I expect blogs to spew crap (like mine), but you might expect a site owned by The Wall Street Journal to be a little better. While the topic of web traffic produced by tablets is not the most exciting thing in the news these days, here is just one example of what journalism has become across the spectrum. Here is an excerpt from an article from AllThingsD.com:
Microsoft’s Windows RT-powered Surface Tablet has been on sale for a little over a month now, available for purchase exclusively from the Microsoft Store (online and brick-and-mortar). And if early Web traffic from the device is any indication, it hasn’t exactly been flying off the shelves.
Take a look at the latest stats from online ad network and data analytics from Chitika, which found that Microsoft Surface users generate less than one percent of all North American tablet traffic.
Now here is the actual study:
This study was drawn from a date range of November 12th to November 18th 2012, and only includes traffic from the U.S. and Canada. This week was chosen in order to eliminate any Black Friday-related traffic spikes which could skew the results.
So the device goes on sale on October 26th and the study starts November 12 and ends November 18th. Yet the article clearly implies that the stats cover more than a month of the device being on the market. How hard would it be to put in your article the actual dates of the study? I don't think Microsoft would expect their few week old tablet to be competing with the iPad in web traffic surveys, but apparently this guy does.