In tonight's attempt at quantifying the Blogosphere, I've gathered Microsoft Word's readability statistics for eleven blogs (ten popular, and mine). Of the popular blogs, five are written by professional writers (Daily Pundit, Dave Barry, Ken Layne, Matt Welch, and James Lileks), while five are not (The Volokh Conspiracy, Instapundit, Eschaton (Atrios), Silflay Hraka, and Dustbury.com).
I presume that Atrios is not a professional writer. In a sense, law professors (Instapundit and many of the Volokh conspirators) are professional writers, but their statistics were very different from those of the professionals listed above, so I left them separate.
According to this Hallmarks of Good Writing page:
Unless you are using passive voice for a specific purpose (e.g., to soften bad news, in certain scientific writing), try to keep the percentage of passive sentences less than about 5-10%. Why? Passive voice sentences (i.e., sentences in which the subject receives rather than performs the actions of the verb) are boring and lifeless. The grammar checking function in Word can help you find and fix sentences that contain passive voice verb forms.
The average percentage of passive-voice sentences in this sample is 7%. The average for the professional writers is 4%, and the average for the non-professionals (as I've categorized them) is 9%. (For what it's worth, the average for my site was 8%.) The professional writers ranged from 2% (Dave Barry) to 7% (Matt Welch), and the non-pros ranged from 6% (Instapundit) to 11% (Silflay Hraka and Atrios).
The same good-writing site notes:
The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level measure computes readability based on the average number of syllables per word and the average number of words per sentence. The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level indicates a grade-school level. For example, a score of 8.0 means that an eighth grader would understand the document. Standard writing approximately equates to the seventh-to-eighth-grade level. Try to keep your documents at about 12 or below.
The average Grade Level in this sample is 9.1. The average for the professional writers is 8.0, and the average for the non-professionals (as I've categorized them) is 10.2. (For what it's worth, the average for my site was 9.4.) The professionals ranged from 7.0 (Lileks) to 10.0 (Matt Welch), and the non-professionals ranged from 9.6 (Dustbury) to 11.4 (the Volokh gang).
I also note that the analysis of Bill Quick's blog includes its inline comments, perhaps biasing these results. However, there was only one comment on the page from Tony Foresta (no passive sentences, 7.0 Grade Level).
For this small sample of websites, there was no statistically significant relationship between Grade Level and the number of inbound links.
The small amount of overlap between these two samples is interesting (to me, at least). I hope to extend this analysis in the days to come.
Update: According to Microsoft Word, the statistics for this post are 0% passive sentences and 10.8 Grade Level. Given the amount of quotations I include here, I wonder if this is a more accurate measurement.
Update the update: I've been thinking about gathering these statistics for awhile now, but this post by CGHill:
30 March 2003 Ne plus ultraSooner or later, someone always asks: "So who's the best actual writer with a blog?"
Easy enough. I point to James Lileks, and quickly comes the demurral: "But he's, like, a professional."
In that case, the question becomes: "Who's the best writer with a blog who also has a non-writing day job?"
Still easy enough. This time I point to Bill Whittle.
It's an honor to be on the same continent as these guys.
and this comment on the post:
So, does being a professional somehow not make you a "real" writer? I know the average person has a warped idea about the value of scribes, but this is ridiculous... I guess we're in the same boat as all the allegedly overpaid pro athletes: we should all refuse paychecks and play simply for the love of the game. :)Posted by CT at 4:34 PM, 30 March 2003
may have spurred me.
Bill Whittle's post linked by Mr. Hill contained 11% passive sentences and was at a 9.6 Grade Level, and I very much recommend it.
Posted by oscarjr at April 3, 2003 10:58 PM | TrackBackTruly, Oscar, you are a driven man.
(God forbid you should have to get out and walk.)
Posted by: CGHill at 08:22 PMFor what it's worth, living in Manhattan, I walk almost everywhere. Of course, on the rare occasion when I'm not walking, I really am driven.
Posted by: Oscar Jr. at 10:48 PMFor unexplained reasons, Microsoft’s version of the Flesch-Kincaid does not score above grade 12, although the original formula scored up to a graduate school level. Since any grade level above 12 will be reported as grade 12, documents at a graduate school reading level will be reported as grade 12--a measurement error of about 7 grades. Since all research relying on Word’s Flesch-Kincaid formula seriously underestimates a document’s grade level, all of the research done on health materials using Word’s Flesch-Kincaid is seriously flawed.
More information about the Flesch-Kincaid formula can be found on Microsoft’s web site at:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;q167655&
Several readability researchers have contacted Microsoft about this problem, but the company has neither acknowledged the problem nor fixed it.
Researchers relying on readability statistics should consider other programs, such as Readability Calculations (www.micropowerandlight.com), SpellCatcherPlus (www.rainmaker.inc), or GrammarExpert Plus (www.wintertree-software.com), or the readability formulas in WordPerfect.
Make sure that your readability software accurately measures readability. Before putting your trust (and your reputation) into any readability software, analyze a few documents by hand and compare your results to the software.
For more information:
Mark Hochhauser, Ph.D.
Readability Consultant
3344 Scott Avenue North
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Phone: 763-521-4672
Fax: 763-521-5069
E-mail: MarkH38514@aol.com
