Discussion
  • Read More
    Foster KamerMax Read
    6/05/14 11:32am

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      lobstrFoster Kamer
      6/05/14 4:16pm

      It's Faw-stuh!

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Alexander MackFoster Kamer
      6/05/14 7:01pm

      She say she like my shruggie

      My what?

      My shruggie

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    stacyinbeanMax Read
    6/05/14 11:33am

    What did the traffic look like for the same post at the time Forest was getting paid for it? I'm curious about what he's losing out on now!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Max Readstacyinbean
      6/05/14 11:37am

      Foster says he thinks it did around 250,000 when he published it—I assume he means over the ensuing couple days. That's a pretty big hit for Gawker at the time. (In the four ensuing years—before the last few days—it had accumulated 2 million hits, so clearly it was a sort of regular earner.)

      As for what he missed out on, well, individual bonuses are discretionary and not directly correlated to page view statistics.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Mount_PrionMax Read
      6/05/14 11:47am

      You guys gotta send him a bottle of something, or some flowers at least. Tastefully arranged fruit basket?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Cherith CutestoryMax Read
    6/05/14 11:32am

    Perhaps Rihanna's recent see through dress where she had Swarovski crystals on her nipples reminded a few people of this story. They put it on Facebook and it spread for reasons stated?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BabylegsCherith Cutestory
      6/05/14 11:37am

      Except the weird thing about it is that pretty much everyone (read: me) has kind of known what vajazzling is for about 5 years now. It's not a new or particularly shocking thing. It's like traffic for an original post about Lady Gaga's meat dress suddenly gaining 1 million hits this week. Who is that interested or curious about such an old story?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Cherith CutestoryBabylegs
      6/05/14 11:38am

      It is probably new to or had been forgotten by people who spend a lot of time on Facebook.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    dsfsdg4r4fMax Read
    6/05/14 11:27am

    People think there's vaginas yet its non-porn enough to look at while working, esp. since its on your facebook. Perfect recipe.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Cherith Cutestorydsfsdg4r4f
      6/05/14 11:35am

      I'm sure that is true. BUt why don't more people just have the Tumblr app on their phone for when you need vaginas ASAP but can't look on a work computer.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dsfsdg4r4fCherith Cutestory
      6/05/14 11:36am

      Its impulse. You didn't know you needed the vagina until you see the post shared on your feed, now you need it.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    CorvaxMax Read
    6/05/14 11:29am

    The weird thing here is that I'm a regular Gawker reader but didn't notice this until this morning. This is likely because I never pay attention to the sidebar. And then have been wondering about it all morning. Thanks for explaining where the surge came from

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Max ReadCorvax
      6/05/14 11:30am

      I mean, if we didn't have the "top stories" sidebar no one would ever notice. The story basically exists only on Facebook, and only for Facebook, except for the little internal-link portal.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      cheerful_exgirlfriendMax Read
      6/05/14 12:10pm

      At least the Farrah Abraham's porn tape has been kicked off the sidebar, that was up forever. My theory was people with porn blocking at work/prison (?) were watching it repeatedly.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    RussianistMax Read
    6/05/14 11:30am

    Interesting. That might also explain why I sometimes get serious replies to comments I posted over a year ago.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BoredHagRussianist
      6/05/14 11:36am

      I posted about pugs or something like 2 years ago and some burner responded with a super serial response about pet rescue. It was really strange and hilarious that it happened.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      More Ghosts Less StuffRussianist
      6/05/14 11:38am

      It happens. I get comments from individuals on a story from around that time period. I pissed off a lot of people with my views on the Waltons and still get hate replies.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Búho se PierdeMax Read
    6/05/14 11:47am

    (Facebook, we think, rewards time spent on outgoing links and punishes sites and articles that are quickly dismissed)

    This was the most interesting part of this to me.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Max ReadBúho se Pierde
      6/05/14 12:03pm

      We think it's why video posts tend to do better than any other kind of post.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Búho se PierdeMax Read
      6/05/14 1:28pm

      Nitasha should investigate.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Whitson GordonMax Read
    6/05/14 11:36am

    We had something very similar happen to us last year on Lifehacker, with this years-old post I did on de-seeding a pomegranate. Again, just a few paragraphs and a video we found on YouTube. A year and a half after we posted it, it went bonkers on Facebook—for like a month. I still wish I knew who patient zero was.

    The internet is a weird place.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      UnderYetOverMax Read
      6/05/14 11:52am

      Why doesn't the table include links from search engines? It is the number one search result for vajazzling.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Max ReadUnderYetOver
        6/05/14 12:00pm

        Because the traffic is negligent. As the Chartbeat charts show, 85% of incoming visitors arrive from Facebook.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        Weldon BergerMax Read
        6/05/14 1:14pm

        I hate negligent traffic. One always worries about getting run over by a careless click. You should sue.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      rvbeeMax Read
      6/05/14 1:22pm

      There's a significant chance that "patient zero" is actually a well known public persona on FB that has a lot of followers. Unfortunately, Facebook has deprecated the API for Public Post search... so we'll never know who it was!

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Lindsey Jaffervbee
        6/05/14 3:32pm

        Interesting, thanks!

        Reply
        <