Five years of Worthwhile Canadian Initiative

The first WCI post was written five years ago today. Since then, the number of bloggers posting here has increased to four and more than 1,000 other posts have been published, along with some 17,000 comments. I take a certain satisfaction in these numbers, so I'm going to indulge in a meta-post below the fold.

The reason why I take satisfaction from the state of affairs on WCI is that it took a long time before it took off. I'm usually pretty coy when people ask about traffic stats, but it's not false modesty. Traffic was so small for so long that I didn't want to face the inevitable question of why I bothered.

Felix Salmon once made the distinction between blogs that were high-traffic, and those that were high-influence. Clearly, a Canadian economics blog was never going to be in the former category, but if WCI could reach those who were influencing policy debates, then it would be worth the effort. And I think that goal has been achieved: from the feedback we've received, WCI is read - with varying degrees of regularity - by a gratifyingly large number of policy wonks and journalists. (Not to mention the occasional economics professor.)

I think I can point to the exact day when that goal was achieved. On September 9, 2008, I posted this rant. A few hours later, Andrew Coyne linked to it, along with some kind words. As you can see, this marked a turning point. (I've scaled the traffic stats so that they equal 100 on the day before Andrew's link - I'm still embarrassed by the actual number.)

Soon after that, Nick started posting comments of such a quality that I made them into posts. They started drawing the attention of the broader econoblogosphere, and he finally accepted my invitation to join as a blogger in November. Traffic has increased by a factor of ten in the past two years, and it is to be hoped that some of the recent surge due to the Krugman Effect will persist.

It had never occurred to me that WCI might become a group blog; my initial hope was that more Canadian econoblogs would appear. That is still my hope (and if anyone out there is thinking about it, we will be happy to throw you whatever traffic we can), but I have come to realise that there are few who are willing to spend the time I did in the wilderness. There are significant network effects at work here, and for better or for worse, WCI has become a (minor) node. It was much easier to persuade Nick and Frances to join an existing blog than it would have been to persuade them to start a new one. And when Mike was ready to move on from his previous blogging gig, it was easier to move here than to start over.

Another unexpected surprise has been the comments section. I think it speaks volumes that when Nick's Kocherlakota rant was picked up by such heavy hitters as Paul Krugman, The Economist's Free Exchange and Brad DeLong, everyone pointed to what was being said in the comments section of the post. Now, I've seen a lot of blogs and a lot of comment sections, and the quality of the comments usually ranges from frightful to ignorant. But the posts on WCI invariably generate thoughtful comments from people who often know more about the topic at hand than we do. On behalf of Nick, Mike and Frances, let me express our gratitude for the fact that we read our comments with interest and not with dread.

A few words about the census crusade. There was probably little to distinguish my initial reaction from that of other econometricians, except for one thing: I had a blog that is read by a certain number of journalists. I knew that it would take time before we could make use of the traditional means of expressing our disapproval, and there were a couple of weeks in which fewer census stories were running than I'd like to have seen, given the importance of the issue. (I've since been informed that there were in fact several journalists who were filing stories on a regular basis; the problem was that their editors weren't running them.) It occurred to me that the intersection of people who (a) understood the problem of sample selection bias and the importance of the census and who (b) had a platform was a very small set, so I felt that it was my responsibility to do whatever I could to draw attention to the awfulness of the census decision.

One thing that has changed over the past five years is that I'm no longer shy about blogging - I didn't even tell my colleagues at first. Blogs won't displace scientific journals, but it seems pretty clear that to a very great extent, policy debates are now occurring online and in real time. I'm pleased that WCI has become a place where people can take part.

Okay, that's enough - maybe I'll do another one of these in five years. You can use the comments section to offer suggestions about design, features you'd like to see added, topics you'd like to see covered, and other related miscellany.

Comments

[David]

Congrats on the five-year mark! I definitely enjoy reading this blog and joining in the policy debate sometimes. It's nice to see the traffic numbers have been taking off, as the blog is an interesting read and a good service to Canadians with an interest about economics. Keep up the good work!

[Paul]

"You can use the comments section to offer suggestions about design, features you'd like to see added, topics you'd like to see covered, and other related miscellany."

And also to give thanks to you, Nick, Frances and Mike for taking the time to do these posts? Thanks! I doubt you guys get much renumeration for doing these.

I've been following you guys for under a year, but I always enjoy what is written here (even if a lot of it is way over my head, I've only taken "Intro to Econ"). In my opinion, this blog, and "Dash of Insight" are the two most level-headed blogs on Finance/Economics.

[Nick Rowe]

Man, those first couple of years must have been tough, Stephen. You did really well to hang in there, and make the investment, for the rest of us to benefit from.

Funnily enough, I was just this morning looking back over my old posts, from nearly 2 years ago, to see to what extent my views had changed, and how much of my old stuff would make me cringe now. Part of an unfinished "where did I get things wrong" re-examination of my beliefs.

[Just visiting from Macleans]

Congrats on the milestone. And for broadening the appeal of the site through different authors/topics/point of view.

One suggestion for improvement. How about adding a link for blog author in your categories list down the side? It'll help me search next time I argue with Moffatt. :)

[Phil Koop]

Happy birthday!

Contrary to the impression that might be conveyed by my comments ... I love your blog!

[Adam P]

Happy B-day!

[Andrew F]

Congrats Stephen! As someone who's been reading since that flat part near the left of the chart, I'm impressed and pleased with the growth in this blog. I think you can also take a bow for your contributions to the national discourse. Your census posts I think actually had a significant effect on the debate. Here's hoping you can help to inject some reality (or even some critical thinking) into the media narrative during the next election.

[jg]

Congratulations on the 5 year anniversary. I have also been one of the few who have been reading this blog in quite a long time. The kind of quality discussion that is posted here is something that had been lagging in Canada. I am very happy that the blog was able to take off and reach a much larger audience. Again, congratulations and keep up the good work.

[Leo]

Congratulations!

[Andrew Coyne]

I made you Gordon, and I can destroy you!

[Stephen Gordon]

Yeah, but now I have backup.

[Ian Lippert]

Is there a way to get RSS feeds for an individual post's comments?

[Stephen Gordon]

Hey, that was easy - it's done! There's a link at the top of the comments section.

[Mike Moffatt]

"Yeah, but now I have backup."

Oh no... I really hope this doesn't turn into some kind of West Side Story thing. Mainly because I can't dance. Plus I don't want to see Wherry or Wells dance either.

Anyhow, thanks for the 5 years everyone! I asked to join this blog because I believed it is providing an incredibly valuable service. Still do. And we really do have the best commenters. Yes, including you 'Just visiting from Macleans'.

[Mike Moffatt]

Err.. 'believed it *was*'

[Brendon]

Congratulations - as a devoted fan of Indie-rock, my temptation is to accuse you of "selling out" or "going mainstream" so I can make myself feel superior to others by saying things like, "I used to read WCI when it only had 5 hits a day".....but alas I can't since you've only gotten better with age and traffic. Kudos on the milestone!

[Lord]

What a pleasure. You seem to have cornered thought provoking posts.

[Leigh Caldwell]

Well done guys - in my too-long-to-read-consistently list of blogs, this is one of the half dozen whose new articles I always visit. Despite never having visited Canada and having no direct involvement in its economy, I find the topics mostly interesting, and always interestingly analysed. I have learned a ton from Nick in particular, with his great modelling style and enlightening thought experiments.

After 2 years of blogging with up-and-down traffic levels, it's reassuring and inspiring to see one of my favourite blogs having achieved the level of influence (and traffic) it deserves. Maybe one day I'll be able to rebase my visitor numbers to an arbitrary index and imply an impressively large following...oh wait, I can do that NOW! Another econometric lesson learned from the masters.

[JP Koning]

Good job folks. Keep it up.

[Frances Woolley]

How do our hits compare with, say, the abstract views of a typical working paper series on Ideas?
e.g. here

[Gregory Sokoloff]

Bravo! Though worthwhile, Canadian, and an initiative, it turns out to have been not boring at all.

[Just passing through]

Love this blog. I used to think the Canadian economy and politics were boring until I started readin this some months ago. Now I wish I had started reading years ago!

[Canuck]

I get the feeling that Stephen is on his way to internet superstardom. Today its WCI, tomorrow its cameos in Russell Brand movies a la Krugman. Don't forget where you came from!!!!!

[Vivi]

Do the numbers include views from readers? I use Google Reader and so visit the blog, yet I am still reading it. Maybe your influence and reach is greater than you think...

[Stephen Gordon]

Actually, no. The RSS feed isn't truncated, so we don't see page views for people who use newsreaders unless they click through. I have noticed that the number of people who subscribe to our feed on Google Reader has gone from about 200 when I first started using it two years ago, to over 800 now.

[westslope]

Congratulations!

Suggestion: Pace the posts. Especially the theory posts. With 4 bloggers you can frequently overwhelm at least this reader. For those of us with 'focus issues', deciding to read "Nothing" can be far too compelling a strategy on occasion.

And while it is true that some biologists are powerful secular priests who can reduce humans to 24-hour-busy all-you-can-eat pac-men, this profession is supposed to recognize the opportunity cost of time and actually understand common pool resource (CPR) exploitation problems (which I still believe escape many biologists).

[Frances Woolley]

Westslope - would you like to see fewer posts or shorter posts? I'd figured that one post per day was about optimal, but since there's too many anarchists in the group to coordinate, sometimes it's more than one, sometimes it's none at all.

[TJM]

I'd like to see more posts on financial economics, but I'm just glad this blog exists. Thanks Gordon and Nick for the Kocherlakota moment. That was one of the funniest things I've ever read.

[Left Outside]

Congratulations, You are the only, but best, Canadian blog I follow.

I'm glad your hits have increased, because as a blogger I know how strangely gratifying seeing them tick up can be, but it seems you have an influence in excess of what your hitcount would imply. I think I discovered this blog through a policy wonk living in England, Giles Wilkes, who know works for the UK Government's Business, Innovation and Skills Department.

Hopefully a little but of Canada has found its way to Westminster.

[westslope]

Francis: Fewer posts. Some material can be covered in a short, concise post; some of the more popular material clearly requires more than 5 paragraphs.

A more detailed, theory-intensive post may spur several days of discussions with some folks making comments of a more technical nature. A contemporary policy issue might also spur several days of discussions.

Fewer posts should in principle lead to shorter, more concise posts. That assumes bloggers intensify per post effort.

This shouldn't be like trying to get tenured faculty to stop smoking tobacco in their offices. If n=4 or some other small number, you should be able to come with up some kind of sharing rule and self-enforcing mechanism to tame the chaos. And maintain the enthusiasm.

[Stephen Gordon]

Except that chaos is one of charms of blogging. Ideas come, we write them down and then click 'publish'. Sometimes they resonate, sometimes they don't.

[Nick Rowe]

TJM: "I'd like to see more posts on financial economics,.."

OK. Done ;-)

[the_iron_troll]

Thanks for a fantastic five years, guys. Keep up the great work.