TheWayoftheWeb

Content and Digital Marketing Specialists

digg

More on Digg – will business kill the community?

By

It’s been interesting following recent events concerning Digg, especially considering my previous posts outlining the personal and idealogical problems I have with Digg, and the alternative ways available to get crowd sourced news.

I just read a great summary post by David Chen on Mashable, ‘Digg’s recent bans and the limits of crowdsourcing‘ which is a comprehensive look at what David calls ‘building a flawed system’, and the lessons learned – as well as looking at why Digg has banned top users, and how the business strategy is changing.

It reminded me of something I’d noticed recently. Here’s a graph from Compete, comparing Digg (blue line), with an alternative social content site, Mixx.com (red line).
Now, while it’s obvious that Digg is massively ahead at the moment, it appears to have levelled off significantly – and at the same time, notice how Mixx has grown around the same time as the Digg banhammer started making an appearance?

Now look at Mixx in detail:
Anyone else see something kickstarting some growth around Apri/May 2008?

Hmmmm.
What to do when you are banned from digg. - Mixx

Two things spring to mind. One is that Digg has vocally supported the community, and allowed top users a longstanding reign over the rest of the site – which means changing things, particularly without a clear warning, is always going to lead to problems – the question will be how big the problems will become?

And secondly, so many web services which seem to embrace, support and provide a Web 2.0, social media type approach, actually fall down on the Customer Service which is preached by those using them. I’ve always found Digg support to be incredibly varied, but always anonoymous. And the fall back is always on ‘the best for Digg users’ without ever explicitly saying what that means.

Other social news aggregations and voting sites like Reddit have also seen some growth, although in Reddit’s case, it may be down to other factors, such as opening up their service to Open Source installations.

But the fact that the high profile, long term devotees of Digg could be powering the rise in a close rival (in terms of the type of service provided) could prove to be a very interesting case study – if the very people Digg banned turn out to be able to power the rise of a challenge.

Digg update and alternatives….

By

In an update to my last post on Digg, the good news is my colleagues and I are now unbanned from Digg, following several emails.  It’s good that the ban was lifted, as not only would it have left some of my colleagues unmotivated about social media, but I’m also quite determined to see if there’s a way to be successful at driving traffic on Digg without gaming the system – and to do that requires legitmate access rather than cheating and going through proxies, or using autoscripts etc. There’s quite an interesting profile of the top Digg user, MrBabyMan on ReadWriteWeb, and whilst our own Digg saga was developing, there was a rash of stories regarding whether or not he uses a script to autosubmit content.

But whatever happens, during my last post, I referneced quite a few sites which provide a major developing threat to Digg, as it continues to inhabit a world between the massive traffic of Yahoo Buzz, and the smaller focus of sites like Sphinn on the same technology premise.

Dan's Google Reader Feed

RSS sharing: Personally, I use two web based RSS readers – Google Reader is my main reader, but I keep an account at Feedeachother because I got to know the sole person behind it, Udi Falkson, it’s got a lot of features which are as good as Google Reader, and it’s good to have a place for feeds which I read for pleasure and aren’t work related, stopping my main reader becoming incredibly overwhelmed. What both sites offer – and what almost every RSS reader contains now – is the ability to easily share stories with friends and fans via the sites themselves or emails etc. As user networks grow, this provides one major method for content of interest to appear in front of me.

Social news aggregators: In Web 1.0, this meant Digg. Now, however, it tends to mean sites like Twine and Socialmedian. These services combine uploading discovered content with methods to follow ‘friends’ who submit quality news, and to comment around it, re-share it, and discover more via recommendations. Numbers at the moment are small as Twine is still in private beta, and Socialmedian has recently emerged, but they’re growing:

Social networks/microblogging/lifestreaming: Lumping together everything from Facebook to Twitter to Friendfeed basically revoles around one thing. Recommendations from friends. I build networks on these sites from people I know or discover who share interests with me, and therefore, their recommendations carry a certain weight with them. Can I say the same about 800 random Digg users or Amazon reviewers? I know which of my friends can recommend video cameras, mobile phones, or good hiphop. And I’ve already built up this information in getting to know them and adding them. Do I want to have to start researching each Digg user, particularly when the top Diggers tend to submit and rate so much it’s seemingly random – one of the flaws of the Shout system and blind digging the content your friends send for reciprocal links.

Niche ranking sites: It doesn’t take much to create a ranking system – probably less work than getting an article on the front page of Digg! Hence sites like Sphinn, which concentrate on Marketing news and discussion. And bearing in mind that the ‘Digg Effect‘ is infamous for traffic which may have a high Bounce Rate, and low loyalty, the smaller niche sites have a benefit for attracting and interacting with likeminded individuals. Plus you need far less popularity to get to the front!

The majors: I’ve already mentioned Yahoo Buzz and the huge amounts of traffic it can bring. As major newspaper and media sites evolve towards becoming more digital, they’ll increasingly be seeking ways to aggregate and curate online content. They’ve got sizeable audiences, and a wider perceived range of interests than the ‘Digg Crowd’. If you’re not looking for technology specifically, would you browse Digg, or an aggregator run by the New York Times or the Guardian?

Something completely different – human search: I’ll be honest and admit I didn’t see a use for the likes of Mahalo when I first encountered it. Why search within a far smaller sea than Google can trawl, and rely on weak-minded humans rather than our robot overlords? But I always like to use something for a while before making a judgement, and I’m glad I did, because the Mahalo homepage and the plugin for Firefox have become really useful for seeing popular stories and sources of information (the plugin also improves Google search with a handy summary information box!). Now I get an overview of recent stories, which have had an element of human filtering. And it’s showing pretty good growth:

All of this information is coming to me without needing to visit the Digg homepage on a regular basis, or research the small group of Digg users who can effectively make or break a story. I could subscribe to sections by RSS, but given the churn of stories, and the fact I’m not interested in every car or internet news story, it becomes problematic. Instead, I can rely on friends and family who know me to be able to show me things they think are a) Cool, and b) Things I’d really like by their own self-selecting mechanism and no real effort on my part.

I’m intrigued to see how other people feel, especially after some of the great comments to my last post on Digg. At the moment, I can’t see an easy solution for Kevin Rose and the team, but I’ll try and outline some possibilities in my next post.

Is Digg’s day done?

By

This post was partially inspired the fact Digg recently banned my user account – and by using IP blocking also blocked at least 8 other Digg users in an office of over 500 people.

Rather than focus on the individual implications, it prompted me to look deeper at the role Digg serves – and led me to a conclusion that Digg’s days are numbered.

The theory:

Digg doesn’t work as a proposition. Essentially, the site allows people to submit stories from around the web and vote on them, but that’s a tool or mechanism. It’s not a business or user proposition. And every time I think I might have figured out what the proposition could be, I come up against something within the Digg system that prevents it.

If you want an idea of the general news ranked by the opinions of the widest audience, you’d pick Yahoo Buzz. Sadly Compete seems to default to Yahoo.com for the url analytics, but even so, it provides reasonable size evidence.

And the reason I’ve included Facebook is the real reason I’m not digging Digg anymore. You might defend Digg as a niche site for technology and the bizarre (the actual submission trend has gone towards more lifestyle recently), and point to the size advantage it has over Slashdot and Techmeme, that’s not where my real niche news is coming from, and not where an increasing number of people are getting it.

The trend is towards communication, conversation, and friend/network recommendation. Hence Facebook, and the following graph comparing trends for Digg and Twitter:

If the trend continues, Digg has put itself in a corner. Because despite providing tools such as Friend Lists, and being about to ‘Shout’ stories to your friends, Digg bans you for being social.

Having multiple accounts from the same IP address should not have resulted in a ban – some were registered 2 years before the most recent, some were logged in at the same time etc – and a simple check on the IP would show it’s registered to a large company.

Submitting stories from your own sites is allowed in the Digg Terms of Service – as long as it doesn’t reach spam levels.

That only leaves the fact some of these accounts were ‘Digging’ the stories submitted by others on their Friends List – from the same IP address. Something which presumes we were trying to game the system, rather than the fact we happen to work together because we have a shared interest. ( We’re not the only ones!) Annoyingly, we did get a previous Bad IP address error which was lifted when I explained we all worked in the same building. Now, however, it’s an instant ban with no discussion – despite the fact it means I’d need to monitor the Digg accounts of anyone within a building of over 500 people.

And if you do have a friends network you’ve built up legitimately and there’s any hint of nepotism, Digg automatically gives it a lower ranking. Which would be fine over a certain point, but basically means there’s no point in friends who aren’t power users.

Anti-social behaviour:

The annoying aspect is that there isn’t a warning system, or an explanation. When you attempt to log in you get:

‘An unknown fatal exception has occurred

Whoa! Something blew up. If you think you reached this error in error please do not hesitate to contact support.’

So you contact support – and get back an anonymous message informing you your account has been removed – with no explanation of the reasons.

‘Your IP has been permanently blocked. Unblocking your domain would not be in line with the best interests of the larger Digg community, we will not reverse this decision.

For more information, please see https://digg.com/faq and https://digg.com/tos’‘

And presumably guess from any number of reasons why the block could be in place! Especially as Digg Terms of Service state:

‘Digg may remove any Content and Digg accounts at any time for any reason (including, but not limited to, upon receipt of claims or allegations from third parties or authorities relating to such Content), or for no reason at all‘ (emphasis mine).

Now, if we’d all been using different IP addresses, we would never have been banned – for doing exactly the same thing.

Or if we’d paid $1200 to get a top Digger to game the system professionally. Or spent our time stalking, courting and flirting with the top Digg users – who effectively control the front page.

Digg punishes users – not cheats:

Essentially Digg punished us for being a little naive, and gave us no response or way to use the system in the proper way – meaning a large group of people will never see any value from the site.

And Digging as an individual is a similarly frustrating experience. Unless you dedicated every hour to either befriending the Top Diggers or using fake accounts to game the system, you’re never going to get anywhere near the front page and get to experience the ‘Digg Effect’.  And the only other option is to organise and orchestrate your friends list.

Of course, when you do befriend popular Digg users – or those aspiring to it – you’re comitting yourself to hours of mutual reciprocation of shouts and Diggs.

And if it’s not a popular topic, it drives negligible amounts of traffic – certainly in comparison to other tools like Stumbleupon, which seems to drive more consistent traffic, and shows a lower bounce rate. (SU is also more popular in the UK, which is nice).

 

In conclusion:

I’m the first to admit we may have screwed up somehow, despite having individual accounts, with seperate friends lists, and everyone contributing by submitting content from other sites, Digging other stories etc. But noone using Digg is doing it without wishing to self-promote theirselves or their website – and nowhere in the Terms of Service or the Digg mechanism does it make it easy to let someone know personally if their Shouts are coming across as Spam, or if they’ve submitted a single domain too often.

Nowhere on Digg does it state that you can’t use the same IP address which routes your entire office to the internet (Why not run the check on registration and warn people?).

And nowhere does it counter the fact that a very small group of users control the traffic tap on the front page of the site – and without courting them, you’ll get little for your efforts. It encourages you to submit your own content, and build up a friends list – and yet will remove you without any recourse – quoting the banal ‘it’s for everyone’s good’, except not telling you why.

Maybe we should just have one main account, run by everyone wanting to use it, and thereby avoiding the idea of multiple accounts and spending time using the site?

Why Digg may struggle more:

So Digg has some reasonable-sized issues, hasn’t radically changed in years, and bans office blocks full of staff without explanation or feedback via IP addresses. Bearing in mind that Yahoo has the traffic, Twitter and Facebook show the new recommendation engines, and anyone can plug in a rating system these days for a site far more dedicated to a niche interest (e.g. Sphinn) – you have to wonder what Digg’s longterm strategy is…

And the rules don’t apply to Digg’s boss, Kevin Rose!

Tamar Weinberg has done some great posts highlighting the times Mr Rose has seemingly escaped the Digg Banhammer team despite breaking his own rules. Or see someone who submitted 1800 times, and made 4 mistakes get perma-banned.

At a time when the social media marketing echo chamber will wax lyrical about how traditional old companies fail on interaction and customer service – why haven’t we focused on the Web 1.0 Elephant in our midst?

I’m really interested in hearing some other opinions – are social news aggregators doomed? Is Digg’s 20 million uniques proof I’m talking rubbish? Or have you seen a decline in your Digging?

Edit: In my attempt to avoid turning this into a mini-website of it’s own, I didn’t cover the likes of Socialmedian, Twine, or even Mahalo. I’ll try to put together a comprehensive look at the options for information input later this week. You can always subscribe to my RSS feed to make sure you don’t miss it!

Am I evil? The dark side of the web…

By

It’s apparently easy to be seduced by the dark side when it comes to blogging, and I never even realised it had happened.

At some point, an arbitrary line was drawn as a hang up from traditional media. The great and good subconsciously set the ethics of blogging around ‘quality’ content, a lack of advertising, and denying that anyone ever checks the rank of their blog, or sometimes submits their own content to Digg or Stumbleupon. There is a slight get-out clause if you’re already well established as an A, or possibly B-list member of the blogosphere, but essentially you have the basis of the monastic blogging community. Just keep writing open, honest, quality content and relax as the world discovers you.

Sat on the other side of the equation are the blogs which offer readers the hope of making money online, or getting to the top of whichever ranking you like using some simple tools, and by downloading an e-book on the best affiliate schemes. They love to self-promote, follow 1000s on Twitter, and are happy to recommend affiliate schemes they’ve just signed up for.  They don’t publish a lot of original content, and tend to reuse ideas from more legitimate sites like Problogger.net.

It’s a simple guide, and easy to believe in. It’s a shame it’s wrong.

For starters, with 140 million + blogs, it’s perfectly viable to publish quality content for months without anyone stumbling across it. And this monastical approach can easily lead to someone giving up, or looking for ways to self-promote themselves to at least get some eyeballs onto their blog, even if it leads to a 99% bounce rate. Increased competition in every niche means it’s ever harder to be the main tech blog, or the first mommy to write about raising a child.

Even harder to accept is the idea that others might have a different idea of what makes for quality – and that our idea of a spammy blog might actually be of value to someone who hasn’t come across the original source of the information, or might have never had the chance to attract readers without a self-submitted stumble once in a while.

That’s the hardest to accept because we’ve been taught to seek out the accepted levels of quality since childhood. We were shown Shakespeare and Dickens to aspire to, we see broadsheets as superior to the tabloids, and essays and dissertations require a minimum length to be submitted. And we act shocked when someone reverts to Anglo-Saxon.

But the truth of the matter is that the quality of a piece of work, whether blog, newspaper, or verbal tirade, is down to the individual looking at it. It’s not about an expert author carefully crafting literature – it becomes about whether it confers a value to the individual. To insert a suitably literary quote: “the death of the author is the birth of the reader.”

If we really accept that modern publishing is solely about the needs of the individual who reads and interacts with it, then we should be happy that every part of the spectrum is represented – from the ad-free academic discussing topics with other scholars, to the make money blogs offering the same get rich schemes that appear on flyers on lamposts and through our letterboxes. And we should leave it to the end users to decide which work provides them with entertainment or value, even if we do placate ourselves by perhaps offering some type of warning for scams and pyramid schemes *. Or we rank down those works we disagree with via the same voting mechanisms we use to promote and share content we value and feel is relevant to those around us.

It’s why those of us fortunate enough to be gainfully employed in roles which allow us the indulgence of blogging and social networking for work as well as pleasure should stop looking down on those who may be looking at blogging as a mechanism for fame and reward to change their lives in some way.

It’s why, when it comes to money making spam blogs: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,”

I’m looking forward to the comment which will hopefully follow. Don’t forget to Digg, Stumble, and even print this post and send it to all your friends!

*Incidentally, if any blog or website offers you the chance to make money without much effort, or with a simple automated programme, the odds are pretty high it’s a scam. Trust me. If you’re seriously looking for ways to make money online, I”d advise only listening to those who are open and honest about the fact it takes a lot of hard work and luck, as it does anywhere else!

(Cheers to @snowcialmedia for the prompt to post…it might not have been quite what you had in mind!)

Start growing your business today Contact Us