ClimateProgress milestone: 40,000 subscribers

Today, Feedburner identified more than 40,000 “readers” of ClimateProgress.

That figure, which is near the top of the right hand column, is updated by Feedburner daily.  You may have noticed that while it has been growing steadily month by month, it can fluctuate wildly on a daily basis (and it will no doubt drop down below 40,000 this weekend).  In 2007, Rick Klau, Feedburner’s Vice President of Publisher Services, explained why that happens here.

That number isn’t, of course, the total number of readers of ClimateProgress on any given day.  Klau explained, “When we report a subscriber number, that represents the total number of individuals who had the feed requested on their behalf on that day.”  And, of course, not everyone who gets the feed reads it.

On the other hand, I have a large number of readers who don’t get the feed but just come directly to the website.  During the week I routinely get another 15,000 to 20,000 visits every day.

I post the Feedburner number because it is independently determined and fairly credible, compared to most Web statistics (see “Hits charade: WattsUpWithThat hypes itself with dubious webstats, while lowballing other blogs“).  As I’ve noted before, my webstats programs, including Urchin, as well as all websites that claim to track and compare traffic statistics for blogs, don’t capture subscribers (except for subscribers who actually click on a link and come here), and thus miss most of my readers.

I have chosen a subscriber-driven strategy.  I devote a lot of prime real estate at the top of CP to getting subscriptions.  I want people to read the content and I don’t care if they come here to do so (or go to other websites where I repost some content, such as Grist).   Visits to CP have risen fairly steadily over the past couple of years, with dips during the summer.  But subscribers have soared from 2,800 at the start of 2009 to about 28,000 by the end of March 2010 to 40,000 today.

I suspect that I have the most widely read content in the climate blogosphere, but there is no reliable way of knowing for sure.  And, of course, I have the best readers and commenters.  But then you knew that, already, didn’t you!  This blog is only as successful as it is because of you.  Thanks!

Join the growing number of subscribers to the ClimateProgress feed by clicking here — or get the posts of the previous 24 hours delivered straight to your mailbox every day by clicking here.  Or get a link to each post, along with its headline, as it is published by following ClimateProgress on Twitter.

18 Responses to ClimateProgress milestone: 40,000 subscribers

  1. fj2 says:

    Great news!

    Except, that the number should be many times larger.

    Superb effort!

  2. fj2 says:

    Should be valid reason to get the resources to expand.

    [JR: I am working on that!]

  3. Daniel Ives says:

    Congratulations, Joe. It is a testament to your truthful description of the science, your thorough debunking, and your media and politician criticism. It is you who deserve a “Thank You” from your readers.


  4. mattlant says:

    Congrats. Very informative, timely and constantly updated. One reason why I visit several times a day, and recommend to others.

    Keep up the great work Joe.

  5. Ominous Clouds Overhead says:

    Thanks, Joe, very good blog. We need more like you.

  6. toby says:

    Well done, Joe, congratulations!!!

  7. Edward says:

    Not enough readers. Is there a way to make it a talk radio channel so that commuting drivers could listen to it?

  8. catman306 says:

    We might just be able to ‘turn this thing around’. We have to try. Thanks, Joe!

  9. Kota says:

    40,000 down … 40,000,000 to go!
    Go go go!!!

  10. Esop says:

    40,000 is a good start!

  11. MapleLeaf says:

    I’ve been watching those numbers steadily increase. Congratulations Joe.

    I’m sure that the RSS feeds will continue to escalate….

  12. MarkF says:

    thanks for doing the unenjoyable job of dissecting the stupidity.

  13. Wit's End says:

    Romm’N’Legions love you JR!

  14. Sarah says:

    So, 40,000 is 800 per US state (neglecting international readers). If they all showed up on a single day at their state houses to demonstrate and demand to speak to their state reps, the news media would notice.
    Even with just 10% turnout, a group of 80 would be noticeable at the state level.

    That kind of effort fits with Jeff’s comments that the public needs to see climate activists “activating” not just talking/writing/blogging.

    Groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists could help provide specific talking points for each state.

  15. Roger says:

    Congrats Joe! Your Romm’N’Legions follow appreciatively.

    Thank you for all you do, and for speaking at the White House Work Party on 10.10.10., along with Jim Hansen and other climate heroes.
    Let’s keep encouraging Obama to show much more leadership in 2011!

    Together, we can make it a safer place for the kids and grandkids.
    Warm regards,

  16. Roger says:

    Sarah, above, hits a strong chord with her suggestions relating to concentration of power. It seems that application of this tried and true concept has escaped the climate movement to date. What do you think, Joe? Does power-enhancing focus make sense as we get closer to the tipping points that may spell an end to our ability to save man?

  17. Peter M says:



    Best loved wines at risk from climate change

  18. DavidCOG says:

    > …while it has been growing steadily month by month, it can fluctuate wildly on a daily basis…

    You mean short-term noise can sometimes hide the long-term trend? That sounds strangely familiar….

    I predict Watts will compare your stats from Friday with those of Sunday and conclude your readership is collapsing.