The last year has seen the rise of social news sites that give users editorial control of the sites' homepage by voting on their favorite stories. Users submit stories which are then voted on by other users, with the most popular stories appearing most prominently on the sites. The key to this concept is users spending time reading through submissions to find the most compelling stories. The three most prominent social news sites that I know of are Digg, Reddit and Netscape.
Recently, Erin's rant about Facebook was submitted to Digg by a random Digg user. As an experiment (and in an effort to promote Erin's post), I then submitted the same story to Reddit and Netscape as well just to see what would happen.
Erin's post failed to make it to the homepage of any of the three sites. But what I found interesting was the number of people who visited our blog based on the submissions and the number of votes the story received on each site (I voted for each story myself). Below is a breakdown:
Digg
Netscape
These results surprised me. I was surprised that the Reddit submission produced more visitors than Digg even though Digg is the 800 pound guerilla in this site genre (see chart). I was surprised by the lack of visitors from the Netscape submission. Anyway, here's what I learned/think I learned:
There are a number of other questions this exercise raised for me that can't really be answered:
Anyway, I find this stuff vaguely interesting, although I'd be the first to admit this is all very anecdotal. What do you think it all means?
Sign up today to have our latest posts delivered straight to your inbox.