Internet Watch Foundation

The following is a limited set of stats taken from the start of the service on October 17^th 2004

*This refers to sites who link to our pages directly, ie the media sites such as the BBC, Guardian, the Police sites and our members etc.

^†Go-live date was October 17^th (so actually only 5.5 months)

 

The most popular pages: 01.10.04 – 31.03.05

1     Home page             57,109         15.5% 

2     reporting.htm          23,033           6.3%  Reporting Page

3     howto/page.1.htm   17,600           4.8%  Main How to page

4     public/page.2.htm    14,884           4.0%  Main Public Page

FAQ page is ranked 11^th most popular with 1.3% of all visits,

Some explanation of this data:

The Home Page garners 15.5% in both sets of figures. This represents those visitors who type www.iwf.org.uk directly into their browser, without using a search engine or coming from an external link (such as media sites or member sites).

 

 

The FAQ on Suicide websites during the 1^st quarter of 2005 has received 884 visits and is the 4^th most visited FAQ. Above Chat rooms (5^th place) and Premium rate dialers (6^th place), the previous 2^nd and 3^rd most visited FAQ’s. Overall, since go-live it is rated 6^th most visited FAQ with 1357 visits (with 6 weeks less time)

 

Our statistics gathering on the Reporting page is less accurate due to technical matters (there may be a fluctuation of up to 10% in these figures), but from the data available we can see that we during Q1, we had 15971 page impressions (people viewing the page, not just visitors), 5828 people started to make a report, of these 4513 submitted reports. When we compare these to the actual RMS reports received, we can see that total reports from the public during the same period was 5054.

 

We can deduce a number of positive elements from these figures:

1)       Visitors to the reporting page saw the notifications on known SPAM’s and therefore decided not to make a report.

2)       Visitors started to make a report but realised during the process that we did not take reports on content they were reporting (ie phishing, or auctions etc)

We believe the method of display at our reporting page cuts down dramatically on the number of duplicate reports and inappropriate reports we receive, thus reducing our overall reporting figures, but ensuring accuracy of data.

 

We are investigating including some additional data gathering elements to the web-site to enable us to gauge the usage of the reporting function.