Mail Online hit new traffic record in January with 15.6m daily and 243m monthly browsers - Press Gazette

Mail Online hit new traffic record in January with 15.6m daily and 243m monthly browsers

Mail Online hit a new website traffic record in January with 15.6m daily browsers and 243m over the course of the month, according to ABC.

This compares to the site’s previous record of 15.2m daily browsers in August 2016.

The site averaged just over 200m daily page impressions a day in a month where the news was dominated by the inauguration of US president Donald Trump.

In terms of unique browsers, around three quarters come from outside the UK, with 66m inside the UK. Each browser counted by ABC is a different device (rather a different person).

The Guardian website is believed to be in second place (in terms of UK newspaper websites), although it is not currently audited by ABC.

Its internal data claims 8.9m average daily browsers (up 18.7 per cent).
The Sun was the fastest growing website, up 122 per cent year on year to 4.2m unique browers per day.

All other UK national newspaper websites grew year on year, with the exception of the Telegraph which fell 12.3 per cent as it felt the effect of creating an online paywall for premium editorial content.

UK newspaper website traffic for January 2017 (source ABC)

Title Daily average browsers m/m % change y/y % change
MailOnline 15,641,619 11.8 5.98
Mirror Group Nationals 5,453,722 9.96 13.09
The Independent 4,830,779 34.46 45.01
The Sun 4,247,921 20.16 122.41
Telegraph 4,044,489 15.31 -12.3 1,637,521 16.05 16.99
Metro 1,590,809 17.41 12.17 993,425 33.37 10.22
Manchester Evening News 785,747 20.35 13.33
Evening Standard 664,843 22.14 32.41
Liverpool Echo 555,616 21.68 -0.01
Wales Online 381,989 30.45 16.82
Birmingham Mail 357,713 28.78 55.09
Chronicle Live 277,533 30.02 8.75
GazetteLive 134,347 30.1 18.9
Hull Daily Mail (Web) 129,197 24.03
Nottingham Post (Web) 113,624 23.34
Bristol Post (Web) 112,586 19.83
Daily Post (Wales) 99,963 23.22 17.86
Plymouth Herald (Web) 94,161 17.33
Stoke Sentinel 91,204 14.75
Derby Telegraph (Web) 89,697 26.17
Coventry Telegraph 86,979 31.15 25
Huddersfield Daily Examiner 85,190 68.83 42.52
Leicester Mercury (Web) 83,230 36.98
South Wales Evening Post (Web) 67,178 31.15
Get Surrey 58,660 11.96
Cambridge News (Web) 52,144 23.2
Grimsby Telegraph (Web) 46,904 22.12
Get Reading 45,404 1.99



Press Gazette's must-read weekly newsletter featuring interviews, data, insight and investigations.

Author: Dominic Ponsford

Dominic Ponsford is the editor of Press Gazette


1 thought on “Mail Online hit new traffic record in January with 15.6m daily and 243m monthly browsers”

  1. It’s very convenient to explain the sympathetic attitude towards the Third Reich of many British newspapers in terms of news management by Chamberlain. This did of course exist, but as both Wainewright, and Richard Cockett in Twilight of the Truth, make abundantly clear, Rothermere needed no manipulating whatsoever. It’s also necessary to distinguish between papers which were pro-appeasement, such as The Times and the Express, and those which were pro-Nazi, such as the Mail. There’s a significant difference. Indeed, I’ve always wondered why in CJ Sansom’s novel Dominion, which imagines a Britain which lost the war, the quisling prime minister is Lord Beaverbrook rather than Lord Rothermere, who would seem the obvious choice.

    By the way, in the Night of the Long Knives Hitler did not murder more than 100 of his political opponents. In point of fact, he instructed the SS to murder more than 100 of his closest and most loyal supporters: the street fighters of the SA. This was because the more radical elements of the SA wanted to have a ‘second revolution’, and Hitler was terrified that this might scare off those elements of big business and the armed forces who were at this point supporting the Nazis. The story was put around by a now totally compliant media that this action was necessary because of homosexual activity in the SA.

    Finally, you say that in the Daily Mail during its pro-Brexit propaganda campaign it was ‘ journalists (and one editor in particular) who were calling the shots’ as if the journalists and this particular editor had equal weight. But they obviously don’t. So, to judge by the paper’s coverage of Brexit, either every journalist was an ardent Brexiter, or the remainers thought it advisable either to keep quiet or to follow Dacre’s line

Comments are closed.