Would You Prefer Your Articles To Be Dugg or Shared?
Jul 08 2008 
View Comments
Lately I’ve been noticing that I pay more attention to how many times my articles are shared on RSSmeme and Readburner rather than how many times they’ve been voted for on Digg. I think I can safely say that it’s much easier to get your article shared rather than dugg, though I’m not sure why since it’s the same action with a different name. However, I want to ask you whether you’d prefer your article to be dugg on Digg or Shared via Google Reader or a similar service. First, here’s a look at the differences between the two actions.
Getting Dugg on Digg
Cons: It’s hard to get your article dugg. I think the reason why is because the process is much more extensive than sharing an item in Google Reader and because the point of getting dugg is to hopefully make the front page of Digg. The chances of making the front page of digg are pretty slim unless you’re Kevin Rose, which can effectively dissuade people from digging your article.
Pros: On the other hand the benefits of getting dugg are massive. Digg gets a ton of traffic from millions of people on the internet every month. If your article makes it to the front page of Digg, you can expect to your site to slow to a crawl and possibly stop showing up all together. The traffic is awesome and traffic is good, especially if you have advertisements that could use a few clicks.
Having Your Items Shared Via Google Reader
Cons: Having your items shared is another way to gain popularity. However, this popularity varies from Digg, especially if that item makes it onto FriendFeed. While you’ll get a nice amount of traffic, it won’t be nearly as much as Digg. Also, your target audience would be a lot more specific. A variety of users visit Digg, but normally early adopters and technology evangelist use Google Reader, let alone the ‘Share Item’ feature.
Pros: However, something special can happen. Conversations are more likely to start on and around your article if it were shared more so than if it were dugg. This can bring in a ton of linkbacks. Also, you’re more likely to get visitors that will stick around rather than receive visitors that are only there to read that particular article and nothing more.
So Which Will It Be?
Now that you’re aware of some of the pros and cons. Which would you choose now? Was it the same choice you had in mind when you saw the title of this article?
LOVED IT? SHARE IT!:
Hard to say , but I think I'd go with Google Reader. I follow those Google Reader folks that I find interesting. For me (and I haven't been entirely quiet about it), Digg has somewhat lost its appeal. That's not to say it's entirely dead, but I prefer specific targeted messages which I get from Google Reader.
If I HAD to choose, GR sharing is way better. The pros far outweigh the cons for me. Especially the point you make about the conversations (especially the intimate ones) developing — that's more important to me than the potential for a lot of pageviews.
I'm going to go with Google Reader as well, for the conversational element. I am not interested in getting my blogs Dugg but I am interested in having them start thought-provoking conversations. I'd rather 10 people share my stuff than 50 people Digg it.
I'm sure you can guess which I prefer :-) Another point on Google Reader sharing is that by doing so, you're inherently endorsing that piece of content to your contacts and those that subscribe to your link blog. With Digg, there is a massive pile-on effect of people digging stuff after it's submitted, just for the sake of pushing it to the homepage.
Just an fyi – your link to ReadBurner is broken …
Definitely share me. Have it show up in FriendFeed. Get some conversation happening.
I don't read a lot of stuff from Digg, but I do read direct recommendations from my “friends,” so I'm sure they do the same. I may still get dugg in the process, and probably by more people :)
Shared for me too. I don't know many people who use Digg, and here in Asia where community is emphasised (i don't mean online community, but traditional community), it works better when things are shared.
I'm going for shared too. Digg can get you great traffic, but seems to me rarely starts a conversation. Reader shares can take on a life of their own.
Definitely shared! No matter what huge traffic Digg can bring, it will almost never stay and, more importantly, everyone knows that Digg is constantly gamed. So when I see our post shared, I actually feel that someone really paid attention and wanted to add real visibility for the post. It will not result in the traffic spike, but it will add real value.
Dugg for sure, the traffic bump is lovely. Google Reader will bring insight, but the wave of random teenagers brings the party.
I don't have a lot of experience with Google Reader sharing. In fact, I probably never picked up on it until I became a FriendFeed user, as Netvibes used to be my sole RSS reader. My main traffic source is actually StumbleUpon but, like Digg, it appears to have horrible bounce rates and little return visit value, at least for my blog.
By process of elimination, I'd have to say “sharing” is preferable.
I replied on friendfeed but I will also post up on here as well. I am gonna go with Shared. I am a huge fan of Google Reader and thats how I get my news for the most part. I am more in the Shared Feeds/RSSmeme/Readburner scene then the digg scene…so its Shared for me.
I write about topics in embedded systems programming and development, so not articles of general interest.
I've never had an article dugg but have made it to the top of reddit's programming page. That was a big traffic day, and my RSS subscriber count also got a nice bump.
I've only just started using Friendfeed, and though it is interesting to follow it is overwhelmingly focussed on social media. Politics also comes up for discussion (likely due to the upcoming US election). If there is an active group of friendfeeders on my topic area I've yet to find them.
I don't know what other services are powered by the Google Reader shares, but I suspect they also have mostly attracted the early adopters interested mainly in social media topics.
So for my area of interest, being shared doesn't seem to accomplish much. I'd rather be dugg (on digg's technology subcategory), or submitted to reddit/hacker news/etc.
I'd rather have it shared. A digg will send a bunch of traffic to you, but you will not necessarily gain any readers. A share on Google Reader is coming from, most likely, someone the person knows, so you're more likely to get a new reader.
-Adam
For me, I would say shared. I have never been an overly active digg user as I find it to contain more crap than quality information. I write for many reasons, but achieving digg stardom is not one of them.
Is gaining more readers one of the reasons why you write?
You're seriously the first person I seen vote for being dugg. Kudos and great points as to why.
I feel the same way when my posts are shared. I feel like they really did read it and didn't just share it because they were asked to.
To be truthful, no. I write mainly as an outlet for my own internal monologue. I would, however, rather have someone who has read my work and understands my point of view disseminate my writing, than to have digg present my work with no salient background.
Would rather have it shared. Even if it reaches less people it won't fry my site if I gain traffic from it.
That and I like Mixx better than Digg.
I vote for both because each has their merits and minuses.
@Shared: A conversation is what social media is about. I have gleaned more about what my readers just refuese beleive even though it's true and what they want to argue down because of whatever issues they have. They could have paid a ton for information or just read up on the topic highly. When something very new comes along, like many of my articles, they like to refuse there is a change coming.
Also many have been abusing social bookmark sites for so long, that when I write about that being wrong, these spammers really hate to think that their prime source of traffic is going to die. So, conversation and disscussion gives me a chance to see where stop points will come in my sales letters and overall sales processes.
@Digg Social Bookmarking gives you another positive indicator in Google but only if you get 50+ to 100 Diggs. The more votes you get the more you will rank well in Google especially under niche terms.
The draw back to Digg is if you are not Digg top 100 you are not going to make the front page for the most part. My friend submitted a great article, 287 Diggs in 12 hours but the number of buries killed him and he never made it. There is a malicious insider group in Digg that will come down on you in force if they decide they do not like your post.
So, to sum this up, I prefer both. BTW, SEO, Internet marketing and email marketing do not do well on Digg, they just draw the bury brigade.
Tag, UR it! I tagged this blog as a fave on
http://dorkage.net/2008/07/free-link-juice-in-a...
dunno if you do memes, no obligation.
And this post turned me on to a whole new world of readburner. I use bloglines but I'm OK to change
I will prefer my articles to be shared around and get the conversations started. Gaining returning visitors is our objective.
Rif Chia
I will prefer my articles to be shared around and get the conversations started. Gaining returning visitors is our objective.
Rif Chia
Nice one. I have stumbled and twittered this for my friends. My friends will enjoy reading it also.