What is Digg?65 Comments
- KillerJ59J, on 10/12/2007, -8/+66God, I love Starcraft.
- gamasutra, on 10/12/2007, -4/+40power overwhelming
- eastbrook, on 10/12/2007, -0/+33Good research. Seems we diggers (even those of us who are new) may be a rather lazy bunch given so many stories come from large conglomerate media channels. It's too bad because the Internet has so much potential to democratize news and offer alternatives to mainstream media.
- hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Spam.
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23People (Myself included) really need to stop submitting /most/ Engadget stories, half the time they're a day late to the party, re-use others content and add bad commentary/bias. Now, Ars Technica is a site which deserves it, for the most part their content is their own and is well written.
Actually, people need to start using direct links as much as possible. - profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Quality content means you don't have to pay for diggs.
- jattsona, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20impressive
- hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Actually, Crooks and Liars is #11 with 25955 total diggs and 20 homepage stories. :)
- hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@cutkomp,
Hum, definitely something to think about. A problem I foresee though is less popular categories (such as sports) only have 50-60 total articles posted all month. The analytics on that would probably be a 50-60 way tie with one only article hitting homepage per domain (maybe a handful have two).
Possibly I could do that on the top 5 categories, however with ones like Tech News dominating, it'd be very similar to this study. It might be interesting to see categories like Political and Apple though, you're right. Does anyone else think this is a worthy endevour? - reddevil3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Digg did start out as a technology news website you know...in fact I think there's not enough tech news.
- Cutkomp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@hmaugins
Thanks for the info. Have you thought about breaking it down by category? I'm a political digger, most of those tech sites are foreign to me. It'd be interesting to see if diggers are getting their political news from a good mix, or to scope out any patterns. - hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12@Cutkomp, www.lewrockwell.com was pretty low on the list. They only had 5 homepage stories and 4359 total diggs.
- Roscoe1976, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Lets just change the name of Digg to Endiggtechnica.com :)
Seriously though, would love to see more diversity on the site, and see some of the other categories besides technology make the front page more. - vemerge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Sure, why not. Any type of statistical analysis of Digg will be worth looking at.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11so, if someone creates a mashup using these pages as sources, what could happen with digg?.
- zappo1776, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Excellent job. This list fits where I usually end up almost perfectly. I guess I'm more typical than I thought.
- Cutkomp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Something to take into consideration if you do the political analysis, a lot of political articles get buried for nonsensical reasons. I'd hate to have you spend much time or effort doing such a thing only to have it get buried.
- FregTK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I don't mind linking to professional blogs like Engadget, as often they are actually the first to report stories from trade shows and other conferences (although they are sometimes late). They also have interesting commentary on occasion.
It's the kind of digg submissions like "Look at me I found a cool link on the interweb and wrote a crap post on it at my lame blog come give me traffic now so I can make money from adsense" that are annoying. Direct links all the way on those. - madeingermany, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6no lifehacker? Somehow half the stories I find on digg are from lifehacker....
- ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6calculator?
- meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5They might not *always* be non-biased but they're certainly the most open, public and non-politically affiliated news source in the world.
Put it this way, about a year ago they ran a story on the BBC news and the World Service pointing out their own failings after a critical public report. I've never seen any other broadcaster criticise themselves on air and i doubt i ever will. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Uhh you see those "Read more" links on engadget's posts? Yea that's where they summarize their news from. 90% of their digg submissions have that. Same with gizmodo unless their readers sent something in.
- JoJoMoMo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Hey Digg.com can you please make this type of website rankings a feature. Thanks.
- Maxamegalon2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I would have expected Crooks and Liars to be up there. They seem to get a lot of attention with their clips from the Daily Show and other news sources.
- stevejobs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You're onto something there. Time to cash out Kevin.
- tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Oh the tired old 'the BBC is the governments mouth-piece' thing. I can't even be bothered to argue it, but you're wrong.
- fuxjoey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4maybe you should explain how you conducted this study?
- MasterChi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@FreqTK - ""Look at me I found a cool link on the interweb and wrote a crap post on it at my lame blog come give me traffic now so I can make money from adsense""
Um, engadget does that and quite frequently from what this story is telling us. Have you not seen the page full of ads and so little story on engadget or do you forget to RTFA and just digg it with engadget in the link? - meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3And how do you explain the Hutton report?
The government went directly against the BBC, leading to the director-general's resignation, and all while the majority of citizens saw the report for the ***** it was. - javaripped, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3overall the BBC is nonbiased; however, when it IS biased, it's OPENLY biased. the commentator/reporter will pretty much make you aware of it, and their style of questioning is certainly unique from an american perspective.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@KillerJ59J
"God, I love Starcraft."
What the hell does that have to do with anything in this story? - KoZo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Sometimes I can see an article on Reddit first then after a couple of hours it's here, with the same description.
- HsoKinees, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2no LifeHacker :O
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Welcome to the internet.
All the major sites (/., reddit, fark, digg, etc) have most of the same content - fartingbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But they are the sites that get dugg, so it is fair. Or maybe you expect the person who did this analysis to look up the sources listed on every article over the past month that made the frontpage (theres only several thousand after all...) and then attribute it to that website/person instead?
- Ellsass, on 11/05/2008, -1/+2I don't know if it's really fair to put cnn.com and news.yahoo.com on the list like that. 99.9% of CNN's stories and 100% of Yahoo's stories come from other sources, mostly the wire services (AFP, Reuters, AP).
It would be more interesting to see those wire services listed separately, especially to compare them to BBC (which is on the list). - krinthekuz, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1then you get sued like belgian google news.
- kakapu4u, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You can create your own mashup pretty easily. Just grab the link for the RSS feeds for each of these sites, put them on your google homepage. On mine, there's Wired, NY Times, engadget, autoblog, lifehacker, gizmag, NORML, physorg, scientific american, and Ben's bargains. Not really a mashup, maybe, but you get the headlines of all those sites on a single page.
- profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@hdtvdust
Do some research before you start a random witch hunt.
Go through the first few pages of my diggs. In the last month I've dugg a total of THREE Consumerist links, and the most recent one was 25 days ago (and two of those three links were completely original content, in the form of emails submitted by users). I read the Consumerist blog outside of digg, so I don't feel the need to digg any of their stories unless I feel that it deserves more exposure.
I should hope they wouldn't pay me for doing such a shoddy job of helping them "game the system".
EDIT: BTW, where's this proof you speak of? - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They should do a ranking for political news on Digg. That would be good for a laugh.
- Threnody, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1None of what you said applies to Ars Technica, the top ranked site.
- hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@geekee:
More details are here, including how thinkprogress.org stacks up:
http://digg.com/tech_news/Most_Powerful_Sites_on_Digg_Recalculated_by_Topics - hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The above article got buried. :(
It has a lot more descriptive information than this one. Check it out anyway. - hmaugans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've spent most of the day working on this. Thanks for the suggestion(s). :)
http://www.digg.com/tech_news/Most_Powerful_Sites_on_Digg_Recalculated_by_Topics - cesarin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2What about the ten top hosting companies?
- airbball23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0very nice!
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1What about thinkprogress.org?
- COBOLdinosaur, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Well this just enforces the feeling the Digg is turning into a collection point for garbage pickup. The sites listed are re-hashed content from other sources and major media outlets with stories that are available all over. Digg used to be filled with unique content from small sites written by independent journalist, developers, and insiders; now most of what makes the front page just caters to $$$$, either because of gaming or because the source has big bucks for promotion.
I guess it is easier for elites to post and vote for a small number of sources, but they need to focus on better quality if they are going to dictate what us more casual Diggers see. - VickyB, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3"#9 - news.bbc.co.uk - 27 homepage stories - 23236
I assume most of Digg is US based, so the BBC often adds an international non-biased spin on topics."
Pah! You want to try living in the UK and then see how "non-biased" the BBC is. Granted - they're not as bad as FOX but if you want positive government spin then just go straight to the BBC. One of the reasons the BBC shouldn't have to depend on the Government for control of its license fee. -
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is