This Story is Archived
Netscape Piles on Digg »
Posted by: jeremytoday 1 year, 11 months agoJason Calacanis is ready to place a bet. Mr. Calacanis, who sold his two-year-old blogging network, Weblogs Inc., to AOL last year, is now going after Digg, the social news site that has been making waves for its idea of allowing users to vote on news that should appear on the home page.
Read Full Story at redherring.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 11
-
msaleem
Sept. 15, 2006, 4:43 p.m.An interesting read, even though in the beginning it portrays Jason as a malicious character going after Digg as a personal vendetta of some sort.
Here's what tips you off:
1. Mr. Calacanis...is now 'going after' digg.
2. Netscape.com, a site that has recently begun modeling itself after Digg...
3. ...allegations that Mr. Calacanis' offer is a bid to entice Digg's most popular users and raise the pressure on his rival.
-
jeremytoday
Sept. 15, 2006, 4:54 p.m.Digg and Netscape as of right now are so different from each other in terms of content. Digg is still more of a tech oriented site, while netscape users, who comment and vote, tend to lean toward the news site, world, politics, war, etc...
-
-
wayjer
Sept. 15, 2006, 6:01 p.m.I agree with you 100% Jeremy, I was going to say exactly the same thing but you beat me to it. Netscape is more news oriented, but I think it is also more well rounded with all of the different channels also.
-
ARealPatriot
Sept. 15, 2006, 10 p.m.True, the real difference between digg and Netscape is the users, but more importantly this seems to be a direct result of the construction and moderation of the site.
Much like the current republican administration (couldnt resist), digg runs with a heavy hand, banning and censoring people who dont fit the apparent profile they are looking for. As such, its become a pretty inbred site, made up of a few cults of personality who all basically promote the same things with very little or no diversity - and really not much critical thought or opinion at all. This situation would not have existed, had digg not banned people and censored their posts en-mass to try to cater to said audience.
It seems they got a little big for their britches, and are now paying the price, mostly losing anything that made them an interesting place to visit.
-
okitech
Sept. 16, 2006, 1:58 a.m.same same...To me the most compelling thing missing was that part at the very bottom which key the whole importance of the article.... there is no "netscape this link" to drag the eyeballs. I think this is how netscape is missing the mark. It does not imply competion but why doesn't link exist to begin with? Not popular with site owners / operators? Does netscape feel above the oppuritunity for eyeballs to use something other than the arcane "submit" button they provide? I know a few of those questions are way off mark but the bottom line is the netscape link is not presence ....no presence actual or perceived = no eyeballs. love okitech
-
tanbo
Sept. 16, 2006, 2:50 a.m.The idea of paying the top users of digg 1000 a month to work at Netscape simply won't work. It does not appear one becomes a top "digger" by simply posting the most unique stories that could be found - there are other forces at work. It's not entirely clear what they are but they could include the pure number of stories posted and dugg (which could mean simply that if you were a member for a longer period of time, you have an advantage), forming an "alliance" with friends, maybe leaving lots of comments...who knows.
Point being, they are replaceable - once they are gone, new people will take their place. Kevin realizes this (as well he should since its his algorithm) when he says the top dggers change every 6 months.
Don't get me wrong, I like Netscape, especially because it's less tech oriented and more focused on world news events. However, I dont find the headlines here to be much different from NYTimes.com or CNN.com.
-
KeithAdv
Sept. 16, 2006, 3:32 a.m.As the link below indicates, Digg has more visitors and is trending up. Netscape is trending down. In three months, Netscape has slipped in ranking by 156 places. Digg has increased by 37 places. Despite Mr. Calacanis' confidence, it appears Digg isn't the one trying to play catch-up here. If these numbers are accurate, it's hard to predict a successful future for Netscape.
-
Gmailer
Sept. 16, 2006, 8:42 a.m.slipping because jeremy is on the knob again. and the info is extermely old. I think everyone is over the digg vs netscape thing
-
hackthis
Sept. 16, 2006, 9:23 a.m.gmailer: agreed
keithandy: Thanks for the insight and great move adding the references.
agreed this is extremely old jerermy leave the dead horse alone it is gonna get you in trouble with the animal groups
-
michaelgray
Sept. 16, 2006, 11:50 a.m.The downside of the "user created content" model comes when users realize they don't get a piece of the pie. When someone offers them part of th action things change. Then the problem become maintaining editorial integrity .
All 11 comments are shown.
