Why I don't dig Digg

There is little doubt in my mind that Digg's significant contribution to making social media more conversational is questionable   think the company has a great future. I've had a subscription to it since just after they first came out.

But over time, I found myself using it yes and yes.  I just opened my Digg folder and realized I had not even looked inside for over a month. Here's what's wrong with it for me:

Personal relevance is more important to me than mass popularity.  I like the idea of people voting.  The concept has done wonders online for eBay. In fact, the concept of voting thumbs up or down on people, products and politicians has proved to be a pretty good thing in the real world.

But when it comes to choosing what I read and what is relevant to me, I'm only interested in opinions from people i know and trust.  I may be in one demographic.  you may be in another.  I may like opera and you may like Hip Hop or BeBop.

Digg's top vote getting content frequently does not interest me. That which does I find without using Digg. In fact, in the old fashioned days when i read lots of magazines and newspapers, I rarely read the most popular publication.  I respected the New York Times much more than I did the National Enquirer, which at the time had a larger circulation.

Several companies have tried to make it easier to find user defined relevance in news searching.  Personal Bee is one that looks good to me, but despite it's name it does not seem to have generated the buzz it needs to become a powerhouse.

I think it is very, very hard to let people find what is relevant to them and for a company to do that for masses of people. I look forward to using any tools that can help me find stuff that I personally consider either interesting or useful.

Comments

[Bob LeDrew]

I think that Digg is more useful as a barometer of the zeitgeist than as a definitive news source. At this point, I think the sample is a bit limited to the early adopters and the heavy-duty techies, but if digg or something like it goes mainstream, it becomes more and more able to tell people like me (in my case, PR flack and blogger) what the world is thinking about.

I think you're right to identify that Digg is weak at giving you what YOU're interested in; however, it's useful for a lot more than that.

BLeD.

PS: Just bought a copy of your book today and am looking forward to (pardon the pun) digging into it.

[Mark Harrison]

I still can't make up my mind about WHY digg is so less interesting that I'd hoped:

Theory 1: This is just another "short head" problem - digg is looking for hits in a space where the long tail is becoming more and more dominant.

(Actually, I first mistyped that paragraph as "long tale", which is kind of ironic.)

Theory 2: Digg is indeed a social niche, and I just don't fit in it. I suspect that, at 34, I'm about a generation too old to "get it" as far as the average Digger is concerned.

Oh - I read your book yesterday - and as a result of Chapter 11 re-titled my Blog.

[David]

Oh, the irony if this post got dugg!

[shel israel]

Mark,

At 62, I am soooo not the demographic that they could care less.

David,

If I get Dugg, please let me know. I'm no longer a subscriber and i could miss it.

[Another bored member]

Good comments!

I agree, I too have become more jaded with Digg, over time.

The articles are either totally unknown (unvoted), or the final few at the top.

Making comments is a waste of time, as within a day the discussion has moved on to the next flavor of the moment.

There is no continuity or development in the comments, its just a mass comment system with a short interest lifespan.

I always read the new entries, as they are far more diverse and interesting than the top listed ones.

But contrbuting? I have learned not to bother, its difficult to get your post noticed, comments mean nothing, with a 1 day lifespan, and voting is only marginally successful. I suspect there are voting blocks operating that are voting some aweful stories high.

There is no method of moderating the board either, so often I see people selling their sites repeatedly, or products directly. Its the submission of the mediocre most of the time with 5 minute blog entries, predominating.

Digg will be a flash in the pan without some strong structual reorganization. For me its now just a source of good stories.

[Dennis Howlett]

Shel - I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't get Digg - despite I have a link to it on every post. As far as I can tell, Digg reinforces what I call the Lemming Principle but which others might refer to as an example of the wisdom of crowds. Heck - I'm a Lemming!

Like you, I have no problem with voting systems for real world issues but it seems stuff llike Digg simply reinforces the human need to belong to something, even if it is a crowd of three.

I really question whether, in many cases, we're talking mass popularity or mass association with perceived popularity. Digital groupies?

The same is true of Technorati although from a different perspective. For instance, the Huffington Post may be required reading in the US but it's completely irrelevant to me in EU. Where all these rating/ranking systems fall down is in their lack of focus. So while there are lots of people I enjoy reading, a good 30% are largely irrelevant to what I do. They add peripheral interest.

I'd be a lot more likely to use these kinds of tool if they were focused to topic areas from which I could then select people of interest. That means using a much broader taxonomy (not folksonomy which we define as individuals) as a starting point.

I find most of the personalised service systems are either inaccurate or present me with a hideous interface. A lot could be done in both areas. It's not as though we don't have the technology. What we don't seem to have are companies listening to users. The very thing that drives attention.

Until these things are resolved I will remain as frustrated as you.

[Damon Billian]

"I think it is very, very hard to let people find what is relevant to them and for a company to do that for masses of people. I look forward to using any tools that can help me find stuff that I personally consider either interesting or useful."

This is why I am more prone to using del.icio.us as a social bookmarking tool. I can easily scan the tags to see what people have posted of interest & see if they align with my interests.

As the bulk of the population is probably not aware of digg or del.icio.us, it will be interesting to see if they do become more relevant as time goes by (I personally think they will continue to grow in influence). I also think that these systems can potentially erode the influence of the major search engines (linking ranks, generally speaking, favor older players on the internet than newbies).

[Stephanie Booth]

I've never liked digg either, a bit cheaply, I have to say, because I never really got near it.

I just don't like this "the more votes the more interesting" way of thinking. The more votes, the more "popularly average" something is.

I wish people would stop confusing quality and quantity...

[shel israel]

Stephanie,

I think the final sentence of your comment, is brilliant and summarizes a good deal of the problem as I see it. Wish I had sauid it.

[Stephanie Booth]

*blush*

[Justin Thorp]

I have found a few pearls within digg. It will unearth these hidden little gems that no one would ever see otherwise.

Most of the time a lot of the digg stuff is crap. I don't care what everyone else wants me to see because most of it is sensationalism and over blown. I want to hear what is important for me to know.

Heh don't even get me started on the political category of digg.

[Justin Thorp]

Every time I hear Michael Arrington say that Digg will be bigger then the New York Times, I laugh.