Readers of What’s Wrong with the World tend to be fairly young. Fully sixty-five percent of our readership is under 45. The most common single age category among respondents to the survey was 25-35 years.
Almost a dozen first-time readers filled out the survey. It is difficult to account for this perplexity. On the other hand, close to sixty percent of respondents are daily or weekly readers.
While we have no grey wizards or Chestertonian geniuses (and at least one remark complaining of the poor humor), we do have a few autodidacts. Overwhelmingly, however, our readers are highly educated, not to say overeducated. Ninety percent have some college instruction. Nearly half have earned a postgraduate degree.
Almost half, likewise, are securely and gainfully employed. We have several titans among our readers — of both industry and home economy. We have about twice the number of unemployed readers as we do business owners. Several readers, poor fellers (for over eight in ten readers are male), are destitute and jobless. Students outnumber retirees.
Our readers span the globe, from Australia to Kingstown, Thailand to the Czech Republic. Canadians appear to outnumber Londoners, inclusive of the guy who gave a hockey team for his hometown. Colorado is well represented, as are California and Texas, Tennessee and New Jersey.
Almost six in ten readers never set down a comment; combined with those who rarely comment, lurkers make up eighty-five percent of our readership. Only two percent say they comment often.
Politically, over half of our readers are conservatives or traditionalists. Almost one in ten are monarchists, still alive and unhanged. Add up the socialists, along with the social democrats, liberals, leftists, moderates, centrists and Democrats, and you get to about twenty percent opposition readership: pretty solid considering that a half dozen readers complained of our rough treatment of dissent. Anarchists are overrepresented because the Editor blundered when he composed the survey, inexcusably neglecting the category “chirping sectaries,” meaning libertarians.
Roman Catholics cleared forty percent among respondents. Protestants approached it. Mere Christians came in third. No pagans or Jews filled out the survey, but several Muslims, a few Orthodox, and even a pre-Reformation Christian did. Agnostics and atheists made up about ten percent of respondents.
Thanks to all who took the time to participate.
Comments (11)
What exactly does pre-Reformation Christian refer to? Apparently not Catholic or Orthodox, which is what I would have thought. Nestorian? Donatist? Sedevecantist? Mormon? A Protestant who doesn't like the word Protestant? A Catholic who doesn't like the word Catholic? Or do they mean they're a time traveler and actually come from before the Reformation? Perhaps this was explained on the survey, but I'm afraid I only check this space once or twice a month at most myself and didn't see it.
Posted by Hrodgar | July 8, 2014 12:56 AM
Hrodgar, good question. There were a few options on there that I was curious about, I didn't know if people chose to identify that way or not.
It is my understanding that some people, (perhaps some of the "Jews for Jesus" type people?) say that it is not necessary to distinguish between being Jewish and being Christian, since (a) Jesus was Jewish, and (b) all of his apostles were, and (c) the entirety of the Judaic history was designed by God to lead up to Christianity, so Christianity is simply the continuation of Judaism properly understood. I would take a guess that some Christians more or less analogously take the view that Christianity properly understood doesn't separate out and distinguish a 'Catholic' version from a 'Protestant' version. Who lays claim to the thesis that both varieties are Christian, and they simply don't grasp each other's different emphases? That "Christianity" simply speaking doesn't care about those differences?
But I would bet that Paul can give a better answer.
Oh, and thank you for your input and for filling out the survey. All the better for us to know who (in a manner of speaking, that is) we are speaking to.
Does anybody have a clue as to why so many of our readers write comments either never or rarely?
Posted by Tony | July 8, 2014 12:14 PM
Tony, I don't comment a lot because a) I'm often too busy to take the time to make an articulate comment, b) I come here to enjoy learning from the wonderfully informative posts and comments, c) I often feel a bit out of my league with the level of knowledge and/or technicality of some of the posts. If i don't feel I have something more to add than "great post," I'll usually pass on commenting. Also, Lydia has noted that if the posts are linked at FB, then conversations get going there instead of here -- I don't usually comment there, but I've seen quite a few comments from folks there whom I don't see here.
Posted by Beth Impson | July 8, 2014 12:40 PM
And yes, I know that "I" should be capitalized. English teachers should just stay off the web, I sometimes think. :)
Posted by Beth Impson | July 8, 2014 12:41 PM
Beth, having seen some of your work in the Christendom Review, I seriously doubt that you could be "out of your league" in the com boxes here. But I also know that it can be difficult to take the time to post something that is thought through all the way instead of just off-the-cuff, and some people just are uncomfortable saying something off-the-cuff. People have different comfort levels, of course. Thank you for the times you do comment, I always appreciate them.
Posted by Tony | July 8, 2014 2:12 PM
"Pre-Reformation Christian" is how Eric Voegelin described himself; it may be coextensive with medievalist.
I agree with Tony on the unlikeliness of Beth Impson being out of her league. Maybe she's just worried that she'll be too impish in the comments? (Okay. Sorry.)
Posted by Paul J Cella | July 8, 2014 2:59 PM
Thanks, Tony - and Paul, I think. I rather wish I were capable of impishness at times -- I tend to be far too serious -- which is why I comment rarely because it takes too long to write seriously! But it is kind of you both to suggest I could keep my pace here. Now, when someone posts on education again, I may appear . . . science and philosophy are areas I'm a learner only in.
Posted by Beth Impson | July 8, 2014 3:04 PM
'Pre-Reformation Christian' is another way of saying 'heretical or schismatic Roman Catholic'.
Posted by Martel | July 8, 2014 9:48 PM
Does this suggest that you received around 27 responses?
Posted by Lion IRC | July 9, 2014 9:44 PM
Lion, no we received more than that. Those were not the only 3 categories: there were also monthly, now and then, and only very rarely. There were a lot more than 27 responses. As might have been guessed from the fact that 2% of responders said they comment often: the total # has to be capable of having a 2% portion.
Posted by Tony | July 11, 2014 11:26 AM
The final tally was just over 140 responses.
Posted by Paul J Cella | July 11, 2014 6:23 PM