For example, according to Compete, eHow was attracting 39 million uniques and change in December 2011. Last December, the UVs were 41,123,396. That’s an increase. That number is down from it’s peak of 45+ million in March, 2011, just before Panda hit the company, but it’s significantly higher than the 37.8 million low it hit in July, 2011.

Furthermore, the traffic has stabilized with four straight months of 40+ million. If you watch the weeklies, that stabilization should continue for a fifth straight month, probably with a slight increase. Compete ranks the company 22nd in US UVs. Not bad. Could it go down, of course, but those UVs give the company a firm foundation for building and growth. We’ll have to see what they do with it, but I’m not selling my shares.

As a former journalist and current PR professional, I can only surmise that you are new at this job. A writer’s credibility is his calling card, and while no one is perfect 100% of the time, good writing usually trumps the few mistakes that are made.

Not only do you have glaring errors that others far more familiar with DM than me have already called you out for, but you published this post with strikeouts through the incorrect copy, so now EVERYONE can draw the conclusion that you are not qualified to cover this story.

The first rule every journalist learns is: make sure your sources are confirmed before going live with anything. The second is: proof, proof, proof your copy, and then proof it again!

It appears like Demand doesn’t have much of an idea where they’re going next. The IPO cash only lasts so long and if you believe some critics they’ve never actually made money. It’s no doubt they’re cutting their content costs by slowing new production to a bare trickle and just profit-taking on existing content, but that’s not a business plan any investor should be happy with.