The Internet is a digital recreation of real life. For that reason, it can be a scary place, and yes, bad things have happened on good sites. No matter how much we believe in site-level intelligence, we understand the comfort that comes with page-level blocking technology.
That is why we also took a look at page-level safety data and its relationship with our site-level quality ratings.
Trust Metrics submitted a pagelist to a third party safety verification company for analysis. The list contained over 38,000 pages across 500 randomly selected websites that represented a typical spectrum of quality. We then crunched the numbers to see what correlation existed – if any – between unsafe pages and low quality websites.
Since low quality and safety concerns frequently go hand-in-hand and our quality ratings are influenced by unsafe content, we weren’t surprised to see that most of the sites with unsafe pages fell in our lowest quality category.
Here’s a look at the percentage of unsafe sites in 10 point quality rating increments:
The graph shows that as sites progress higher into our Good (61-80) and Excellent categories (81-100), safety concerns become non-existant. In fact, we did not find a single unsafe page within the 81-100 range.
Conversely, over two percent (2%) of pages on Poor (0-20) quality sites had safety concerns.
In this test, our quality ratings did an excellent job eliminating unsafe pages, but how do we really stack up against safety verification? Next week, we will uncover some shocking stats from this study and discuss the necessity (or lack thereof?) of verification companies.