I was quoting 350,000 monthly readers (unique visitors), as opposed to the absolute unique visitor figure of around 70,000. The 70,000 figures is the number of individual (or more accurately individual computers) which log onto my site during the course of one month. A better explanation can be found HERE.
According to official figures this week, The Guardian website gets 26 million unique visitors each month. To the uninitiated, that would look like 26 million individuals. But it isn't. At least I believe it isn't. If I visit the Guardian's website thirty times in a month I count as 30 of the 26 million.
So we are still not comparing like with like.
Much of the Guardian's online readership is foreign. This table of UK unique users is interesting...
UK unique users
Guardian.co.uk: 9,548,426 (36.7%)
Telegraph.co.uk: 7,394,866 (32.2%)
Times Online: 7,231,485 (33.4%)
Sun: 6,936,051 (42.2%)
Mail Online: 6,441,804 (30.9%)
Mirror Group: 3,372,104 (57%)
This suggests that The Guardian probably has an Absolute Unique Visitor figure of around 2 million and the Mirror only around 600,000. I base that on my own sites proportions of absolutes to uniques. That may of course be entirely wrong. But if it isn't, it means that individual blogs are now getting as much as 15% of the traffic of a whole national newspaper website like the Mirror's. Not bad for a one man band like Guido or me, is it?