The LJ drama generator...
Mar. 18th, 2005 04:29 pm...seems to generate very high school drama. I thought that was kind of odd, because even though I'd been told that the stereotypical LJ user was a 17 year old girl, I don't see much of that crowd. I got to wondering if the stereotype was true.
Boy, is it ever.
http://www.livejournal.com/stats.bml shows that over two-thirds of LJ users are female. All those political bloggers wondering where the women are? Yeah, they're here. Over four million of them.
Also, the top of the age curve is in the 17-18 range, so those polibloggers best stay away, 'cause lots of them are underage.
Interesting tidbits:
There are more LJ accounts to people of high school age (15-18, over a million), than there are accounts to anyone over 21 (just over 910,000). There are almost as many middle school accounts (13 and 14, nearly 159,000) as there are accounts to people over 30 (around 160,500). A lot of users are undergrad age (19-22, over 830,000), but definitely not as many as high-schoolers.
All of these numbers are for accounts in general, not active accounts. Since only about 40% of LJ accounts are active in some way, I found myself wishing for some statistics that left out all the dead accounts.
Anyway, it was interesting to find out how close to the truth the stereotype actually was.
Boy, is it ever.
http://www.livejournal.com/stats.bml shows that over two-thirds of LJ users are female. All those political bloggers wondering where the women are? Yeah, they're here. Over four million of them.
Also, the top of the age curve is in the 17-18 range, so those polibloggers best stay away, 'cause lots of them are underage.
Interesting tidbits:
There are more LJ accounts to people of high school age (15-18, over a million), than there are accounts to anyone over 21 (just over 910,000). There are almost as many middle school accounts (13 and 14, nearly 159,000) as there are accounts to people over 30 (around 160,500). A lot of users are undergrad age (19-22, over 830,000), but definitely not as many as high-schoolers.
All of these numbers are for accounts in general, not active accounts. Since only about 40% of LJ accounts are active in some way, I found myself wishing for some statistics that left out all the dead accounts.
Anyway, it was interesting to find out how close to the truth the stereotype actually was.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 10:18 pm (UTC)It's funny really. It must be the circles that i surf/search/have shared interests. I've yet to stumble upon too many of the teeneriffic pages. That being said, there are quite a few folks in my circles who are of the 19-22 age bracket...and fellow club folk. So much of our shared drama is...well...club political or alcohol induced.
That being said, you could do an LJ generator which is more adult oriented and not so realistically harsh....like "OMG, I got so drunk last night that I mailed my mortgage off without putting a stamp on it. Now i've got to call my bank and..."
Gadzooks. You're right...that's too much like real life...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:24 pm (UTC)Yah, it would just be a downer to read.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:49 pm (UTC)Yah, I personally think those people are simply looking for reasons to dismiss LJ.
LJ is a tool. It's silly to dismiss the tool just because a bunch of teenage girls use it. And, as a matter of fact, teenage girls grow up, so in a lot of ways LJ is like those Asian mobile phone operators with all the cutesy add-ons. I don't see anyone making fun of those mobile operators just because their cell phones are pink and have antenna hang toys.
even though I personally have been using LJ for a number of years now and just haven't been exposed to any of that stuff.
Moreover, I don't think there's anything wrong with that stuff; no one compels me to read it, and if there's an infrastructure to support it that I can also use for whatever it is I want to do, so much the better.
Of course, one kind of has to already know someone with an LJ before that kind of thing can happen, so it's a case of the community creating itself and growing of its own accord, using the tools provided.
Yah, it's all about the network effects...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 06:05 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:26 pm (UTC)Yah, I've never tried opendiary. I'm not sure what I'd say. I mean, maybe it'd be a better venue for restaurant listings, being more public and all, but I guess I never got roped into the community there the way I did here.
Also, you realize you have a very distinctive voice when you post? I can almost hear you as I read your words; you really write the way you talk.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:48 pm (UTC)And thanks! I'm assuming that's a good thing, because I like it when other people are like that. It's less of a good thing when I start writing papers for school the way I talk, though. *grin*
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:42 pm (UTC)I got together, last weekend, with some other people from LJ Support. I'd expected to be the oldest person there, and I was. I was only a little surprised that the gap between me and the next-oldest was 18 years.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:51 pm (UTC)That's a very good point. I started to brainstorm a less high school version and realized it was way too close to what I actually read for comfort.
I was only a little surprised that the gap between me and the next-oldest was 18 years.
:)
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 09:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 10:18 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 02:46 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 06:00 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:02 pm (UTC)Actually, what really works for me for a "heck, my life isn't that bad after all" sense is reading my own journals from a time when I was seriously down. All the schadenfreude, and none of the hurtfulness.
I intended to post about that, and never have.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 10:17 pm (UTC)Hope you're feeling better!
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:03 pm (UTC)Thanks! If this newly returned sore throat doesn't go away by Monday I'm going to the doctor.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-18 10:45 pm (UTC)Though, this is not to say that people in general aren't doing that, just that I have noticed my friends group often doesn't do it.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 12:08 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 04:05 pm (UTC)There are enough issues with the stats that I don't really want to draw huge conclusions from them, although some people certainly are; if you google "livejournal demographics" you get a lot of pages of analysis, possibly based on incomplete or unreliable data.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 03:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 10:11 pm (UTC)I'm very interested in seeing how/if the demographic spread shifts over time, whether the teenage spike represents a transient fad or instead a wave of early adopters to a medium that will become mainstream. Considering that many of "us older folks" started using email well before AOL ever existed, and would have been equally surprised at discovering our parents having email addresses, perhaps Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-03-19 12:54 pm (UTC)