1,000 Posts (and 10 Points to Make on the Subject)

This is the 1,000th post on this blog. Other than a dozen guest blogs, all the writing has been mine.

And there have been more than a few surprises, as I sifted through the metrics and links I’ve seen. So for one day only, I’ll navel-gaze at some of those things that I never would have expected when I went live almost four years ago (on November 18, 2006):

1. The most popular post came this year: Scalia: “There is No Right to Secede” with a whopping 33,000 page views (as measured by Google Analytics), plus another 10,000 from this follow-up. The second most popular, also this year, with over 12,000 page views was my deconstruction of an April Fool’s Day prank:  About That White House Blogger Post from Yesterday….(NYT Gets Punked). Also popular with over 10,000 views was an April Fool’s Day prank from 2008: Supreme Court Grants Cert in “Fantasy Baseball” Case; Three Justices Recuse Themselves Due To Participation in High Court League.

It would have been nice if one of those posts was actually about New York personal injury law, but if I were a predictable one-trick pony writing this blog wouldn’t have been as much fun.

2. Given the popularity of the White House and Supreme Court posts, I’ve had some visitors from those houses: I’ve had 28 White House visitors (Hi Barack!) and 75 from the Supreme Court (Hi Nino!).

3. The most unusual citation to this blog came in an editorial in the Economic Times of India, about a post I wrote when George Bush‘s dog took a bite out of a reporter.

4. The most political citation to this blog was a mention in an editorial in The Washington Times regarding Sonia Sotomayor and her private practice firm Sotomayor & Associates, which didn’t happen to have any actual associates.

5.  After the US, the most likely place a visitor came from was: Canada, U.K., India, Australia, Germany, China, Phillipines, Vietnam and France. I had 240 visitors from Saudi Arabia, 52 from Iran and 96 from Belarus (the old country for my clan).

There’s no love for me in some other countries, though, as I’ve never had even a one-second visit from some indexing robot from North Korea, Somalia (and several other African nations), Turkmenistan and Greenland;

6.  Over the past year I’ve averaged about unique 550 visitors per day.  Saturday is, by far, the slowest. There have been over 200,000 unique visitors who’ve had almost 300,000 page views. Feedburner says I have over 500 subscribers.

7. The biggest source of referrals to this blog is Google, via a natural search. Direct hits, without a search or link, also rank very high. The blogs that have sent me the most readers are: Above the Law (over 66,000), Overlawyered (almost 10,000), Pajamas Media (Instapundit) and Law.com. Twitter, for those that care about that service, was in 16th place with just over 2,000.

8. The best single lesson in blogging that I got was when Overlawyered added me to its blog roll in my first year;

9. And the posts that were the most fun to write? Blawg Review #134 based on the New York City Marathon and the Halloween-themed Blawg Review #236 (The Bogeyman Cometh). I also have a list of ” greatest hits” that I personally liked, regardless of whether they were popular or not with readers, from 2006 –  2008 and 2009.

10. Writing wouldn’t be as much fun without the feedback. Thanks to all those that have paid a visit, read some of my ramblings, and left comments.

Tags:

11 Responses Leave a comment

  • Erik Magraken 2010.11.3 at 11:43 | Quote

    Congrats Eric, looking forward to the next 1,000.

    Yours truly,

    Erik Magraken

  • Jamison Koehler 2010.11.3 at 11:52 | Quote

    Congratulations. And, no, you are not a one-trick pony. If you were writing about New York personal injury law, I wouldn’t be reading you.

    I know there is no way to measure this, but I assume your most quoted blog entry had to do with the phrase/equation you coined: outsourcing marketing = outsourcing ethics.

  • P W Dennis 2010.11.3 at 13:33 | Quote

    Good show – one of the things that differentiates your blog from most of your personal injury counterparts is that you will accept dissenting opinions on your blog, something most of your fellow PI attorneys won’t do. The willingness to accept dissenting posts earns you my respect, even if I often disagree with you.

    That, plus you write well

  • Carolyn Elefant 2010.11.3 at 21:21 | Quote

    Congrats, Eric for consistently turning out quality for 4 years. I too look forward to more.

  • Brooks West 2010.11.4 at 09:09 | Quote

    Congratulations on the 1,000th post. My firm enjoys reading your posts.

  • Eric Turkewitz 2010.11.4 at 09:59 | Quote

    Thank to you all. It’s been fun to write.

    P.W.: On the issue of allowing dissenting opinion, I can’t figure out why others don’t allow it. It makes a site more interesting to read.

    And, perhaps more importantly, if a writer can’t defend a position against an adversary, then the position shouldn’t be taken. So dissent is not only interesting, but keeps the writer honest.

    This is particularly true for a trial lawyer. If I can’t defend a position in court, then it isn’t a position worth taking.

  • Eddie 2010.11.5 at 12:02 | Quote

    Congrats Eric. Although I am on the opposite side of the “v” I enjoy reading your posts and getting your perspective issues we deal with in New York.

Comments are closed.


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.