By Bort Valentine, Cultural Critic
[Pitchfork]’s presence in the pop culture zeitgeist (at least as far as I have experienced it) is entirely disproportionate to its readership: Alexa.com claims its US traffic rank to be 94,213th. By comparison, Blender is 8,348th, Spin is 3,832nd and Rolling Stone is 698th… even Robert Christgau’s website is more often visited…”
Well, I’m grateful to have been pointed towards the Alexa website, which I’d never heard of before, but regarding the popularity of Christgau’s site vs. Pitchfork‘s, the data is totally bonkers, at least judging by my search. Christgau’s U.S. traffic ranking (according to Alexa) is 91,770; Pitchfork‘s U.S. traffic ranking is 907 (yeah, my eyes popped out of my head also) (Rolling Stone is 643; Google is #1; Huffington Post is #24). No idea how reliable any of this is, but these numbers, at least in relation to one another, don’t feel wrong. (Rockcritics.com currently ranks 9,190,864th.)
RockCritics.com 
Thank you for your correction. We have properly made changes to the article in question. As we explained in the bottom of the corrected post, our colleague Baldur accidentally listed the rating for pitchforkmedia.com instead of pitchfork.com, which is incorrectly listed under Business, Agriculture and Forestry. We apologize for our mistake, and we take the accuracy of our articles seriously. Thanks for your insight.
Bort