digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at mashable.com

HOW TO: Survive a Social Media Revolt

mashable.com — There have been numerous ‘revolts’ on Digg (social news), hundreds of thousands of users have created numerous groups to stage protests on Facebook (social networking), and hundreds of blog posts have been written about how terrible Twitter’s service and up-time used to be and what a poor job they were doing in communicating their problems ..

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 29, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

60 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • PhoenixFlames, on 01/28/2009, -2/+43These revolts are simply a protest online. The issue is, the powers to be on digg, facebook and twitter don't give 2 ***** about their users,
  • AmyVernon, on 01/28/2009, -1/+25I have to tip my hat to Hulu for admitting it handled the situation poorly. Good for them. Even though they can't fix the ultimate issue (FX wants to take "Sunny" offline), they still left their users knowing why and that it wasn't the site's fault.
  • daniellesmyname, on 01/28/2009, -0/+19These guidelines apply for almost any online community. I recently worked at an office where the Owner and CEO of the company had a blog available on their intranet. He would blog weekly about updates in the industry, happenings in the office, plans for the future, and occasionally even looking back at the past. It helps that his writings were engaging and I genuinely wanted to read them, even looked forward to them, but I think it was an excellent example of reaching out to your ‘users’. I have known this man almost my whole life (I grew up with his kids), and have had ties to the company since it started almost 20 years ago, but many of the other employees at the office have never even met the man. Not only that, but employees always leave comments on his posts- adding their two cents, bringing up other points, or even just thanking him for the post. It has established a community within the office. People always stress how important communication is, and no matter how big the company, or what the nature of their work is, these tips for communication, and for handling problems are valuable.
  • mmittimm, on 01/29/2009, -1/+18There's a huge problem with your party analogy: Most party hosts don't profit or make a living off of their guests.
    "Digg, Twitter, Facebook, and hulu don't owe you anything."
    Actually they owe us their entire existence. Without users there is no site.
  • FlyingPhotog, on 01/28/2009, -3/+18Digg revolts are much like the student protests in Tiananmen Square. They get a lot of attention, but fail to accomplish the goal.
  • Carbunkulous, on 01/28/2009, -5/+20O NO I CANT FLICK POO AT MY FRIENDS ON FACEBOOK. AWWWWWWW
  • Rothbardosaurus, on 01/29/2009, -0/+12Is it really a "revolt" if the very next day, the revolters go back to exactly what they were doing anyway?
  • binky79, on 01/29/2009, -8/+20Complaining about how these sites are run are the equivalent to being invited to a free party and having a hissy fit when it isn't the best party you've ever been to. Digg, Twitter, Facebook, and hulu don't owe you anything. These are their websites to with as they see fit, not yours. You people sound like whiny bitches who can't be happy with what you are given for FREE. Some people just like to complain about anything and everything. If you don't like the way these sites are run don't go to them, or make a better one.
  • mmittimm, on 01/29/2009, -0/+8Right but we're not talking about one person wanting to make fundamental decisions about a restaurant, this is hundreds of thousands of users or more telling a company that they don't like the changes made to the site that they made popular to begin with.
    I'm willing to bet that if Outback Steakhouse suddenly got rid of their Blooming Onion and thousands of people protested then they'd respond very quickly. (Goofy example of course, but it gets the point across)
    I'm not saying sites should respond to every grumble it's users make. I remember when Facebook added the newsfeed and there was a fierce uproar from nearly everyone. However it's slowly just become less annoying as everyone learned to accept it and now it's an integral part of the layout. There's no harm in complaining about it though.
  • mmittimm, on 01/29/2009, -0/+7Dissidents != Whiners
    If every dissident were considered a whiner then this world would be run by fascists.
  • inactive, on 01/29/2009, -1/+8Jesus christ what an idiot.
    But wow I can't believe it was so long ago.
  • TheAirLoom, on 01/29/2009, -0/+7I survive by not giving a damn.
  • BigMacMcChicken, on 01/29/2009, -0/+6Dammit-

    The next time I have to read some self proclaimed Social Media "expert" or "consultant" repeat the same obvious crap I'm going to kill myself. Wow: "listen" and "stay connected" and "be forthright." Jesus christ, enough. Enough with the PR people and "consultants" trying to boost a non-existent resume by copy and pasting the same crap some other dude wrote about the exact same topic and hoping some potential client stumbles on it and hires them. If you're a top ranked member on social news sites, AND writing this drivel, how much consulting could you possibly be doing!?
  • z00k, on 01/29/2009, -2/+8http://i41.tinypic.com/5xoqci.jpg

    May 1st, 2007

    Never forget.

  • 4rp4n3t, on 01/29/2009, -0/+5To look at the Steakhouse analogy - *telling* a company you don't like changes they have made has never and will never make any difference. There is only one thing that does make a difference, and that is the bottom line. If you know you don't like changes made to the menu at a restaurant, you don't go there, eat and then complain. You just DON'T GO THERE ANYMORE. It's really ***** simple - let your feet (fingers, mouse hand, whatever) do the talking.
  • DirtyVicar, on 01/29/2009, -0/+5HOW TO: Survive a Social Media Revolt:
    Log off and go read a book.
  • inactive, on 01/29/2009, -1/+52008/9 internet buzzword.

    I'm waiting for a Social Porn site.
  • msaleem, on 01/29/2009, -2/+6@binky, They make millions of dollars a year from our participation, I would hardly call it a free party. It's because the site owners have the same attitude as you that many of these sites end up pissing their communities off. If you'd read the article you would see that Kilar (Hulu CEO) agrees that they owe the community everything...
  • esumti, on 01/29/2009, -1/+5Absolutely!
    And as long as the investor money lasts, why should they?
  • sickthoughts, on 01/29/2009, -1/+5All my wonderful submissions never receieve the light of day... it's a ***** travesty I tells ya.
  • javiero, on 01/29/2009, -0/+4Rabble rabble rabble rabble !!!
  • torressr3, on 01/29/2009, -1/+5we won against the hd encryption key block.
  • Pixelante, on 01/29/2009, -0/+3And diggers don't even have a square. Face it, in a world where the Seattle anti-global movement was defeated, any online action is doomed. I'm beginning to think that even offline, real-world actions have no hope anymore.
  • str3ama, on 01/29/2009, -1/+4Well there's a good deal of speculation over whether Kevin Rose actually changed his stance over the HD-DVD key because of the user revolt and risked facing a lawsuit, or whether it was because by then the hd-dvd key had been so far spread that even the HD-DVD lawyers weren't bother trying to have it pulled, and so Kevin knew he could save face since it no longer mattered.

    I wonder if he still sleeps on a "sofa"?
  • inactive, on 01/29/2009, -0/+3You didn't win anything. Kevin Rose just said some ***** to shut you all up. It's not like Digg would be sued for a code that was all over the internet by then.
  • ThirdPrize, on 01/29/2009, -0/+3Those were the days.
  • binky79, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2"hundreds of thousands of users or more telling a company that they don't like the changes made"

    In a community of over 150 million active users (im talking about Facebook from the article) a few hundred thousand people is the exception. We can't expect these social networks to bend their will to the few who, even you acknowledge, were not necessarily correct in their grumbling.
  • binky79, on 01/29/2009, -2/+4Yes our traffic generates revenue. But we're not frakking shareholders. Just because I eat at Outback Steakhouse that doesn't mean I get to make fundamental decisions about the company's direction.
  • MacParrot, on 01/29/2009, -1/+3That's it exactly. I see all the people whining on Digg about power users duping stories and getting all the front page. Guess what whiners. They aren't doing anything special that you can't do yourself if you would take the same time and amount of effort! Most (most that is) of the dupes you complain about wouldn't have made the front page otherwise.

    Face it. You don't want equality, you want instant gratification without the effort.
  • trashsportcat, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2"How many of these whiners do you think actually support these sites by clicking adds, buying stuff, or donating money?"
    They actually support the community by creating content that grabs attention and motivates to participate.

    All hail to the mighty trolls in the series of tubes!

    it's all about the lulz.
  • Deliguy, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2People revolt against the big sites for poorly catering to the masses but refuse to give the smaller social sites a chance because they're not as popular.
  • seanovan, on 01/29/2009, -2/+4If you don't like it, go somewhere else.
  • thejokker, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2If they don't stop using the service, why should the companies change their policies?

    People can join all the facebook groups they can, they can post all the 'power user' articles they can, but unless they change the sites they visit there won't be much impact.

    Facebook cares about things like users, click traffic, time spent on site, not how many people join the "join this group if you want facebook to ..."
  • DirtyVicar, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2Mr. BabyMan's crying you a river.
  • spyd3rweb, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2Don't investors usually want some kind of return?
  • groo68, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2Actually i haven't seen one with a better UI. On the surface digg has been refined and works simply and well, it's just under the hood where it has problems. sites like reddit have a lot of channels and you have to dig to get ones you like, but then you miss a lot, and mixx has a terrible ui. and the smaller sites also have power users. digg just needs to put a cap on how many articles you can submit a month, and how many articles you can digg a month, or make submissions anonymous, so that only the comments have names and a friends network can be based on people liking what other people say and so forth. shouts are against what digg was originally for because they allow more bias than there was before them.
  • SteelChicken, on 01/29/2009, -0/+2As if "social networking" is important enough for anyone to give a damn.
  • sgtbutterscotch, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1Nah, it's not that they don't give a *****. It's that they remain oblivious to the anguish of the common man. Or something.
  • mmittimm, on 01/29/2009, -2/+3What's with calling every site a Social [blank] site lately?
  • joshualamgroup, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1Oh no you can't poke them too..
  • jgtg32a, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1Ah the 21 century got to love it, I want it but I don't want to work for it.
  • airabongco, on 09/11/2009, -0/+1I don't think that a 'social media revolt' does pretty much damage, unless, I guess, reinforced by a successful offline movement.
  • binky79, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1I have no problem with complaining. I'm complaining right now. My problem is that these small pockets of individuals think that these sites need to bend to their will.
  • Topsiders, on 01/30/2009, -0/+1Buncha pussies...I survived the Angelfire revolt of '93, and I have the .gif scars to prove it.
  • javaroast, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1BS. All of these sites want to build a community and from their standpoint the more people they get the better. If they don't listen to the community the community will move on and they have nothing. And any successful business is going to look at feedback from their community, customers, users. What sounds like whiny bitching to me is someone who thinks that I can't offer my input to a community I'm part of. There are logistics involved that can make the changes more gradual than I might like and I understand those. But, what site owner wouldn't like the fact that people care enough about a site... and feel that they are part of the site enough to offer their input on how the site should function. They may own the site, and the ultimate decisions are theirs to make... but the community adds value to the site. Without a community all of these sites are worth nothing.
  • Kabloink, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1There has been protests on social sites? I think much like the majority of Americans, I haven't noticed.
  • binky79, on 01/29/2009, -1/+2"If you'd read the article you would see that Kilar (Hulu CEO) agrees that they owe the community everything..."

    They certainly do owe the community everything. But the whiners are not the community, they are the exception. I think the whiners make up about 5-10% of the community (maybe less). Of course it seems like more only because they are the loudest. BTW... How many of these whiners do you think actually support these sites by clicking adds, buying stuff, or donating money?
  • FlyingPhotog, on 01/29/2009, -0/+1Power-users.
  • danscannnn, on 01/29/2009, -1/+2except digg doesn't have tanks...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.