Just when you thought the whole Xiaxue versus Gushcloud expose and retaliation was over, Singapore’s leading trolling site, SMRT Ltd (Feedback), at the request of their fans today posted an expose on Xiaxue’s attack on Gushcloud.

“Many have asked, why is SMRT Ltd (Feedback) even involved in this? Why so kaypoh?
Now, this article isn’t about invalidating Xiaxue’s claims, neither is it meant to reinforce Gushcloud’s argument. We have no business interest in either. We don’t really care if Gushcloud is wrong or if Xiaxue replaces her nose every month.
The reason is because, aside from us being so righteous as fuck, we want to call out Xiaxue on her bullshit and tell you why people who live in glass houses, shouldn’t throw stones.”

Again, why does it matter to us? To be honest, we care little about the eternal war between Gushcloud and Nuffnang. But as before, an expose is always fun to read.
The first thrust by SMRT Ltd (Feedback) was on Xiaxue’s viewership figures, which it explained has also been inflated. As SMRT pointed out, ditto.

“Firstly, the stats counter has been rigged to increase +1 per second. Any web developer will be able to tell you that, based on the Javascript coding that was used to deliver that function.
Secondly, she claims that 40,000 people view it everyday. Let’s do some simple math. 40K unique viewers per day equals to 280K unique viewers per week. Compare that to ‘600,724 Visitors’ in the past week as per shown in the stats counter.”

In addition, SMRT noted that Xiaxue might also have been paying for readers. Tracking one particular post she made on Instagram, SMRT suggested that she might have used the services of instafamous, but lost likes when Instagram did a purge on fake accounts.
Using Socialbakers.com to derive this, SMRT also did a tongue-in-cheek on another local “celebrity”.
SMRT Ltd Feedback XX LHL buy likes
That said, SMRT acknowledged that vieweship figures for any website would vary from month to month. What it did point on was that the peaks on Xiaxue’s blog seem to coincide with instances where she have secured large advertising contracts.
SMRT then noted that these peaks in readership also coincide with times where Xiaxue would apparently orchestrate a controversial blog post to coincide with a advertising contract – be it bickering with another blogger or taking a stab at Gushcloud – with the intention of maximising page views for the benefit of the advertiser or sponsor.

“From here, we can deduce that in order for Xiaxue to prove to her clients that she can get as much viewership as possible, she will commence a ‘saga’ regardless if its relevant to her advertorial. In this way, she generates buzz and views and redirect them to her ads.”

Finally, SMRT took issue with Xiaxue’s analysis of Gushcloud’s financial reports and explained why the company’s loss, while appearing bad on paper, might not be really so. This is because any “loss” that Gushcloud reported might be due to the company’s investment in its expansion.
In fact, SMRT suggested that Xiaxue did not reveal the financial figures of Nuffnang, Gushcloud’s competitor and the company in which Xiaxue also has a stake in, to hide the possibility that Nuffnang could actually be worse off financially.
SMRT Ltd Feedback GC NN accounts
Now, that’s a fair bit of accounts sleuthing. Where did SMRT get these figures from, and is the deduction accurate? We’ll let you decide.
Meanwhile, the troll site has promised a part two for the expose, just to make sure you have #FaithInLupCheong.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

ASEAN Human Rights Declaration Forum 13 Oct 2012

PRESS RELEASE The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD) is going to be…

Walkover 2017: Protest the Process, Not the Person 

Several to-be-participants of the sit-in protest at Hong Lim Park have issued…

Third UK patient believed to have ‘caught coronavirus in Singapore’

BBC reported today that a third confirmed case of a person from…

剖析《防假消息法》附属条例 是否回应了各界对法案权限的忧虑?

本月2日起,已经公布于宪报的《防止网络假信息和防止网络操纵法案》正式生效。该法自提呈国会以来即备受争议,不仅政界人士,包括国内外学术界、媒体、公民组织等都已对该法提出质疑。 根据政府电子宪报上的通告,尚有其他数个《防假消息法》附属条例也一并发布宪报,包括上诉程序细节、媒体巨头、网络中介的规范等等,以及给与他们时间进行必要的调整,以符合《防假消息法》的条规。 事实上,《防假消息法》草案刚出台,即遭到各界挞伐,提出对赋予部长权力过于广泛、以及可能形成寒蝉效应的忧虑。一些议员、公民组织都曾建议政府再修法,不过在今年5月8日,草案在未经修改下,以72票赞成,九票反对,三票弃权三读通过。 不过,此前律政部长尚穆根在回应官委议员提问时,曾表示将为该法草拟附属条例,那我们且来看看,这些新近公布的条例,是否有回应此前众人对该法表达的忧虑。 忧虑一:法案定义过于笼统 国际法律家委员会(International Commission of Jurists),今年4月中旬曾致函我国领导李显龙及其阁僚,表达对我国《防假消息法》草案的高度关注,认为该法案“定义笼统”,在很多方面都不符合国际司法标准。 工人党议员刘程强在参与草案辩论时,也认为部长可利用法案内假消息的广泛定义条文,根据需要对有关文字是信息还是意见做出选择性的诠释。 不过,就目前在政府电子先报上看到的《防假消息法》附属条例,似乎没有进一步厘清如何解决法案定义过于笼统的问题。 不过,在附属条例第16(1)下,则阐释何谓网络中介和网站持有人,例如拥有每月至少平均50万,来自新加坡的访问用户;而网页持有人/运营者,则指其网站连续三个月,平均每月有10万访客。…