Social editing: just a fad or the future of news reading?
According to senior analyst at Hitwise, LeeAnn Prescott, Digg is the "101st most popular news and media Web site in the US" with 0.13% of the total of visits to these sites. Taking into consideration the whole picture, that's not all that bad.
Digg launched in December 2004; that means it has existed for a year and a half. The New York Times first published on the Web in 1995. YahooNews, the American Web's most popular news site, has only been around since 2002.
Furthermore, until two weeks ago, Digg was just a technology news site. It has just added science, world & business, videos, entertainment and gaming categories that are all in beta. YahooNews (essentially an advertisement for the AP which dropped the ball on being its own news aggregator, but that's another story), has aggregated all news since its inception.
If Digg can become the 101st most popular news site just being a technology site, now that it's expanding, what is there to stop it from jumping up in the rankings? And more importantly, what about young readers?
26% of Digg's users are between the ages of 18-24 and only 10% are over 55, the same demographic which comprises 35% of nytimes.com readership. Doesn't this say something, not only about the way that young people are reading the news online, but how they will continue to read the news throughout their lifetimes? Now that Digg has expanded into other categories, especially entertainment on which this demographic thrives, isn't the site's popularity sure to increase?
According to one person quoted by Barnako, Digg is just a "flavor of the month" and that the NYT will continue "attracting massive audiences to very hard to duplicate content - for a long, long time." Fair enough. But until now, the only section of the New York Times ranked on Digg was its technology section. Now that the entire paper is pretty much fair game for the socially edited news aggregator, isn't more NYT traffic, especially from younger readers, bound to come through Digg?
In the end, it may all come down to the personal preferences of newsreaders: readers more comfortable with the decisions of a few, professional editors will still read their news through their favorite publication; those which prefer the collective opinion of their newsreading peers will start their news searches with sites like Digg.
Which would you choose? Because chances are, as the numbers show now, those younger readers you're trying to attract are going to be very attached to social editing.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Social editing: just a fad or the future of news reading?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5839
I'm always amused at the hoohah about traffic rankings. Ultimately those rankings are pointless, because advertising at that level is purchased on a CPM basis, not full-run. While the rankings may bestow bragging rights, the real question is whether a given ad distribution channel delivers measurable results.
As for social editing (or social filtering, as I prefer to call it) -- I think it may not work in all newspaper markets but will work in many. U.S. newspapers are increasingly local in focus, but those in very large markets, state capital markets and university markets may be able to create value by aggregating links to a variety of "competitors" and allowing users to rank/rate/sort the results.
To understand the social process and its implications, newspaper companies need to be conducting experiments. At Morris, where I work, we have two experiments in place -- FanaticZone Remix ( http://www.fanaticzone.com/ ), focusing on sports, and Ruby Baboon ( http://www.rubybaboon.com/ ), focusing on celebrity gossip. I don't know of any other newspaper industry experiments in this area, unless you count investments. That's troubling.
HYDERABAD BASED MUNSIF AND SIASAT URDU DAILY EDITORS GRAB WAQF LANDS
Urdu Media War and the Wakf properties tussle in Hyd ; MiM Leader Akbaruddin Owaisi
(Friday, Dec 09, 2005 - 09:00 pm) TeamMedia war among Urdu dailies was taken to Assembly in Hyderabad, when MIM floor leader Akbaruddin Owaisi accused Siasat and Munsif Urdu daily owners of grabbing Wakf properties and demanded stern action against them.Mr Owaisi armed with statistics and details of all Waqf Lands which are being encroached upon said govt is going soft on these editors as they are trying to threaten the govt through there newspapers .In the same breath he also alleged that no action was taken against grabbers of Wakf properties in city and outside including Viceroy Hotel, Shaam and Sensation theatres, local reports inform. Turning his ire on owners of rival Urdu dailies, Siasat and Musif, he said, "Mr Zahid Ali Khan has illegally encroached Wakf property. He is a white collar land grabber. Why is the government keeping quite? You should put them behind bars." Shifting his heat on another Urdu daily Munsif owner, he remarked, "Mr Khan Lateef Khan...the double Khan.. too has encroached Wakf properties housing Santosh and Sapna theatres, yet no action has been taken. The government should take stringent action against encroachers of Wakf properties," he alleged. Reacting to Mr Owaisi's demand, minister for minorities welfare Mohd Fareeduddin assured that the government would enquire into the matter and would not "spare anyone however big he might be." Referring to allotment of land to one Tajuddin, he said the land was given on a lease for three years for agricultural purposes and the renewal would depend on the government He also accused them of trying to cover there illegal grabbing of land by bribing some high officals in the govt .
posted by HyderabadLive at 5:30 AM