What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
38 Comments
- jizzatch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12If newspaper companies want to remain viable, they should make a heavy investment in flexible LED technology. Imagine allowing a subscriber to upload today's news via the USB port on their pc and take it on their morning commute or the morning coffee break. Make it a monthly fee and subsidize the cost of the viewing equipment, much as cable companies do with their boxes or cell phone companies do with the phone itself. Or, they will suffer a similar fate as Polaroid and Kodak did with the advent of the digital camera.
- monkey23, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10must be due to p2p sharing of newspapers...
- Crazyiodudo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Perhaps the biggest Digg effect of all time?
- magnusdopus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Only true if you want to be a specialist. There are people who like to be well-rounded and on a daily basis the New York Times does this better than any periodic. If I wanted to supplant the NYTimes, I would need to aggregate some 50 feeds. And then I would need the blog service to remove dupes and prioritize based on newsworthiness. Not quite as efficient as looking at the front page of the NYTimes.
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The concept of a general newspaper that covers everything from wine and fashion to business and science is on the way out. The internet allows you to pick and chose between the best providers of each kind of content. Why would I read the NYTimes's business section when the WSJ and Economist do it fifty times better? Why should I read David Pogue when Walt Mossberg is less of a spaz? The list goes on. What, in the end, is the Times good at? It is good at being your one stop shop that has pretty good coverage of everything. People don't need that anymore. With the internet, they can just as easily aggregate the very best sources. The Times simply can't compete against a swarm of specialists.
- kevinmotel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5i've been saying this since i saw minority report
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think that traditional newspapers are on their way out. It won't happen quickly, but I believe it's inevitable. It's getting easier, cheaper, and (obviously) faster to distribute news over the internet than through paper circulation. It seems to me like this is similar to the transition from the horse and buggy to the automobile. The only print publication I read regularly is The Economist.
- magnusdopus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4This is not good news for sites like Digg. Digg ultimately depends on trusted news sources like the NY Times. If NY Times starts laying off their staffers, the whole media world loses.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The problem that traditional print media has is keeping up with the new electronic news. Many of the big newspaper companies have read the writing on the wall and invested heavily in a web presence with value-added features for subscribers.
"Todays news" on the doorstep is yesterdays news to the new wired consumer. This is not just a side effect of the ubiquitous nature of the net. 24-hour news channels have been applying pressure to print media since the early eighties.
The challenge to daily newspapers is to remain relevant, give their readers options and a reason to subscribe beyond local high school sports scores and garage sale announcements. - egb6550, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm afraid it's my fault. In the last few months I kept leaving my paper on the driveway, no time anymore for it.. and then I had to do it, I canceled my subscription!
- CrashKC, on 08/25/2008, -0/+2I don't like the biased reporting, editorializing, and out-of-date news that the KC Star provides. So I don't buy it.
Simple as that. - WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3This is good news for those who prefer truth and real quality journalism.
The lying, manipulative corporate-owned news media outlets are bound to collapse and disappear. Lies can only be sustained for so long, as people everywhere wake up, and become more responsible and intelligent. (one can only hope) - dkm201, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Thank God, I was afraid I'd miss my daily dose of loony right wing nonsense talk today.
- ajamer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I subscribe to the New York Times and The Economist. They;re both two great newspapers.
I get web access to both, but I find I read articles that normally wouldn't catch my eye on the website, in print format more often. - rrouse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Propaganda doesn't sell well. If they were to go back to free-form unfiltered news and I'm sure sells would pickup. Today, they are obviously not reporting on what everybody is thinking about.
- MrFrostyUK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't know about the US papers, but over here in the UK the papers suck.Big time. Most are politically motivated, nasty and willing to print any stories (whether true or false) just to sell more papers. I say hit 'em where it hurts and give them a good kicking in the circulation points. I think many UK digg readers would agree with me on this one - they only need to check out the :-
Sun (sensationalist paper), Mirror (garbage news stories, had to sack their stock market writers for "influencing" the stock market), Daily Mail (loves to scaremonger middle class readers with stories of doom), Star (30 page leaflet, 20 pages of mobile phone ads and sex lines). - HardwareLust, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's a great site...they need to fix a few feeds (Eurosport->Motorsports is broke), but I'm liking it. No registration or login crap-o-la, just click and read. Great stuff.
- HardwareLust, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The only problem with all this electronic this and web that is that I don't want to sit at my kitchen table and read an LCD screen with my morning coffee (esp. on Sundays!) I spend enough damn time at work and at home doing just that already and that's one of the few short periods throughout the day I don't mind being off-line for a few minutes.
And sure, news downloaded to some sort of electronic paper or e-ink would be nice, but we're at least a decade or more away from an affordable solution that would give that sort of thing mass-market appeal. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1DOH!
- gr8edchz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I recently sent an email to the newspaper I like to read telling them that I purchased the Wed. (garden section for my business) and Sun. (coupons.. less and less though lately) paper every week at the grocery but that I had no interest in the other 5 papers they put out each week. So, I would like to know if I could just have the Wed. and Sun. papers delivered to my house for an annual fee.
They said no but I was free to get the Wednesday through Sunday subscription for a rather larger price than the price of the 2 papers I buy weekly now. I said, but I don't want Friday, Saturday, Monday, and Thursday editions. They said, nope again.
Oh well... My fun newspaper experience. I still just pick the paper up at the grocery when I remember. - rapidex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah - that's the online effect for you. Personally I get my news distilled by http://www.dotso.com - but there are so many sites for news these days !!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Must have something to do with p2p software.
They must start an NPAA and sue the hell out of us. - xenlab, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3i can't get my local paper to stop delivering a paper to me on sundays. i never ordered it, and a couple months ago they started landing on my lawn. i don't read it, and faithfully recycle it each week. when i call to tell them, they say they'll take care of it, but never do. i think they are trying to inflate their circ. numbers... but who knows. could just be old fashioned incompetance... it surely wouldn't surprise me considering the horrendous reporting that they do.
suck it, orlando sentinel! - donte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes douchebag... because my claim was that all newspaper articles are crap. No, I'm saying that good reporters and good articles are few and far between. It's just terribly hard to find them when they're surrounded by horrible writers trying way too hard to be the next Edward R Murrow to actually worry about journalistic integrity, creativity, and objectivism. So if the media world needs to trim the fat, it's by all means welcome.
I'll go back to my toilet home now.... - sagemane, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2And I think most people who read sites like digg, slashdot and metafilter are interested in having general knoledge of everything happening, and people who read internet news and horde RSS feeds in general are usually addicted to being in the know. As for how well newspapers fulfill that need, I have to say that on any day I read about several stories that end up on digg in the afternoon in the SF Chronicle on the way to work in the morning. Internet news sources definitely deliver more articles focused on my areas of interest and offer opportunity for community discussion, but newspapers also offer what is usually the only thing that comes close to quality local news. Maybe that function will be supplanted to some extent by metrobloggers, but for now I find them both very useful news sources in their own way.
- margrita, on 12/30/2008, -0/+0Yes, newspaper circulations are falling gradually and internet readership is increasing. Most of the people are approaching web to find news globally. I think digital editions of the print publications are the only way to increase the readership rate and so that publishers can retrieve their revenue. Some of the companies like http://www.pressmart.net helping the print publishers to publish through online and rich media distribution channels. I think using of these kinds of services will definitely increase the readership rate.
- donte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3If it means laying off a bunch of people who make up stories or spend 80% of their articles in editorial, 10% in filler, and 10% in facts... fine by me. The media world doesn't lose... the only way it loses is if it fails to adapt. The public has shown that they prefer electronic news by way of their actions... and if the media doesn't feel like providing those things, it's their own damn fault.
If the newspapers want to clutch on to outdated business models while producing complete and utter crap in the process... well that makes them no better than the music industry. - AdmLangford, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0I think that it's obvious that the printed media will fall away. Newspapers will have to provide extra content to subscribers in order to keep the subscribers. More often than not, people are well aware of the days news from online media before they even receive the paper.
http://www.bleeperacla.info - Whodoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0xenlab: regarding the Slantinel, I even tried letting them pile up by the curb hoping they would get the message and stop throwing them at my house. They didn't care that I left them out there but just kept throwing them!
You are probably right about their circulation numbers. They are just goofing their advertisers. - JimMessenger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks.
- magnusdopus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Newspapers create crap? Do you realize you are commenting on an article from a newspaper. By your argument, you are commenting on crap. Do you always like to comment on crap? How long do you observe your own crap? Do you go into public toilets and take notes, observe the nuances, take in the aroma, try to pick out what foods constitute the crap?
- xenlab, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1no one's waking up until we start to manufacture those sunglasses rowdy roddy piper is so fond of!
- mckirkus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Naw, they're just going to hire the best bloggers in an attempt to stay relevant. The question is whether or not it'll be easier to just pull up a blog on your wireless laptop instead.
- dmadzak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0@magnusdopus
As far as I'm concerned i can't find an unbiased news source. Some are better then others but all news outlets slant the news one way or the other. I find these arguments funny. If you say the NYT is biased liberals go "well what about Fox News and Rush Limbaugh"? If you say Fox News is biased then republicans go "well what about the NYT and NPR?"
They are all biased. Don't argue who is worse, the fact that they abuse the trust the people give them and the special access that they only get is awful. Arguing they aren't as bad just enables the charade to go on. Shame on all involved.
Chris Carter had it right "Trust no one". - magnusdopus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Please enlighten me Republican. What are the news sources that are of high quality and integrity?
- Aggressor, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Did somebody teach birds how to wipe their asses?
- ricree, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@magnusdopus
I've found CNN.com to be fairly well rounded. It's not always the best, but you can usually get a good general idea of the recent news from it. - Guncrazy, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5Wow. An article from the New York Times that doesn't find a way to help terrorists or sabotage America. And they even have the honesty to admit that a rival paper, the New York Post, is actually UP in circulation more than 5%.
Perhaps this is a sea change for the New York Times? Perhaps the editorial pendulum is swinging back to the right?
Nah. More likely the "broken clock being right twice a day" phenomenon.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is