The Economist takes note of a study entitled "Blogs and the Economics of Reciprocal Attention." Here's the abstract:
We argue in this paper that attention to one's blog is won by paying attention to other bloggers. We derive properties of blogging networks from a model where bloggers trade attention and content. The predictions from the model are then checked against a novel dataset from LiveJournal, a major blogging community. As predicted, the activity of bloggers is found to be related to the size and level of reciprocity within a blogger's relational network. We also find that bloggers who do not adhere to reciprocity norms are sanctioned with a lower number of readers.
In the future, all important research will use LiveJournal as its main dataset, so, I guess, enjoy it while it's still novel. Also, you know, ugh.
When they're done with that, maybe they can look into this "zine" thing.
I have written a cogent and quite beautiful piece about this phenomenon, if you'd care to link me.
I used LiveJournal as the main dataset for my dissertation – "Kierkegaard, Robespierre, GaGa: Have They Had Work Done?"
This is like those great studies I get to read about on the marketing/"news" screens in our building's elevator.
Like the one that determined (I wish I was kidding) that people have more pleasant dreams when they smell roses than when they smell dead fish.
Science!
APPENDIX A
Our findings suggest an inverse correlation between hotness and desperation. For example, while most LiveJournal users admit that Kim Kardashian is nominally "hot" she is also identified as a "desperate" and "fame-whoring", qualities which detract from her otherwise empirical hotness. These factors also seem to inform users' opinions as to who they would hit it with, who wore "it" better, and whether the haters of the celebrity in question should step to the left.
Sadly link-love, like love-love, is rarely reciprocal.
I wonder if they realized they stumbled on a gold mine of marketing data for the 13-24 female self-loathing shut-in demo.