What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
152 Comments
- canewediggit, on 10/12/2007, -26/+263dear thomas- ***** off, you're a p.o.s. writer begging for publicity. if you didn't notice, the evening news was giving crap like britney spears and o.j. more coverage than real news like darfur years before digg came along. you're searching for pageviews and i want mine back.
at least on digg, i decide what i read and discuss, unlike if i just watched my local newscast or read my paper and only received the info that certain editors chose to give me. and i will never read anything you write again.
don't read this article (nothing against you, savingadvice) - RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+84According to Google, respectable outlets like CBSNews.com or BBC.co.uk seem to give as much or more coverage to Tom Cruise and Britney Spears as they do to the Sudan. All I did was search for the number of instances of each phrase. Not a scientific measure, but an interesting indicator. Who is to blame? Everybody. Africa's colonial masters, its own leaders, its own people, militant Islam, genocidal maniacs, self-interested corporations and governments, the general public in the west, journalists, those who run the business side of media, politicians, various world organization, etc. Only a system-wide failure could have such a result.
cbsnews.com:
Tom Cruise: 3,820 instances
Britney Spears: 4,250 instances
Sudan: 4,250 instances
From bbc.co.uk:
Tom Cruise: 10,400 instances
Britney Spears: 10,080 instances
Sudan: 27,800 instances - savingadvice, on 10/12/2007, -15/+93no offense taken ;)
- HalBSure, on 10/12/2007, -10/+77To be fair, The Sudan hasn't released an album or become knocked in at least ten years.
- blazah, on 10/12/2007, -10/+62someone please call for a waaaaambulance!
- nayr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42since when do digg users care about britney spears?
- rac1234, on 10/12/2007, -9/+39It's a valid point. Digg users can promote any story about anything in the world, and yet what are the two most dugg stories of the year? A new version of Digg and a fancy computer keyboard.
All our digging doesn't bring the most important stories to the top. Whereas a traditional news editor has the opportunity to do this. Whether news editors in fact use that opportunity is a different question.
That said, a journalist does have the option of writing without worrying about how many diggs they'll get. - Trention, on 10/12/2007, -7/+33Blaming Digg is this guy's weak attempt to sound relevant, like he knows what's up. Of course, blaming Digg for vanity journalism and blogging is stupid: it's been around a lot longer than even the Internet. Show it does just the opposite: it shows that he's clueless.
And he's full of it too, because story rankings happen anywhere that there are writers in competition. Are we supposed to believe that the popularity of his stories doesn't factor in to his job? To his editors? To his fellow writers? - dono169, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Wait, is he telling me that mainstream media hasn't being playing to the lowest common denominator throughout history?
Does he really think pre-digg news covered the humanitarian crisis of the world? Sudan was a passing interest, Rwanda was never important enough, Tibet hasn't been given a thought...
So, Thomas Kostigen, Ethics Monitor, open your eyes and stop being a Luddite.
(Oh, and did you notice the "Digg This" button on his story?) - nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22or just a wahburger and some cries, if it's not too serious.
- wmarcello, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25This is why I don't rely on Digg for ALL my news, just for the cool stuff. Major outlets do cover the tabloid crap as well, but at least you can find more important stuff too. That said, the featured story on CNN right now is the TomKat wedding. Ugh.
- rotting, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17True the digging might not being the stories to the top of the week but nothing is stopping the reader from going to the World & Business-> Politics section.
IIRC you can also configure digg feeds to show only story types that you are interested in but I may be wrong about that one. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21Content in the stories is completely irrelevant to whether they make it to the front page or not.
What puts an article on the frontpage is the amount of friends and/or sockpuppets the author's got who will tit-for-tat digg for him - that's it. This is a social networking site, not a news site.
Savingadvice needs to find some like-minded people and form a click digging eachothers articles, like everyone else who gets their article to the frontpage does.
- Llanowar, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21Optimus Keyboard > Anything political
- Ninjab3ar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Although Digg has a section for random news, wasn't this website at first aimed towards tech-savvy individuals? That in turn explains why there is more focus put on "trivial" articles than on real news.
In my opinion, finding out about the perils of Sudan, or Africa, or anywhere really doesn't matter to me, we see enough bad news in the television as there is. The reason i go to Digg is to find out about interesting things completely unrelated to the ***** we have to live around and learn about daily. - scilec, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12You bring up an interesting point.
I wonder how the digg front page would change if all posts were to show up as anonymous until they got enough diggs to reach the front page. - alabat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied" - John Stuart Mill
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I completely agree with the guy. That's why I don't get all my news from Digg (or other social bookmarking websites). Digg is a good place to find more popular kinds of news among geeks, but it is by no means well-rounded.
- haobaba1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9What a jackass, on election day cnn had a banner across the top of their site "Breaking News: Britney files for divorce" as if it was more important than the election that was taking place.
- Kerr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8What is he implying, digg is going down the road of main stream media?
- silenceHR, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"since when do digg users care about britney spears?"
have you seen how many diggs news about her pr0n got?... Britney+pr0n = massive digging (not to mention private parties after posting) - yuutokun, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Thats what you get with freedom of speech. The voice of ignorant loud people will always overshadow the educated minority.
- Thing2, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10I'm sorry - but because we dont all sit around all day wallowing in others pity does not make the stories we read any less relevant. - I dont want to sit around and read about all of the 3rd world countries that are in need of aid, or about the policies in Iraq...or anything similar...if there's nothing I can do...I'm frankly not going to sit around wallowing in someone elses pain. Relevant....I think not.
- Ninjab3ar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why didn't you reply to his comment, then?
- krust, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Science gets better coverage on Digg.
In the mainstream science is too often treated as a freak show or is under attack from Creationists.
Here it gets some respect. - Koosebane, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You actually mean "news tool of the internet activist."
When agendas are promoted or buried based on mob rule, the front page is always going to be skewed. Mob rule simply doesn't allow for freedom of expression and thought.
I've witnessed the most inaccurate bung available on the internet being thrown to the front page and blindly promoted with little regard for the truth. I've witnessed valid, reputable information buried from sight because it doesn't fit a popular agenda. For this reason alone, Digg is only useful to a mob who doesn't mind keeping other readers from seeing what they don't want them to see.
Blatant suppression of news and opinion does not a valid site make. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8wait, you mean there is news outside of SONY and GOP?!
- remotecontempt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6He's giving Digg way to much credit. It's not THAT influential, and I would hope people don't make this site thier only news source.
Or else they might think that Ubuntu and the Wii are the only thing important in the world. - flintmich, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Digg (or DIGG as this inept reporter labels it) is very, very valuable at breaking through big media. I would have had no idea about that tasering incident in California because its no where to be found on CNN, CBS, ABC, etc. However, it was on Digg. I spend more time on Digg per day than a week on those other sites, save for NY Times which I do like a lot. I stay informed. I send links out. It seems all I get from my non-tech friends are "where do you find this stuff, awesome!"
Digg is the best news tool in recent memory. Long live Digg. - c0r3file, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's not Digg's responsibility to educate or inform the public. Individuals should follow whatever news they want and not be 'programmed' by major media networks. If people want to write 'popular' news, they go the Britney Spears route. If they want to write 'important' news, they go the Darfur route. Just be ready to have fewer page views if you chronicle genocides instead of pop culture.
- Depthfunction, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Right, because the traditional media outlets never get distracted by OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson, Chandra Levy, JonBenet, or that blonde chick that disappeared in Bermuda(?).
Yeah, traditional news media are never swayed by what the great unwashed masses want to hear about. - oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8"Ignorance is bliss"
wow, i guess so. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Hey that would be a great experiment. I wish they would do it. You wouldn't even have to say "before they make it to the front page" You could make the criteria "Your story is anonymous until it hits 50 diggs"
- Canthros, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Don't be stupid.
The problem isn't that so many people are 'stupid', and characterizing things that way is crass.
The reason television so often caters to the lowest common denominator is that the lowest set of interests has a much broader base than any of the higher ones. How many people can be reasonably expected to follow a discussion on art history, versus how many can be expected to get a bunch of fart jokes? Those aren't necessarily disjoint groups, either. (There's a quote I'm thinking of, but can't remember nor recall the quoted party.) - canewediggit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4yes yes let's all keep our eyes focused on the pretty white girl that gets lost in aruba and the next celebrity fiasco. i'm not saying spend all day reading about the real troubles of the world, i like my pointless drivel as much as the next person. but if you don't want to pay attention to what is really going on.....
don't complain when it's your family members getting slaughtered in the next holocaust because nobody wants to acknowledge it is actually happening
don't complain when our freedoms are stripped away piece by piece because you weren't paying attention
don't complain when you or someone you know gets sent off and killed in a pointless war because you weren't paying attention
act like a brat and keep complaining when your fast food doesn't come fast enough because you don't pay attention to the fact that we have things pretty damn good compared to most the planet
stay in your safe little air conditioned bubbles and keep your eyes glued to the tabloids because ignorance is bliss. until it's too late. - an0nymous, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Just another guy who knows what's better for us, than we do ourselves.
Yaay, Thomas! Boo, self determination!
Alternatively, this could be a viewed as a "what's the matter with kids today? story". Never heard that before. - JuyLe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Sure Digg is not the place for poor country conflict, political strangeness in africa, war in orient, new research found, crime or case... But we all have, I guess, other sources of information. Digg is the place for the COOL information !
- canewediggit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3i do understand that, i think others don't. even thing2 states "and the policies in iraq" as something he doesn't consider 'relevant'. i think there's about 150k servicemen plus their families that would all strenuously disagree. but yes, i happen to think being informed about what happens in places like darfur is relevant as well. my great grandfather had a mark on his arm he got at a not too friendly sleep away camp in germany that was part of very similar situation. was that episode not 'relevant' because it wasn't going on in my neighborhood?
and sometimes when you understand real troubles in the world, you get a better perspective on some your own 'problems' that are actually just incoveniences. it allows you to become much more thankful for everything you are fortunate enough to have.
i'm just saying- be informed. - Ladon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes, there are a lot of good stories on Digg that go un-noticed in favor of the usual fanboy BS that comes up every five minutes.
- neofactor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3ingnored... try ignored... or were you going for "ignorant"?
Looks like your education was "ingnored" you poor challenged fool. - BigManOnCampus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dear Thomas Kostigen,
Go back to school and re-educate yourself about human nature, you seem to have lost all sense of it. When you blame technology for altering human behavior, you're displaying just about as much understanding of humanity's past as a flea. You end up sounding like the people who say that if we took away guns, noone would get murdered. Or the people who say that if we destroyed all weapons, that nations wouldn't squabble. Or how about the people that say that if we got rid cell phones that people in cities would be less rude? Get off your goddamn high horse and realize that technology doesn't alter anyones core behavior. If someone is going to be rude, they'll do it regardless of how they call people. If someone wants to kill you, they can do it without guns. If someone wants to ignore the news about some genocide on the other side of the globe to focus on TomKat or Britney's pregnancies, they can avoid the evening news and pick up a tabloid at the supermarket, they don't even need internet access.
In short, you're an idiot. Lucky you, you're well-paid for being idiotic. Not everyone gets that chance. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you don't like digg, make your own damn website..
Like seriously, it's a million times easier to go up against a website than it is to go against Viacom or Time Warner. Frankly, I think this reporter knows close to nothing about the web; maybe he just knows digg... - Canthros, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Fine. It isn't because they're ignorant, either.
- FlyboyP, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3VERY interesting idea... let the stories rise to the top on their own merit.
- optimus_maximus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I posted a story recently that is summed up here:
http://www.gavinphotography.com/digg/
I was amazed at the vehement and almost religious response from the digg community. They were actually prank calling and email-flooding the leecher. They took this more personally than me and have it over 2000 diggs.
So to add to your list:
5) Geek Humor - koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I did notice the button, and the del.icio.us one too. What reliable news site makes it so obvious that they want to be bookmarked? The NYTimes has its own bookmarking service (Times Select) that nobody I know uses, but that's still more respectable than having these little 'digg this' buttons on the top AND bottom of the page. It makes one question the site's motives. It's not a blog, independently run trying to make its way on the 'net. It's a funded, well-earning news site.
Digg drives a lot of traffic, but just as Ninjab3ar said above, it was never meant to be a source for accurate news and reports on world events and the like. It has always been a place to find the cool, unknown, odd and interesting things online. On Digg, traditional headlines don't matter. We have TV and news sites for that. Just like YouTube isn't for hourly news updates...
So, please try and handle our traffic spikes. Enjoy the ad revenue, but please don't make us your business model. In my honest opinion, the people "gaming" this site are not us 'topusers', but news reporters like Thomas trying to feel important and good about themselves. I think he's smarter than that and understands that getting dugg should not be his goal. Let's hope other writers understand that too. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I bet he drives a Crybrid Vehicle.
- bliz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2the author of the article, is ironically writing for publicity too...
the thing is, media is changing and we all have to accept it. in the future we could have newer ways to source for articles. bayersian bots searching the internet for articles which you are interested in etc... - spudnic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just because you CAN say stupid ***** all the time doesn't mean you should
- ninetynine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3but you didn't have to read it...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 153 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is