Friday, November 21, 2008

Newsarama: Still Need Google To Search It?

So I was chatting with a friend online regarding some of Dan Didio's recent decisions regarding the DC publishing schedule. The friend says that Didio came off looking like a complete asshole in the last column where he answered questions on I remember him having some bad news, but not coming off like an ass.

So I search for Dan Didio and I get this:

1...2...3...3....3...THREE TOTAL RESULTS.

Do a quick Google search of for Dan Didio?

Searching Dan Didio on the site itself pulls up a total of 3 hits...but Google puts the pertinent articles right at the top?

Other blogs (like The Beat) have already covered how Newsarama and CBR are much closer in hit levels since the redesign. I still say the fall can be blamed on the move to Pluck and comments on front page articles instead of threads. The old style was much more conducive to readers linking back to notable bits on the site, without any particular benefit to be found in the new.


  1. Sadly, this is true for a great number of web sites. The Detroit Free Press regularly frustrates me when I try to reference an article, usually giving me some classified ad. I, too, end up doing most seaches via Google.

  2. I think it would be fair to say CBR is the #1 now. When Newsarama have to resort to 'Top 5/10' lists then they are obviously not of the calibre that they previously were.

    And true, the forums are still pretty unusable and even simply making a comment in an article is a major pain with no quote or edit button.

  3. Scott: I could understand if the site managed to list all hits with Dan Didio, but not really be an easy way to find the particular item you're looking for. To only list 3 hits, though? That's just silly.

    Paul C: I'd disagree with the Top 5/10 lists being evidence of the site being worse than it was. Those sorts of lists were done on occasion before the change and they're done now because they draw in readers/hits.

    It's true in this niche market as well as in the mainstream. How long were people talking about the AFI Top 100 Films list? How many morning radio shows will wind up talking about something like Rolling Stone magazine having a top ten rock albums of all time?

  4. I see your point Kevin, those sorts of lists do generally create a lot of discussion such as "Are they serious, they listed XXXXX as #1?!?!". It's just that some of them seem like a load of filler or are just quickly slapped together and/or poorly researched. I'm thinking in particular the 'Top 5 crazy James Bond gadgets' recently whereby if the writer had of looked deeper they would have found far wackier choices. (Okay so that one in particular has nothing to do with comics, which is Newsarama's main focus, and probably just irked me given I am a huge Bond fan, but it just seemed a bit sloppy).

  5. Ha! No, it's fair. They're branching out to all entertainment coverage, so you can want to hold them accountable on that without being goofy.


It is preferred that you sign some sort of name to your posts, rather than remain completely anonymous. Even if it is just an internet nickname/alias, it makes it easier to get to know the people that post here. I hope you all will give it some consideration. Thank you.