tolerate objective criticism. One bigger story doing the rounds in the blogosphere is the Duke Rape case.