What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
73 Comments
- estvir, on 10/12/2007, -5/+85Use paragraph breaks, please, think of the children.
- Ascendant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+71But... then... how is that kid in the headphones supposed to make his 60 million dollars?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+39shut the hell up about digg already, i'm getting sick of these masturbatory articles
- marcuschi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+39Well, now is the best time to sell. With Digg becoming so saturated with fake diggers, spam, copycats, and duped stories, it's hard to appreciate the same value it once had. Like with anything revolving around social atmospheres (as stated in the Tipping Point), going beyond a certain number of people poses a disconnect amongst groups and soon everyone will either clump to smaller more niche groups or disband all together. So it's probably best to sell, use the money to invest in newer technologies and ideas, and repeat the cycle. I agree, Digg isn't about money. Digg has so much power and potential to utilize the knowledge and resources of everyday people. Coming from a designer/strategist's standpoint, I'm constantly amazed at how quickly I can follow trends from Digg. It's like getting a glimpse of the present and future, 20 minutes a day. When the James Kim story broke, all sorts of people became detectives for a day, employing Google map skills, setting up charity blogs, and offering whatever knowledge they had to shed some light on the mystery at the time. Digg became a living, breathing social entity... like a Web 2.0 Captain Planet. =) But, unfortunately, with all great things there's great responsibility. And I believe Digg has grown too big to manage. Kevin Rose and the Digg team have pioneered the Digg/news-democratization model, but now it's up to them to push that standard to create something new. I say sell it to those sucker corporations. Let them destroy it like they always do. But let a new innovation be born. We will always be the generation to say, "I'll sell you this idea because I've got something better." Digg is history in the making. Let's never forget that. And by selling, they'd be immortalizing it.
- tastypastry, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Digg will eventually "sellout". And you can't blame them, it cost a lot of money to run this site. Theres a reason why Kevin and everyone else behind Digg is so focused on this site, because they hope it will make them a lot of money, and thats what running your own business is all about.
- GaffleSnipe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26"Who is to say that Yahoo wouldn’t buy Digg and start to plant articles that shine them a in a brighter light than Google?"
Uh . . . those stories would probably get buried anyway. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+34another picture from an earlier article:
http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/4/42/Krose.jpg/459px-Krose.jpg - tshawkins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10If yahoo where to buy digg, they would treat it as they have every other recent system they have bought, bring the hosting inhouse, to improve availablity and reliebility, maybe enable yahoo id login, and add "digg it" links to yahoo media pages. Yahoo is not stupid, they wont buy a property and then try to change it, they will grease the wheels and provide the support only a big company can bring, but they are not going to shell out millions for a property and then try to change from the very thing that made it sucessfull.
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9If you own the technology that's a fairly easy fix. There's already "algorithms" in place doing strange things on Digg. I'm still researching but will post about it soon.
- TopBanana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@kevinmotel
Click fraud won't help anyone - kb0x, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8That will teach you to sleep in a bath full of custard.
- mille716, on 10/12/2007, -1/+71.) From watching diggnation, I really don't think so.
2.) You're a homophobe douchebag. Please do go away. - leftfield, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7because you wake up and realize you are a butterfly.
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I woke up but I'm just wet and sticky. :(
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The reason to not buy digg for any serious amount of money is because digg isn't making jack squat from Google adsense ads.
Kevin himself said they only made 3 million bucks from google ads last year, even though they had 20 million unique visitors per month. With that kind of traffic on a site like cute overload.com or something, you would be making at LEAST 30 million with google ads. Diggs 3 million in adsense revenue didn't even cover the costs of their bandwidth to run this site, he said.. much less salaries.
The problem is that digg readers either
1) run firefox with adblock and never see the ads
2) have learned to "tune out" the google ads and never click on them
To make money with google ads you need traffic, and you need stupid people who can't tell the difference between a navigation link on your site and a google text ad. The users on digg may not be geniuses, but they're experienced enough to just ignore the ads.
That's why digg isn't worth much at all. Slashdot has the same problem, btw. Their users are even more hardcore than diggers, and nobody is going to buy slashdot for 500 million dollars either. - danielrh9, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I for one would no longer visit Digg if it were owned by some media conglomerate. I visit here to get away from that. If Digg is owned by anyone other than Digg, it ceases to be Digg.
- thewump, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Why not?
- JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The premise of the article is that digg shouldn't be sold because it could become biased.
All media is biased in one way or another and digg is no exception. By reading digg, an alien from another world could justifiably conclude that Ubuntu is the most popular computer operating system on this planet. And who's to say that the ranking algorithms aren't already tilted to reflect someone's personal viewpoint? Has anyone seen the code? - kb0x, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@rjodwyer
Even if he is gay, He only wants you to visit his site, Not suck his *****. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Digg isn't about money"
Not for you perhaps, and i am sure Kevin does enjoy his job and it isn't *just* about money, but it is about money. Would digg have come into being if money ultimately wasn't a factor?
You also seem to expect a place like this to remain pure and clean, that somehow only the good eggs will come and no-one will try to spam/shamelessly promote their sites, etc...
I don't like to call people naive, but there are some sides of humanity that will never go away. Wishful thinking and remembering times gone by as better than they proabably were is another one of them. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4here is a idea guys, lets all chip in i got six dollars, ahh ***** it lets get a pizza
- mille716, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Thats more likely because so many of Kevin's fans check out his profile and see what he's digging. Doesn't mean he's forcing them on the front page.
- autodata, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I really have to wonder about anyone who hasn't realized that digg is already completely infested by spam and astroturfing, both of which make up a large percentage of front page articles.
- 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Digger? I prefer Deegro
- anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3MONEY IS EVIL
END CORPORATE HEGEMONY NOW
PASS THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
FREE MUMIA NOW
HEY HEY HO HO OLD WHITE MEN HAVE GOT TO GO
BUSH LIED PEOPLE DIED
oh, wait. oh - okay. we're talking about digg.com. a website. not a way of life. cool. sorry for the mistake. - mille716, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Does anyone know how much revenue Digg makes from the google ads? Its gotta be quite a bit if Digg has now in the top 20 websites. Although I don't like it, I'd be willing for Digg to expand those (just a bit though) if it would allow Digg to remain independent.
I've always been appreciative of how transparent Kevin Rose has been with the Digg community. It be nice if we could get a comment from Kevin about Diggs future plans sometime soon. - mtownand1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2*shreds huge novelty check for 100 mil*
- GorillaButler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That article was lame. For paragraphs? Ads in every corner of the screen? Sigh. Digg is great in theory. It's got a great interface, it looks great, and Kevin is improving the sites technology all the time. But it's only as good as its community, and to be frank digg's community (like most unmoderated web forums) has been getting worse and worse. I started reading this site in '05, and since then the stories linked have seriously dropped in quality. As it stands now, digg is a forum for the google generation to discover old hackneyed internet memes while sophisticated users either shrug or post blog spam to game a digg effect and get some add revenue. Last year I stopped visiting fark in favor of digg, but now I find myself going back to fark for funny headlines and entertaining comments.
- 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think Wikipedia should buy Digg - nice and neutral...
- HanSolo69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well one can only hope that when the time comes for Digg to be bought out, that they hire you as their top advisor. Because i'm sure "dude, that's THE MAN trying to buy you out." will really sway them to your side.
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Here's the fallacy of your argument - you aassume that the same sort of "story pushing" doesn't already happen with the owners of digg? Look at Kevin's profile and tell me how many stories he's dugg have not been frontpaged?
- FenBar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yahoo bought Flickr and Upcoming, which I use everyday, and personally I've seen nothing but improvements (save for a few annoyances). And let's face it being bought out is the dream for the creators of sites like these.
However, I'd definitely agree that when giant companies buy up sites like Digg it does leave me with a "dirty" feeling. - rowlodge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2just seems better where it's at. it's like a country within a country, to be taken over by anybody else would make everybody feel as if we were being invaded.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'd buy Digg for a $1.
IBDFAD
(See: Robocop) - noerrorsfound, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2WHAT? Oh, you said *digger*!
- washcapsfan37, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have no problems with Digg being bought out, as long as whomever does so runs it without a ulterior motive (as expressed above by many, like Yahoo or MS using it to promote positive stories about themselves). Although Digg is run well, I have always had some reservation about how stories get promoted. A story should rise based on the merit of the story, not on some formula or who is submitting/digging it. Let us, the Diggers as a whole, tell each other what is best.
- kevinmotel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i'd say libertarian more than anything else
- DooM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Uh - how about to own it for profit..? That's at LEAST two good reasons to start a business.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1sell it. change is good.
- vroom101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2In the current Web 2.0 era, Digg.com is a force to be reckoned with. If Founder Kevin Rose is offered a legitimate certified check for $300 million (US dollars) for the site, I suspect he will politely listen and refuse the offer; a $550 million (again US dollars) offer, his heartbeat will pickup significantly, but again he'll probably decline. At an offer to buy Digg.com for $900 million U.S. dollars (cash), he'd probably think that's sufficient for starting the Web 3.0 movement and probably sell Digg.com...
...And for the first time in Digg.com's history, there'd be zero activity for a few hours due to the mass fainting of Digg's 600,000+ users because of the sale (and the mental overload of thinking about $900,000,000 in the bank account). - aceslick911, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6No dream lasts forever
- ToastPop, on 04/17/2009, -0/+1Is this really such an amazing revelation? It's common sense. If a company owns a website, the website's content would be in their best interest. Duh.
- noddyxoi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Some slashdot news are bought. That was implemented some time ago and that is public knownledge.
- michaelwilde, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Agree.. Digg will probably sell out.. why.. because they sold out to VC money... now don't get me wrong.. i don't mean taking VC money is necessarily "selling out"--like people often refer to musicians as having sold out... But while Kevin got it started on a shoe string, it took a shot in the arm by Omidyar and other VCs to make it sing. VC's need their money back, in spades. They generally have three ways to get money back, 1. Go Public, 2. Sell to a larger company for a hefty profit, 3. The company can pay the VC's back... Since "3" isn't likely, and "1" is a long row to hoe, "2" is more likely.
But, I think digg should try to be a standalone media company. Resist the temptation for exit, be a strong surviving business.. maybe even at some point become a major media outlet. I can see it now Digg would make one hell of a TV channel.. think Current.TV but WAY better. - phogasmic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love Digg and I appreciate Kevin Rose for putting it together, eventually he should cash in though. I know it will ruin digg because the stink of corprate influence will smell from every post, however Rose built a good product and deserves his pay day.
- foamweapons, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's too bad Digg has investors. Investors want money.
Digg is also a platform for distributing information, built by a community. Communities want freedom to make the platform their own.
One day these two forces will collide and Digg will change beyond recognition. It's not all bad though, things change so fast the next new thing will be there to replace Digg when it happens. - Jay730, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1anything can be monetized
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1He's supposed, to learn how to use. His, punctuation the right, way. Dammit.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And oh, no one really cares about who owns what. If a site is appealing, people will use it. If it sucks, even google can't save it. Google's own video service is an example of this, and that's why they bought Youtube. Google also scrapped their Answers service. It's about adding some value, and no one really gives a hoot about who owns anything.
-
Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 