A newsletter reader this week sent an e-mail asking a simple question:
In short, the answer is "No." In fact, I question the "fact." I don't believe that genealogy is as popular as often claimed. Let's look at the facts.
I have heard two slightly different claims:
- Genealogy is the most popular (or second or third or fourth most popular) topic on the World Wide Web.
- Genealogy is the most popular (or second or third or fourth most popular) hobby/personal interest in the United States.
I have no doubt that genealogy is very popular. For proof, I can point out that more than 40,000 people read this newsletter every week. FamilySearch.org and Ancestry.com are some of the more popular sites on the Web with hundreds of thousands of users. Local genealogy libraries and Family History Centers serve thousands of patrons every day. The study of one's family tree obviously is a popular activity among Americans, but is it really the second most popular interest? Or tenth most popular? Or fiftieth?
The only reputable survey that I know of was published in American Demographics magazine in 1995. The survey reported that some 113 million adults in the US, or four out of ten of us, were at least somewhat interested in family history. This survey appears to prove that genealogy is one of America's most popular hobbies.
I do believe this article's accuracy, but I suggest you closely examine the question asked: "at least somewhat interested." If you approached 100 strangers on the street and asked each of them if they were "at least somewhat interested" in their family tree, how many would answer in the affirmative?
Now, what happens if you ask 100 strangers if they are VERY interested in their family tree or if they have ever done anything at all to discover more about their ancestry? I don't know the answer to that, but I suspect it would be much less than four out of ten.
While many people may claim to be "somewhat interested," I dare say that most of them have never been to a genealogy library or to a courthouse. Most have never cranked a single roll of microfilm in their lives. How many people in your neighborhood do that? Some may have looked at one or two free online genealogy databases to find people of the same last name, but does that count as being interested in genealogy? I don't think they are very interested if they have never gone beyond the simplest of searches.
The American Demographics magazine survey was conducted in 1995, when the World Wide Web was in its infancy. In that year, probably 90% of all Americans had never seen the Web. In fact, some had yet to hear of it. What a difference we have seen the the past fourteen years! Today we do know that genealogy is a very popular topic on the web. I suspect there are more genealogists today than in 1995.
In short, while the 1995 survey in American Demographics magazine may be interesting, I believe it is no longer valid. The genealogy world has changed greatly since 1995. I would not trust a survey that is fourteen years old to provide meaningful answers about anything that is popular on today's World Wide Web.
The other surveys that I am aware of were conducted by Maritz Research. These surveys asked similar vague questions:
- Are you at least “somewhat interested” in tracing your family history?
- Are you at least “somewhat involved” with genealogy?
Sixty percent of the respondents said they were at least “somewhat interested,” and 45% claimed to be at least “somewhat involved” with genealogy. That sounds promising. However, again, let's examine the questions.
What is the definition of "at least somewhat?" Does "at least somewhat interested" mean, "I remember grandmother talking about that?" Or does it mean, "I have a database on my computer or a notebook on the shelf containing the results of my own search?"
The other thing that bothers me about the Maritz Research is the fact that it was commissioned and paid for by Broderbund, the former producers of Family Tree Maker software. One has to wonder how accurate a survey is when the company paying the researchers has a very biased interest in the results.
The reports of the Maritz Research surveys always reported glowing results and then casually mentioned that Family Tree Maker was the best-selling genealogy program in the world. The same reports usually did not mention that the company that produced Family Tree Maker commissioned and paid for the entire survey.
I wonder what the percentages would be in response to this question:
To be sure, genealogy is very popular on the World Wide Web. A search for the word "genealogy" on Google returns more than 97 million occurrences of the word. Time Magazine even named genealogy as one of the four most popular topics on the Internet in its 19 April 1999 cover article. (Sex, finance, and sports were the other three.)
My question is this: Does this high number of web sites reflect the true popularity of genealogy, or is it merely a reflection of the fact that today's genealogy programs can create thousands of web pages from one person's database? I suspect the answer is a blend of both.
The fact that 97 million web pages contain the word "genealogy" does not equate to 97 million people posting their own ancestry. In fact, it might be only tens of thousands of people using their genealogy programs to create thousands of web pages each.
If genealogy is truly one of the four most popular personal interests of Americans, we should be able to prove that by other means, right? We should be able to measure the dollars being spent, the popularity of local and national conferences, the number of magazines that serve this personal interest, and more. These are all tried and true measurements used by tens of thousands of marketing firms and others.
Let's start with magazines. If genealogy were truly as popular as our nation's interest in sports, at least one genealogy magazine would have a circulation similar to that of Sports Illustrated. Sadly, I do not know of such a genealogy publication. I could make the same argument about Newsweek, Oprah Magazine, Boating Magazine, Field & Stream, This Old House, Travel & Leisure Magazine, Better Homes & Gardens, Popular Mechanics, various movie fan magazines, and many more. There is no genealogy magazine in a list of the 100 most popular magazines of today. The magazine stand at your local drug store or grocery store probably contains no genealogy magazines at all. Larger bookstores typically do have genealogy magazines available, but not nearly as many as for other topics, such as sports, automobiles, needlework, camping, or pets. If I stop at the local magazine rack, I get the impression that more people are interested in poodles than in their ancestry.
How about national conventions?
The national Star Wars convention draws 40,000 to 50,000 attendees per year. The National Rifle Association's conventions attract 60,000+ attendees. The national convention of ham radio operators draws 25,000 to 30,000 attendees every year to Dayton, Ohio. A local health and fitness expo in Phoenix draws 70,000 attendees, and I suspect most of them live within 100 miles of the conference location. Local golfing, hunting, or fishing conferences near me regularly draw 10,000 people and, again, I suspect that most attendees live within 100 miles of the convention center.
Then there are hundreds of local and regional antique fairs, hot rod shows, boating shows, sportsmen's shows, and more. Many of these attract tens of thousands of people; some attract hundreds of thousands.
So, how big are the national genealogical conferences? In recent years, the two largest conferences attracted only 800 to 1,600 attendees each. Is this an indication that genealogy is one of the five most popular personal interests among Americans?
Finally, let's examine the businesses that serve this personal interest. I do not have sales figures available, but obviously the golfing industry serves a multi-billion dollar marketplace. So do firms that sell to hunting, fishing, gardening, health & fitness, pets, firearms, stamp collecting enthusiasts, and other companies that serve personal interests.
What is the total dollar amount spent on genealogy per year? While I am sure it is a significant sum, it must be a pittance when compared to the other personal interests just mentioned. Let's compare the money spent against that of other personal interests: golf, hunting, fishing, etc.
In summation, I will suggest that genealogy is indeed a very popular activity among Americans. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million, people are actively looking for their family heritage. However, that number pales in comparison to some other personal interests that I have mentioned.
Do you believe there are more genealogists than that? Is genealogy one of the top five personal interests in America? I have one challenge for you: find some believable statistics to prove it!
What a full and complete answer you gave to this person! You are to be commended for taking the time to talk in such great lengths, to show this student[?] how to question statements like this, how to try to prove or disprove such claims, and how to use what he or she finds to draw his own conclusions when definitive information cannot be found. Bless your heart! As a mother, I would wish for this kind of caring response to any child or student's question. You've turned your answer into a true learning experience for this person, and I'm sure his/her teacher will be grateful. Keep up the great work!
Posted by: Linda | February 19, 2009 at 12:18 PM
An excellent response.
The 1911 census for England and Wales launched last month. Statistics from their Blog:
Last week in Numbers
Tuesday, January 27th, 2009
In the past week, we have served 4.4 million searches during 476 thousand Visits by 239 thousand Visitors, resulting in 18.7 million Page Impressions.
Since launch that brings us to: 15.8 million searches, 2.34 million Visits, 1.26 million Visitors, 70.7 million Page Impressions.
---
Looks impressive doesn't it? But I should imagine that many of those visitors came out of curiosity after national publicity rather than any real interest in genealogy. "Lets see if we can find grandma". Even if the 1.26 million visitors were all English and genuinely interested in genealogy, it represents about 3% of the population of England and Wales. Hardly in the league of a most popular hobby!
I believe stamp collecting is supposed to be the world's most popular hobby - but who knows who brought out that statistic!
Posted by: Sandra J Smith | February 20, 2009 at 03:55 AM
Dick I agree with your comments. In my case I devote on average of 6-8 hours daily both before and after work to my Genealogy. I have been an Ancestry.com subscriber for years and Admin one of the Surname boards. On a typical day I'm guessing but I conservatively estimate I generate several thousand hits on my surname alone. Including soundex searches since there are at least 4 known spelling variations of my surname still in use and I have documented about 55 variations. So a simple Google or Ancestry search often turns up several thousand hits, which of course is then narrowed down to hundreds on follow up searches.
I am sure that all of these resources are in fact counting search hits not users per say.
I haven't been anywhere in this world that when you start talking about genealogy that is doesn't spawn some interest, but as you say real questioning usually reveals just a casual interest with little active pursuit of the subjact.
Many like myself started out with a simple question like: Where did my Great Granfather come from and who were his parents?
Then because I was a product of a Military career that led to further research on my families military history. And from there it grew to encompass all Weatherwax's born in North America since our arrival in 1710.
Yes we do congregate in like minded groups to share our research, expand our information and networking, but mostly to share our love for Genealogy a communicate with like minded individual.
As you point out I attend various conferences etc usually within 100-150 miles from home like most other people.
Aside from publishing my comprehensive Weatherwax genealogy I would not normally travel to Salt Lake or out of the New England, New York State area to attend a conference. I usually wait until one of the big ones comes to my area.
I doubt we would find that Genealogy is as popular as many indicate. I dont doubt that if you count search engine his for just the LDS,Ancestry.com, and Genealogy.com website hits that you end up with Genealogy being the #2 top topics for hits; not the #2 hobby in the world as some suggest.
And believe it or not I do have other hobbies which include collecting books, building models and an ocassional dabble with painting for relaxation. Although my Grandaughter is convinced I prefer learing about "Dead People"
Wayne E. Weatherwax
following David b:1747
Posted by: Wayne E. Weatherwax | February 20, 2009 at 06:42 AM
If genealogy were that popular, don't you think you would hear from more "long lost" cousins. Just one pair of my great grandparents have well over 300 living descendants. I have only heard from a handful of them in connection with my on-line family tree in the past 10 years.
Posted by: Bill Andersen, Jr | February 20, 2009 at 07:35 AM
Our genealogy organization, the American-Canadian Genealogical Society in Manchester NH participates in various cultural and genealogical activities in the area, usually having a table with information about our society and research material for the Manchster area. We find that when talking to various attendees that they are very interested in their family tree. This is evident especially when the materials on hand show them their grandparent's marriage, their father's baptism, etc. Unfortunately, this interest seldomly translates into involving these individuals in family research. We make it easy for these persons to get started by offering a free day of research at our library by way of a coupon, which we track for response. Needless to say, the number of people showing up at our front door with coupon in hand has been disappointingly low.
You're quite right in stating that 'interest' in genealogy does not translate into solid research. I'm not sure if people find the research too intimidating for some reason, just can't find time to 'get started', or do get started only to quickly lose interest. Someday we hope to find the magic formula that converts 'somewhat interested' into enthusiastic research.
Gerry Savard
President - ACGS
Keep up the great articles.
Posted by: Gerry Savard | February 20, 2009 at 08:46 AM
Ever fill out a form where you check interests? I don't remember ever finding Family History or Genealogy as one of the items. A recent Newsletter subject was a online publishing site. None of the categories listed were Genealogy. So I wrote and suggested Genealogy as a category. I'll wait and see if it happens.
Posted by: Robert Strock | February 20, 2009 at 09:56 AM
In comparing genealogy with sports, it's important to remember that for some sports the number of active participants is far outweighed by the number of spectators. For example, in Britain soccer is by far the most popular spectator sport - but in terms of adult participation it ranks well behind swimming, cycling, and fitness training, and only just ahead of golf.
Genealogy certainly isn't much fun for spectators - indeed it's a real challenge to make it interesting for anyone other than the participant (nobody else's family could possibly be more interesting - to me - than my own). I think it's wonderful that here in the UK the TV series "Who Do You Think You Are?" regularly attracts between 5 and 6 million viewers - that's well over 10% of the adult population.
I attend a lot of business networking events, and have found that around a third of the people I meet have some interest in family history: they've either done it themselves, plan to start when they have more time, or can name another family member who is researching their tree. In 2005 the Oxford Internet Survey found that 22% of Internet users in the UK had used the web to research their family tree, and whilst this will include many casual users, I think it indicates that there is a high degree of interest.
By contrast the number of people who buy genealogy magazines (and we're blessed with a large range in Britain) is far lower - and the number of people who belong to family history societies is lower still. But when such a plethora of information is available online, much of it free, perhaps it isn't that surprising - gone are the days when genealogy was an interest that could only be indulged by the retired, the unemployed, and the idle rich.
When genealogy features in the news, as it did recently when the 1911 Census of England was launched, it is bound to create interest amongst people who've never previously considered researching their family tree. Of course most of them won't immediately give up their existing hobbies and pastimes in order to devote time to genealogy, but some of them will - and perhaps in the others a fire has been kindled that will one day burst into flame.
Posted by: Peter Calver | February 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM
While I agree with most of your article, I disagree with your conclusion to asking 100 "strangers if they are VERY interested in their family tree or if they have ever done anything at all to discover more about their ancestry? I don't know the answer to that, but I suspect it would be much less than four out of ten."
This is really two completely different questions. I would agree that "much less than four out of ten" would be "VERY interested in their family tree".
But "if they have ever done anything at all to discover more about their ancestry" leaves a very wide range of responses. This could be as simple as having a single conversation to find all four grand-parents when the person was a child completing a school assignment. Many young parents do their only genealogical research when they are having their first child and are looking for names. Other similar short-term interests abound probably giving a ratio of higher than four out of ten.
In other words, a statistician would never ask an open-ended question like that as the response would be meaningless to anyone trying to determine if they should consider genealogy as a vocation.
Posted by: Lee Hoffman | February 20, 2009 at 10:14 AM
I think genealogy only appears to be popular on the internet because in many instances the definition of both genealogy and research has changed. To many it no longer means tracing ones roots to the degree that each ancestor is uncovered and studied as an individual and against the backdrop of the history/times in which they lived. Similarly, what many people think is research has turned into nothing more than people surfing the internet to hook on to the hard work of real researchers or a listing in some book. This is nothing more than armchair genealogy and name collecting. Some people seem to be more proud about the number of names they have in their tree than knowing a single personal characteristic about any one of those people. These same "genealogists" find and replicate error after error across the internet at an astounding rate, never once having it dawn on them that they should attempt to verify/validate the little jewels they think they've "researched."
Personally, I find it maddening and frustrating.
Posted by: Terri England | February 20, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Thanks, Dick. Great article and certainly informative. How many of us who have attended many conferences, etc, keep running into the same person or groups attending? Unfortunately as we get older the pace gets slower and all we can do is hope that we can pass on the enthusiasm for research to the younger generations or complete strangers... anyone who will listen.
I have a large family and many descendants. So far, only one relative has been interested and is actually doing a LITTLE research. WE will see!!
Thanks, again.
Peg
Posted by: Peg Buckman | February 20, 2009 at 10:18 AM
The thoroughness of your answer is an example to genealogists everywhere, and the exacting analysis you supply is a wonderful demonstration to every reader of precisely how genealogical problems should be researched and analyzed. Thank you very much.
It occurs to me.... magazines, etc. are driven by advertising, and since genealogy deals in information, not high-priced equipment.. the dollar amounts tend to be small. And the high proportion of older people among those interested tends to drive down both the dollar amounts likely to be spent and the personal visits made to libraries, conferences, etc. I believe that many people use the internet [free or paid] and simply order the certificates, etc. that they need on the net or by mail. So traditional measures of interest may not accurately reflect what's really out there....
Maybe a survey of 'record suppliers', such as county clerks, etc. would be informative?
Posted by: Sandra Claney Tye | February 20, 2009 at 10:45 AM
I do agree that most persons who find out that I research my family 10-15 hours a day 360 days a year express interest in the topic, but usually add "Some day, when I get time ...." No burning desire there.
There's undoubtedly plenty of PR fluff in the following Jan 2009 announcement, but it does add some more data to the discussion.
PROVO, UT, January 6, 2009 — We’re Related, a service developed by FamilyLink.com, Inc. to connect Facebook users to other family members, just became the fifth most popular application on Facebook Platform. The We’re Related application surpassed Texas HoldEm Poker, Bumper Sticker, and Video by Facebook as well as more than 52,000 other Facebook applications in terms of active monthly users. “We are thrilled with the momentum of We’re Related and are looking forward to future growth and the new functionality we will offer our loyal users,” said Paul Allen, CEO, FamilyLink.com, Inc. “As the number of We’re Related users increases, so does the number of connections people are making to their families.”We’re Related was launched in October 2007 and is currently the most popular Facebook application for families with more than 16.5 million users. FamilyLink.com, Inc. also recently became one of the Top 500 Web companies in the world, based on Quantcast statistics.
Full announcement at http://blog.worldvitalrecords.com/?p=537
Posted by: Mary Beth | February 20, 2009 at 12:36 PM
I think that you are overlooking some things in relation to genealogy and the other hobbies you cited: While there certainly is a fairly wide age range when it comes to who is interested in genealogy, it is true that a large percentage of genealogists are seniors or close to their senior years and many of us are on limited incomes. Services like Ancestry and all of the resources available on the internet offer a way to conduct a large amount of research from home. The free web sites alone can give a huge start in anyone's research, negating the need to go to a library or other repository initially.
Secondly, just how many people actually live in the town or city where they need to conduct their research? How many only have to search in one town instead of several areas all over the US and Europe? I would venture a guess that there are very, very few indeed who only have a small number of locations where they need to do some research. It is much cheaper to send away for a record or look-up than it is to go to the location and do the search yourself.
You yourself have stated how costly it is going to a genealogy conference - and so many of us, no matter from what generation we come from cannot afford such an expense - so why are you so surprised that the attendance rate is so low? And doesn't it make more sense that those of us who are seriously interested in our research would rather save our money to spend on a subscription to a genealogy website, requesting BMD records, hiring a researcher, making a trip to our ancestor's homeland, etc.?
I think you are correct in your overall statement that genealogy is not as popular as has been stated as a hobby, however, I also think that it is nearly impossible to use page hits as an example. So many of the 97,000 hits may not even really pertain to the actual search query.
What I believe is true is that most definitely genealogy as a hobby has grown in popularity because of the internet. The internet has made it possible for so many of us to connect with other family members and research our roots because of the information that has been put out there and keeps growing all the time.
And why does it keep growing all the time? Because there is a growing interest! Companies like Heritage Quest, Ancestry and others would not have invested all that they have if they did not see the continued growing interest in genealogy and family research.
It is also true that genealogy and family history magazines do not have the circulation that hobby type magazines enjoy. In part the obvious answer is that there just aren't as many genealogists. What is also true is that there are a large number of people who either use free internet sources instead to learn about new genealogy resources and to educate themselves on researching and many others who aren't aware that these types of resources even exist. The majority of the researchers I have connected with have not taken the time to educate themselves and because of that, some of them have fallen into the usual mistakes made by amateurs. Others, while very interested in learning about their ancestors, do not have the interest in learning better search techniques or looking more closely at the evidence to be sure the information is accurate. Many do not understand the importance of sourcing. For some it is merely a hobby of collecting as many names and dates as possible.
What I submit to you is that there is more than one kind of genealogist or family researcher. There are those like me who have spent a lot of time reading books and other sources to learn about genealogy and about our ancestors - their homeland, culture, customs, etc. Each name in the database has been researched and added with care.
There are professional researchers who are the ones more likely to be a member of a society, visit repositories, attend conferences, etc. This is not to say they are the only ones who do these things, but certainly since they are professionals, have the means more than some of us.
There are those who ask a lot of questions and learn all they can from others and research as they can but are very limited in how they are able to conduct their research geographically & financially but they do their best to collect the best information they can even though it may not be much.
Then there are the name collectors boasting thousands of names and dates in their databases; some of them including names and dates from over 2000 years ago. Yes, TWO THOUSAND YEARS! Absurd and ridiculous. But these people often do purchase genealogy software and subscribe to subscription databases.
There are then those who are interested but do not have the time or desire to learn all they can and when they do spend the time to research, mostly on the internet, their information is often faulty because they tend to make assumptions without backing them up with cold hard evidence.
Then there are those who have been researching for decades and began their research long before the internet.
Those of us who are serious researchers I believe fall into a smaller group than those who really only view it as a hobby. For those who view it as only a hobby, going to a conference or even a repository might seem too involved, more than they care to involve themselves. And many of us who are serious researchers just cannot swing the costs of conferences and flying off to where our ancestors lived.
It would be difficult I think to really calculate just how popular genealogy really is. A website can boast that they have had so many visitors but those figures are always misleading - each time someone visits the website the number goes up so if you visit the same website ten times in one day, that counter will go up ten times.
And even if you had the figures of the numbers of subscribers to the subscription websites, that also would not be accurate because not everyone subscribes to those websites and others subscribe to multiple websites.
Bottom line: Your overall argument is correct, the figures are misleading as to how popular genealogy really is, but I believe that based on what I have outlined above, it would be nearly impossible to calculate just how popular it really is. Certainly companies like Ancestry would have some idea otherwise they would not continue to expand their services or continue to even offer them, but even their figures would not be accurate because of the simple fact that not everyone can afford to subscribe to such a service.
BTW, not everyone uses their genealogy program to put up WebPages; there are many of us who build our own websites for our family information.
Posted by: Linda | February 20, 2009 at 01:03 PM
Loved this article. Very thought provoking. I'm not completely on the same page so I composed my own blog post in response - The Popularity of Genealogy: Why Dick Eastman is Wrong. The post is located here: http://eatslikeahuman.blogspot.com/2009/02/popularity-of-genealogy-why-dick.html
For the record, Dick isn't wrong, I just think there is more to the story.
Posted by: Dan Lawyer | February 20, 2009 at 01:57 PM
Interesting and well-argued. I think now the follow-up question is, "How do we *get* more people interested in genealogy/family history?"
But of course, that's a whole 'nother topic...
Posted by: Joyce | February 20, 2009 at 02:09 PM
"In recent years, the two largest conferences attracted only 800 to 1,600 attendees each." I used to belong to a professional organization whose biennial conference attracted 5000, and there was always something new to hear about. In genealogy, except for new websites or databases, there's nothing new to hear. Research methods and resources remain the same year after year. I read the titles of conference lectures and can plainly see that it's the same old information packaged in new bottles. With the attendance at NGS and FGS that low, there should be *one* major national genealogy conference *every other year*, instead of two per year. Leaders of those organizations need to recognize the limit of their drawing power.
Posted by: Oxa | February 20, 2009 at 03:15 PM
"In recent years, the two largest conferences attracted only 800 to 1,600 attendees each." I used to belong to a professional organization whose biennial conference attracted 5000, and there was always something new to hear about. In genealogy, except for new websites or databases, there's nothing new to hear. Research methods and resources remain the same year after year. I read the titles of conference lectures and can plainly see that it's the same old information packaged in new bottles. With the attendance at NGS and FGS that low, there should be *one* major national genealogy conference *every other year*, instead of two per year. Leaders of those organizations need to recognize the limit of their drawing power.
Posted by: Oxa | February 20, 2009 at 03:17 PM
Most people want instant gratification.
Golf: You swing a club - the ball either goes in the hole or not.
Fishing: You come home at the days end and you usually have at least one fish, sometime you have 4 dozen.
Sports: After an hour or two someone is the winner
Sewing: you want a cross-stitch pattern or new afghan, you got it.
Gardening: Dig a hole, plant a seed, add water...voila.
Genealogy requires patience, organization, strategy, reasoning, etc. It involves thought. Hours upon hours add up to days which add up to weeks, months, years and then you might finally get the result you desire. One name added to your family tree.
I am over-generalizing here, but I think there are certain people like us addicted to genealogy that spend hours and hours working on the genealogy of our ancestors and relatives.
Posted by: Jay | February 20, 2009 at 08:52 PM
Interesting overview about genealogy, and I agree with Terri's comment above.
The collectors of meaningless names "don't know that they don't know" what RESEARCH actually is --- much less how to perform it. It is a no-brainer: The greater the number of names in a tree, the more likely it is that no research was done. Names, errors and all, have merely been copied from another tree that was copied from another tree, etc., over and over, with no one along the way having the wisdom to question the validity of any of it. High numbers of names should send up a "red flag" for certain.
Comparing the numbers of such players with the numbers of KNOWLEDGEABLE researchers would probably be an eye-opening feat, if it were possible.
And, in between the two categories, are the many who are "serious" and actually work at RESEARCHING, but could be much more successful if they would just take time to LEARN / better understand research methodology, and the many, many GOOD sources that could HELP them find their needed evidence to build on. There is so MUCH that can be learned, and it is NOT difficult. REALIZING this is the first step. A little knowledge and a few years of "experience" can lead to a false sense of expertise and thinking that one knows ALL that he or she NEEDS to know. Simple things that a researcher DOESN'T know can cause wasted time, energy, and money.
Summary: Don't be "turned off" by the term "beginning genealogy". Investigate the article, class, or whatever, and you will probably learn something helpful that you didn't know. We can all learn something every day.
Mary
Posted by: Mary | February 20, 2009 at 11:49 PM
I'm glad you prefaced your article as "your opinion". With no hard evidence to back up anything, that's about all your article is. The bottom line is, do we really care how many "genealogists" are out there? If a person's goal is to collect 10,000 names and they are happy with that, what's the problem? I have a few thousand names in my data base. Many ancestors have no documentation at all and probably never will. Most of my ancestors in the first 5 or 6 generations are documented to the point that I'm having difficulty storing all the papers I have collected. Online genealogy does make it easier to find these documents (and spread misinformation as well), but genealogy is no different that any other hobby. Some people are stars at it and give it their 100% effort, and others will always be content just to barely keep the bench warm. Even in the small town I live in, there are enough die-hard genealogists to keep some small first rate historical/genealogical societies running nicely. You may not be able to tell how many of us are in existence, but there are enough of us, whether totally dedicated or completely casual, that I don't think genealogy is ever going to go away quietly.
Posted by: Kajufa | February 21, 2009 at 01:00 AM
I am amazed at the number of people, when I mention my passion for genealogy, who say well, it's all on the internet isn't it. Shucks, I didn't know that, and after all the years and the money I have spent on research, and all I had to do was click on a button. Reminds me a little of when my passion was for knitting machines and I had spent hours and days hand tooling a creation and the only comment I got was, well it's all done on a knitting machine isn't it. Perhaps I got it wrong and was supposed to walk away and let the machine do it all.
Takes some of us a long time to learn dont it?
Posted by: Patricia | February 21, 2009 at 02:16 AM
I think this was a very interesting and thought-provoking article as I have often attempted to define this market. My conclusion is prefaced by a favorite quote I have hanging in my office by Lucy M. Kellogg (Detroit Society for Genealogical Research Magazine, 137:119, Summer 1974):
"Genealogy
begins as an interest
continues as an avocation
takes over as an obsession
and in its final stage
is an incurable disease."
I agree that many people have the "interest"; however, fewer really commit any real effort ("avocation"), even fewer get the bug and enhance their skills ("obsession"), and a small few become addicts ("incurable disease").
And, while the interest is greatly fueled by the advent of the personal computer, desktop genealogy programs, and behemothic databases of the Internet, one readily enjoys the pleasure in watching others truly engaging.
Also, Family History Magazine recently reported that 78 percent of Americans are now interested in their family history, and other interesting statistics from their survey. (Family Tree Magazine, 2009 Media Planner, http://familytreemagazine.com/upload/images/PDF/FT_MediaKit_2009.pdf).
Thank you for a very interesting article!
Posted by: John Pfost | February 22, 2009 at 09:12 AM
My, my! This thread has drawn alot of interest. My thoughts on a couple of the subjects raised. There are 3 types of people who are interested in family history: 1) those interested in the results of other people's work if it is about their own family and presented attractively; 2) those interested in actual research into the past; and 3) people like my grandmother whose interest was in meeting living relatives. For her, the whole point of researching ancestors would be to find more living cousins. For me, the whole point of having a family reunion would be to find more clues to the past.
Second point. It is not entirely valid to compare attendance at national conferences in compact countries like England and even France with attendance in countries with populations spread out over a large area. The better comparison would be with total attendance at national and regional conferences in USA, Canada, Australia because of the cost and trouble involved in traveling thousands of miles. How many Europeans would travel even 500 miles for a conference or trade show on any subject? In any event, they do not need to do so. Also, I have the general impression that the interest in family history research is rising in e.g. GB while it had its surge in USA at least a decade ago and has now plateaued.
Posted by: Lois Sparling | February 22, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Dick: Great answer and analysis!
There are more people who are taken with "The Idea of Doing Family History" than the actual doing.
Posted by: Jay Miller | February 24, 2009 at 04:06 PM
Shirley Gage Hodges
http://globalgenealogy.com/globalgazette/gazsh/gazsh-0024.htm
Genealogy has become the number one hobby in recent times
Column published: 25 April 2007
Shirley Hodges hodgessj@hotmail.com
President, Genealogical Speakers Guild
Posted by: The Genealogy Box - Genealogy Network | March 07, 2009 at 05:56 PM