Skip to main content

Google Reader drives more traffic to websites than Google Plus, according to BuzzFeed

Google is shuttering its Reader service on July 1, and according to the company, it’s due to a decline in usage and Google’s plan to focus on services that do better. Reader, however, has a very dedicated userbase that even launched a petition in an effort to stop the service’s closure – and if BuzzFeed’s traffic data mirrors everyone else’s, they drive a lot more traffic to websites than Google+ users. 

reader-vs-plus
Image used with permission by copyright holder

A BuzzFeed post by staff writer John Hermann reveals that compared to Reader, Google+ drives very little traffic to its partner sites with over 300 million users. A pie chart made by the social news website’s data team (pictured above) illustrates it quite well: traffic from Google’s social network is but a sliver in a pie chart with traffic from the dying RSS reader. And that pie chart, which represents data from August of last year until today, doesn’t even include traffic from masked referrals and from news apps that pull feeds from Reader, so Google+’s share might even be smaller.

This shouldn’t come too much of a surprise to people who’ve been following the growth of G+, though, as a study published in 2012 revealed that even Pinterest drives more traffic to websites than Google+. Note that the company claims its fledgling social network has over 100 million active users now, which could very well be inflated as we all know you automatically get a Google+ account when you sign up for another one of its services like GMail. 

If Reader’s usage is dwindling yet it delivers more traffic to a network as big as Buzzfeed’s, what does that say? Are Google+ users just not inclined to share content with one another? Do BuzzFeed’s partners just happen to be voracious Reader users, as well? Or has Reader actually been thriving, and yet the company decided to shut it down anyway to concentrate on Google+, as a former Google product manager speculates? Sound off in the comments, and let us know what you think!

Mariella Moon
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Mariella loves working on both helpful and awe-inspiring science and technology stories. When she's not at her desk writing…
4 CPUs you should buy instead of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D sitting on a motherboard.

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is one of the best gaming processors you can buy, and it's easy to see why. It's easily the fastest gaming CPU on the market, it's reasonably priced, and it's available on a platform that AMD says it will support for several years. But it's not the right chip for everyone.

Although the Ryzen 7 7800X3D ticks all the right boxes, there are several alternatives available. Some are cheaper while still offering great performance, while others are more powerful in applications outside of gaming. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a great CPU, but if you want to do a little more shopping, these are the other processors you should consider.
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

Read more
Even the new mid-tier Snapdragon X Plus beats Apple’s M3
A photo of the Snapdragon X Plus CPU in the die

You might have already heard of the Snapdragon X Elite, the upcoming chips from Qualcomm that everyone's excited about. They're not out yet, but Qualcomm is already announcing another configuration to live alongside it: the Snapdragon X Plus.

The Snapdragon X Plus is pretty similar to the flagship Snapdragon X Elite in terms of everyday performance but, as a new chip tier, aims to bring AI capabilities to a wider portfolio of ARM-powered laptops. To be clear, though, this one is a step down from the flagship Snapdragon X Elite, in the same way that an Intel Core Ultra 7 is a step down from Core Ultra 9.

Read more
Gigabyte just confirmed AMD’s Ryzen 9000 CPUs
Pads on the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

Gigabyte spoiled AMD's surprise a bit by confirming the company's next-gen CPUs. In a press release announcing a new BIOS for X670, B650, and A620 motherboards, Gigabyte not only confirmed that support has been added for next-gen AMD CPUs, but specifically referred to them as "AMD Ryzen 9000 series processors."

We've already seen MSI and Asus add support for next-gen AMD CPUs through BIOS updates, but neither of them called the CPUs Ryzen 9000. They didn't put out a dedicated press release for the updates, either. It should go without saying, but we don't often see a press release for new BIOS versions, suggesting Gigabyte wanted to make a splash with its support.

Read more