When we launched The Reasonable Adjustment in late July, the aim wasn’t to chase vanity metrics. We don’t run ads. We don’t plaster the site with pop-ups. The mission has always been clear: create work that holds up under scrutiny and builds momentum over time.
Still, numbers matter. They’re one way to see whether the right people are not just visiting, but actually reading.
The Stats Since Launch (25 July to 3 October)
- Unique visitors: 636
- Total visits: 906
- Total pageviews: 8,300+
- Average views per visit: 9.18
- Bounce rate: 13%
- Average visit duration: 4 minutes 31 seconds
For context: most content sites average 2 to 4 pages per visit, 40 to 60% bounce rates, and 1 to 3 minutes on site. On all fronts, our numbers are well above those benchmarks.
What the Numbers Prove
- People aren’t skimming, they’re sticking around for 10, 15, sometimes 20+ minutes.
- Readers don’t vanish after a single click. A 13% bounce rate shows they explore.
- Visitors aren’t one-timers. Each reader, on average, has looked through 13+ pages across their time here.
Where We’re At
This isn’t chest-beating. Readership could be higher, of course it could. But that’s not the main focus right now. The foundation has to be strong before scaling. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither is a serious platform.
I’d love to call The Reasonable Adjustment a watchdog, but I’m also aware that the term carries specific legal and regulatory weight. For now, think of it as an independent platform with watchdog instincts: documenting, questioning, and shining a light where others won’t.
The Readers Who Matter
The raw numbers don’t show everything. More often than not, the people reading this site are the very audience marketing departments spend millions trying to reach. The decision makers, executives, directors, and CEOs. The ones who can pull levers, sign off budgets, change policies, or issue instructions.
That’s why engagement is more valuable here than sheer volume. A single read-through from the right pair of eyes is worth a hundred empty clicks.
A Thorn in the Side
I’m under no illusions. Right now, The Reasonable Adjustment is a thorn in the side of many organisations. They don’t like the questions, the evidence, or the attention. But thorns only hurt when they press against the truth. The discomfort exists because they know I’m right.
The Comparison
Let’s be blunt. Many organisations in this space have websites that look busy but bleed readers. High bounce, shallow reads, low engagement. By contrast, these early numbers show something rare. People don’t treat this site like a quick scroll, they treat it like a dossier.
The Road Ahead
- Scale the reach: with engagement this strong, broadening traffic is the next step.
- Convert attention into community: clearer CTAs such as updates, RSS, or mailing lists will help turn visitors into followers.
- Prove the point: strong engagement is leverage. It shows institutions, funders, and critics alike that this platform is already being taken seriously.
The takeaway: Three months in, we’re not aiming for clicks, we’re aiming for credibility. The numbers aren’t about bragging, they’re about proof of concept. And if being a thorn is the price of telling the truth, then so be it, better a thorn than a blindfold.
Be First to Comment