It’s official: The Daily Bell lied about their website numbers
On August 6, 2012, I published the article, Daily Bell, show us independent confirmation of your readership numbers, and then we’ll believe you.
As of November 18, 2012, we now have independent confirmation of their readership numbers, thanks to them adopting an “elite methodology” they had previous blasted — Alexa’s website rankings.
The independent confirmation shows conclusively that they lied about their readership numbers.
As of November 18, 2012, their “Certified Site Metrics” show that they only receive an average of 6,717 daily visitors and 14,800 daily pageviews. Projected out over an entire year, that would give them only 2,451,705 annual visitors and 5,402,000 annual pageviews — a far cry from the 17 million page hits they claimed in a single month after their Alexa ranking had tanked below 100,000.
I first blew the whistle on the veracity of the Daily Bell’s claims about its readership numbers in my January 1, 2012 article, I call bollocks on the Daily Bell’s reported monthly page hits.
Despite the mounting evidence against their claims, they continued to perpetuate their unfounded claims, and as recently as November 10, a regular Daily Bell reader tried defending their readership number claims, showing that people are willing to cling to obviously false claims, facts and logic be damned.
I don’t rule out the possibility that they reached 17 million hits in a month through deceptive means like pinging their own servers, but that would be as honest as me claiming I received a call from the President of the United States because I called myself with a Skype ID of “President of the United States.”
My question to the so-called alternative media is, now that it’s been documented that the Daily Bell lied, what will you do about it?
I predict that their readership will continue to go up, and that Lew Rockwell and Alex Jones will continue to link to their articles, thereby calling Lew Rockwell’s and Alex Jones’ own credibility into question, at least on the basis of having such well-funded, highly-rated sites, yet not mustering the basic resources to uncover what I uncovered myself on an unpaid, part-time basis.