About ten days ago, gossip blog Gawker and its sister sites Gizmodo, Lifehacker and others switched over to a drastic redesign which was met with plenty of jeers. People always complain about design changes, but this time it looks like several of Gawker’s sites actually took a major hit to traffic.

According to Quantcast, which directly measures the sites, Gawker’s U.S. daily unique visitors were cut in half from a high of 561,000 to 257,000 (see chart above). Gizmodo dropped from 746,000 to 420,000 in the U.S. Sitemeter shows an even more harrowing freefall for Gizmodo (see chart at right). Jezebel and Deadspin also took hits. Only Lifehacker seems to be holding steady.

The new design (bottom screenshot) features one top story in the main column, with a few other featured stories below, and more headlines in a thinner column along the side. But it is a bit disorienting because when you scroll down, the righthand headline column doesn’t move, only only the main column does. And sometimes there is only one big full featured post on the homepage, as is the case right now with Gizmodo and a story about Steve Jobs demolished mansion in Woodside, CA.

You can revert to a traditional blog view, but the default is the “top story” view. Most people will probably never figure out how to toggle back to the comforts of the classic reverse-chron design, so they leave instead in frustration. Tweets about the redesign are more negative than positive. Some typical ones:

I never thought a web design could instill so much malice into me but the @gawker redesign just makes me want to RAGE!—
Ian (@pjfry) February 18, 2011

@davidgustav The Gawker redesign is tragic. I just figured out last night where/what the "tags" are. And I do this stuff for a living!—
Liberation (@liberationnyc) February 17, 2011

@lampbane The Gawker redesign is so crappy that I've gone from daily repeat visits to not visiting any of their sites at all.—
Edgar Governo (@pseudohistorian) February 15, 2011

Ah well, maybe they’ll come around. There is one silver lining, however. For those people who do stick around, pageviews seem to be bouncing back to the pre-redesign levels. As long as Gawker doesn’t drive way all of its readers, it should be fine.

Media measurement and Web analytics company Quantcast has some interesting numbers on mobile browsing in the United States, and it’s preparing to release some of those statistics, across vendors. Earlier today, the company put up a teaser blog post, showing two graphs, one of them representing the share of mobile Web consumption in the US per mobile OS.

As you can tell, Quantcast concludes Android is storming ahead, now taking up a 25 percent share of total mobile Web consumption in the US. Apple’s iOS, meanwhile, is seeing its share decline, from approximately 67 percent in May 2009 to 56 percent in August 2010.

Provided this trend continues at current rates, Android’s share should be equal to that of iOS in another twelve months, at least according to Quantcast. It’s important to note that both are still growing rapidly in absolute numbers – what we’re seeing is the relative shares shifting.

Research In Motion’s share is roughly 10 percent according to Quantcast, as much as all ‘other’ mobile operating systems combined, but showing no signs of growth whatsoever.

Clearly, the battle for dominance over the mobile Web is being fought by two companies only at this point, and their names are Google and Apple.

In a second graph, Quantcast reports that Android took share from every corner of the market last month. The company adds that it’s the operating system’s best month share gain since November 2009, when it surpassed the 10 percent share mark.

Now, we should point out that another Web measurement company, Net Applications, has just released statistics that suggest iOS dominates the mobile Web far more clearly on a global level.

According to Net Applications, devices that run the iOS operating system (the iPhone, iPod touch and the iPad) accounted for 1.1 percent of all hardware on the Internet last month, compared to a mere 0.2 percent share for Android. This suggests a 6:1 ratio in favor of iOS, looking at worldwide statistics.

It also tells us Android is making strides in the United States much faster than in the rest of the world when it comes to browsing the mobile Web, placing Quantcast’s and Net Applications’ numbers side by side.

In addition, Quantcast has appointed Michael Blum as General Counsel; he was previously at Silicon Valley law firm Fenwick & West.

At Google, Pekarovic founded, developed and directed the organization responsible for supporting the operational finance activities of Google’s Global Sales Force and Business Development teams. He worked closely with the Global SVP of Sales and CFO of the Mountain View company.

Blum was a Partner in the Intellectual Property Group at Fenwick & West. According to the press release announcing both appointments, his practice focused on “structuring and negotiating relationships to turn technology and intellectual property into revenue; on developing strategic patent portfolios; and on assessing, valuing and allocating risk”.

Both roles are newly created and report to Quantcast Co-Founder and CEO Konrad Feldman.

Quantcast was founded in 2006 and raised over $50 million to date, most recently closing a $27.5 million round from Cisco Systems, Polaris Venture Partners, The Founders Fund and Revolution Ventures.

Perhaps they’re ramping up recruitment to prep for an IPO?

We were recently pointed to this post from last month by Ben Edelman, a Harvard privacy advocate. In it, he details the data the Upromise toolbar collects and sends out. This toolbar is used by college students looking for savings on various items across the web, and can be quite useful. But until a few weeks ago, it appears they were also sending web browsing (and more personal) data to Compete without anyone’s knowledge. Writes Edelman:

As shown in the “host:” header of each of the preceding communications, transmissions flow to the consumerinput.com domain. Whois reports that this domain is registered to Boston, MA traffic-monitoring service Compete, Inc. Compete’s site promises clients access to “detailed behavioral data,” and Compete says more than 2 million U.S. Internet users “have given [Compete] permission to analyze the web pages they visit.”

He continues:

Upromise’s installation sequence does not obtain users’ permission for this detailed and intrusive tracking. Quite the contrary: Numerous Upromise screens discuss privacy, and they all fail to mention the detailed information Upromise actually transmits.

The Upromise toolbar installation page touts the toolbar’s purported benefits at length, but mentions no privacy implications whatsoever.

If a user clicks the prominent button to begin the toolbar installation, the next screen presents a 1,354-word license agreement that fills 22 on-screen pages and offers no mechanism to enlarge, maximize, print, save, or search the lengthy text. But even if a user did read the license, the user would receive no notice of detailed tracking. Meanwhile, the lower on-screen box describes a “Personalized Offers” feature, which is labeled as causing “information about [a user's] online activity [to be] collected and used to provide college savings opportunities” But that screen nowhere admits collecting users’ email addresses or credit card numbers. Nor would a user rightly expect that “information about … online activity” means a full log of every search and every page-view across the entire web.

Shortly after Edelman’s post (and a follow-up PCMag.com post), Upromise changed their privacy policy to alert their users that this data is being sent out. But the company declined to state how long the issue had been going on.

Privacy implications aside, it’s interesting that this is one of the ways Compete was gathering data. And it would be good to know where else they get it from. On their site, they only vaguely note that they have “developed a unique methodology created by experts in the fields of mathematics, statistics and the data sciences to aggregate, transform, enhance and normalize data in order to estimate U.S. Internet traffic.” They also claim to have over two million members — but apparently, at least some of them (such as the Upromise toolbar users), don’t know they’re members.

I’ve sent a message to Compete asking them what other means (other toolbars, etc) they use to gather their data. In light of this Upromise fiasco, it seems wise that they should disclose that kind of information. I’ll update if and when I hear back.

You can read the whole post over at Calacanis.com. He doesn’t pull any punches (in fact he goes on a tangent about punching bullies in the face as a kid) He suggests that companies refuse to pay Comscore for the service, and that investors short the stock.

Comscore investor Fred Wilson laid into Jason with a couple of comments on a copy of the post on Posterous. He also randomly dragged me into the argument (I think he’s still mad about the Zynga stuff):

jason, since you’ve slandered me, i’ll respond here.
you don’t know what you are talking about. comscore (SCOR) is a public company. you can go look at their financials. they aren’t exactly printing money. it’s hard to measure the internet and they spend well over $100mm per year doing just that. they aren’t “shaking down” anyone. their move to a hybrid model is a reaction to many of the criticisms that people have had of their panel model over the years. but it isn’t cheap to manage that data either. someone has to pay for this. or of course we could all just let google do it for free. we know how that will play out. eric schmidt has said “analytics are infinitely monetizable” well for google they are. if we want a third party keeping everyone honest, the market has to pay something for it. as i said, go look at comscore’s financials and you’ll see they aren’t exactly getting rich doing that.

and the “huge venture return i made in comscore” is in your imagination. i have not ever made any money personally on my comscore investment.

please don’t spew lies about me jason. with “friends” like you, who needs enemies?

and

hey Karl, i bet if you and i sat down and had a coffee or a beer and talked for a half hour or an hour you’d come away with a different perspective. if you get your data on me and my investments from Jason and his friend Mike Arrington, of course you are going to come away with an impression that isn’t correct. they like to sling mud at me and my investments. i am not going to get into a pissing match with them online. but i am “kinda sad” that you are getting the wrong impression. i don’t know where you live but if we are ever in the same town, give me that half hour and i bet you’ll have a different and better opinion.

Comscore’s CMO Linda Abraham also weighed into the argument on Posterous:

Jason:
You really need to get your facts straight.

1) First of all, we measure Unique People rather than Unique Cookies which web analytics systems erroneously can unique visitors. I would challenge you to find any kind of server side measurement system that measures people, not machines or cookies. To show you how absurd server side numbers are, AOL Inc. had about 259 MM Unique cookies which gives it over 125% reach compared to a true reach of 54%. The inflation is driven by cookie deletion, multiple browsers, multiple machines for the same users, multiple devices etc… Large companies do not complain about their numbers because they know their server side numbers are flawed as obviously evident by the AOL metrics, not because ‘comScore fixes your number”. This dynamic is less obvious with smaller sites—they don’t realize how inflated their numbers are until their reach starts exceeding 100%.

2) Our Hybrid measurement is not mere pixel tracking as you assert. Our panel, which allows us to distinguish people from cookies, is a central part of the system used to correct for the inflation of cookie based server-side measurement.

3) You are confused about our pricing, so let me explain it to you:

• We charge a one-time setup fee of $5,000 that enables us to audit the beacon implementation and make sure we are measuring everyone consistently. This means auditing beacons on every page to identify pages with multiple beacons that result in over-counting, and pages with no beacon that result in undercounting. We have found about 15% of sites have placed multiple beacons on a page, and over 30% of sites that have missed a number of pages on their site. This auditing function is crucial to protect the system from being gamed. Imagine what happens, if unchecked, sites start cross beaconing each other to inflate their audience. The ‘free’ services do not incur this cost because not much is expected of them. We have seen many sites where the Quantcast beacons ‘fire’ up to 7 times from a single page!
• The initial $5,000 setup fee pays for that audit and gives you access to our reports on comScore Direct $5K for 6 month period.
• The $10K annual price is for ongoing access to our comScore Direct reporting system. However, you don’t have to subscribe to continue being measured using the hybrid methodology. As long as you maintain your beacons we will measure you with our hybrid methodology FREE of charge.

4) You may be upset because you don’t get a free subscription to the reports. We make no apologies for charging for access to our reporting system. That is the only revenue source we have to cover our costs. In doing so, we make a ‘mafia like’ pre-tax margin of less than 9% . Google and Quantcast offer metrics for ‘free’ because they have an advertising supported model. They use the data they collect from users or publishers to sell targeted advertising. We chose not to have a business model based on selling advertising, because we do not want to compete with our clients who make a living selling advertising, and who need a neutral third party to provide audience data that is free from conflicts of interest.

5) As for the free trial offer we made you, you need to get your facts straight. When we rolled out this new hybrid system, we needed some sites to beacon with us early to test it out and get user feedback .This is a common practice you might have heard of—it’s called ‘free beta.’ You chose not to participate, which is fine. But there was no attempt to ‘buy your silence’ and we challenge you to prove otherwise.

We provide a valuable service and we are proud of it. We offer the most accurate 3rd audience measurement tools available which are paid for in real dollars by more than 1,200 companies who, unlike you, freely choose them despite available ‘free’ services.

It’s unfortunate that you were picked on as a child. It must have been difficult to you. But you’re an adult now. If you want to debate, please do so with facts, not just blind fury.

My take – Abraham is right. Comscore is by far the best analytics service available. Alexa, Compete and Hitwise are seriously flawed (I may dive into this more in a future post). Quantcast has its own issues and is subject to abuse, which we’ve seen directly. Comscore uses panels and statistical analysis to generate traffic estimates. The new product measure traffic directly off of website servers and should provide nearly perfect data.

And the fact is that the company probably does need to charge to do this properly, as Abraham argues. If a competitor can provide the same service for less (or free), God Bless Them and I’ll support them all the way. Until then, the market will bear what it can bear.

We always choose to use Comscore data first when its available, and will continue to do so. Here’s an example of how useful it can be.

So in this case I respectfully disagree with Jason on the merits of his argument. And I ask Fred Wilson to try to keep me out of his various fights.

The mobile Web grew 110 percent in the U.S. last year and 148 percent worldwide as measured by growth in pageviews, according to a new Quantcast Mobile Trends report (embedded below). Even so, the mobile Web accounted for only 1.26 percent of Web consumption in the U.S. (and 0.99 percent worldwide).

Apple’s iPhone and iPod Touch drove much of this growth. In the U.S., Apple has a commanding 65 percent market share of mobile Web access as of the end of December, 2009. Only 41 percent of that is from the iPhone. The other 24 percent comes from the iPod Touch, which has been growing rapidly as a mobile Web device even though it only has WiFi. Globally, Apple also dominates in every market except Africa (where simpler and cheaper Java phones still rule).

Android isn’t really much of a player yet outside the U.S. But inside the U.S, Android is coming up fast, with 12 percent market share. Android is now the No. 2 mobile Web operating system, recently beating out Blackberry’s RIM OS, which has an 8.7 percent market share.

The sudden growth spurt of Android jives with Admob data showing that it doubled since October. And that’s before today’s release of the Nexus One. Most of that share comes from HTC handsets, and Verizon’s launch of the Droid in November. (Motorola’s Droid is the yellow part of the chart below.

Quantcast Mobile Report1 http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf?document_id=24826531&access_key=key-2einbf1u9os07n9kgxsn&page=1&version=1&viewMode=list

In the announcement, Quantcast says the extra funding will primarily be used to support the adoption of its recently launched Quantcast Media Program, which is essentially a marketplace where marketers and Web publishers can connect based on accurate and actionable data.

In the release, Quantcast claims its free audience measurement solutions are now being used for some 10 million websites, and that its products are used by such media companies as NBC Universal, Time Inc., Hulu.com, CBS Corporation, Fox News, ABC Inc. and Bloomberg.

Quantcast offers a “new media measurement service” that competes with companies such as comScore, HitWise and Alexa. Quantcast combines directly measured audience data with panel-based estimates to deliver third-party metrics on websites for advertisers or others seeking traffic data. Participants in Quantcast’s direct measurement program include Fox, CBS, Belo Corporation, AccuWeather, Slide, and IDG.

As part of the deal Ken Howery of Founders Fund and Mike Hirshland of Polaris Venture Partners will join Quantcast’s Board of Directors. The new funding will be used “to support burgeoning demand for its direct-measurement audience service and related solutions.”

Today they will announce a second fund, Founders Fund II. It’s much larger – $220 million. And unlike the first fund, the money comes mostly from outside investors. The new fund will allow Founders Fund to make 15-20 new investments, including pro-rata investments in follow on rounds.

A couple of investments have been made out of the new fund, they say, but have not yet been disclosed.

Founders Fund partners have deep connections in Silicon Valley, which help with deal flow (Peter Thiel, founder and former CEO of Paypal, Ken Howery, founder and former CFO of PayPal, Luke Nosek, founder and former Vice President of PayPal and Sean Parker, founder and former CEO or President of Napster, Plaxo and Facebook). But they also approach deals differently than most other funds.

Sean Parker said today in a phone interview that a glut in venture capital, combined with reduced capital needs of most startups, has led to a shift in balance of power between entrepreneurs and VCs. Founders Fund recognizes that shift and has evolved does deals a little differently because of it. For example, they invented and promote the issuance of a special class of stock, called Series FF, which allows entrepreneurs to take money off the table much earlier in their company’s lifecycle. They also allow significantly more liberal voting rights to founder board members than many other funds. See this article in the SF Chronicle earlier this year for more on how they do business.