Digg and Reddit: Please Learn The Difference Between Original Content and Blogspam

By Daniel Miessler on December 27th, 2006: Tagged as Digg | Reddit | Social | Spam

Nothing is worse for systems like Digg and Reddit than repetitive, mediocre content. These networks are designed to magnify the efficiency of the Internet by taking excellent content — regardless of source — and promoting it through impartial democracy.

Ultimately, the goal is to minimize the time it takes someone to get up to speed on the most original/interesting content within a given area of focus, be it technology, politics, or whatever. When done correctly, the concept is quite beautiful.

Spamming vs. Contributing

The system breaks down horribly, however, when these communities fail to understand the difference between submitting original content and blogspamming. Many are confused about what blogspamming actually is: it’s not posting a link to something on your own blog or website (if it’s decent and original, that’s called “contributing”). Blogspamming is actually very specific (I had the Digg staff spell it out for me) — here are the requirements:

  1. Find interesting content somewhere on the Internet
  2. Post that content on your own website
  3. Post the link to your website rather than the original source

This is blogspamming, and it’s every bit as evil as people make it out to be. But it should not be confused with people posting their own original content. That practice, i.e. sharing ideas, is what makes the Internet so wonderful.

The Idea Bazaar

When it comes to sharing ideas, the Internet should be viewed much like a traditional, open marketplace — where people bring the artwork, pottery, clothing, woodwork, etc. for public review. It’s like open-mic night in front of billions of people.

Hello, everyone. Here’s a short story I just finished. I hope you like it…

This is what the Internet is about, and I think Digg, Reddit, and their successors should be more open to this philosophy. We shouldn’t penalize people for offering their own original content to the world just because they submitted it themselves. It’s far more genuine to do that, after all, than to artificially manufacture a third-party submission (which so many people do).

Remember that writers submit their work to publishers; they don’t wait for it to be found. Artisans have shows and invite lots of people. Academics submit to their respective journals. In short, submitting original content for peer review is an absolute must in any system that values intellectual progress.

Communities that rely on a constant flow of quality content need to adopt a mantra of judging offerings based on only two things: originality and merit. Any would-be resource that fails to grasp this concept (or later forgets it) is doing its users a disservice by discouraging would-be contributors from participating.:

← Older Comments
  • Deference

    Well, okay, Dave, good stuff but could you give specific examples of blogspamming.

    Do sites like Infowars and PrisonPlanet meet the criteria you’ve spoken of in your opinion and is that consistant with actual Digg action / policy from?

    Thanks for your time.

  • Mike

    Torchwolf, check out http://www.stumbleupon.com/. I use the firefox extension.

  • Mike

    Torchwolf, check out http://www.stumbleupon.com/. I use the firefox extension.

  • Dan

    There is a general flaw in this argument. While I do agree that originality and creativity should be extolled… there is still a value created by distribution. Which is essentially what bloggers do.

    Besides creating content – there are those out there that work to distribute that content. And this is a service almost as important as the creation itself.

    Hence the definition of SPAM being used in your article is incorrect (although I am aware that the vast majority agree with it). Spam is submitted with complete disregard for the potential of the market or group to care about the message. It should not be defined by the fact that the contributor may get some financial gain from the submission.

    Another reason why your definition is wrong can be seen when you consider the following: – someone finds some content that is awesome – that no one has found before. By the grace of the creator, he puts it on his site – and then drives traffic to it by submitting to digg. Because it is such great content it makes it to the front page. Everyone who sees it is greatful that they did. This can hardly be called an act of spamming – because a chief characteristic of spam is that it is content that is NOT wanted by the vast majority of recipients.

    If all the crap we received in our mailboxes was stuff we liked – then it would never have been called spam – or ‘junk mail’ – using the old reference.

    This general movement against bloggers who distribute quality content – is actually HURTING the naturally symbiotic nature of the web – not helping.

  • Dan

    There is a general flaw in this argument. While I do agree that originality and creativity should be extolled… there is still a value created by distribution. Which is essentially what bloggers do.

    Besides creating content – there are those out there that work to distribute that content. And this is a service almost as important as the creation itself.

    Hence the definition of SPAM being used in your article is incorrect (although I am aware that the vast majority agree with it). Spam is submitted with complete disregard for the potential of the market or group to care about the message. It should not be defined by the fact that the contributor may get some financial gain from the submission.

    Another reason why your definition is wrong can be seen when you consider the following: – someone finds some content that is awesome – that no one has found before. By the grace of the creator, he puts it on his site – and then drives traffic to it by submitting to digg. Because it is such great content it makes it to the front page. Everyone who sees it is greatful that they did. This can hardly be called an act of spamming – because a chief characteristic of spam is that it is content that is NOT wanted by the vast majority of recipients.

    If all the crap we received in our mailboxes was stuff we liked – then it would never have been called spam – or ‘junk mail’ – using the old reference.

    This general movement against bloggers who distribute quality content – is actually HURTING the naturally symbiotic nature of the web – not helping.

  • dingo

    I really dont agree with the evaluation here. The problem is that your blog or a persons blog may never get seen, hence your contribution to greater mankind is lost in the shuffle. So places like digg and others have an important contribution to all of us when someone posts a link to this site or others that may have very important information on it that many of us don’t get time to see. For instance .. this blog has a very low PR and ranks highly for nothing. I actually found it listed on a blog that you have just said is spam like, in part anyway. They do have some good articles that they have put together themselves but also repost other important articles that really do need to find a bigger “Pool” then a lonely blog a nowhere@noplace.net.

    Blog spam is just that.. people that use backtracks and link spamming under comments and false articles that is very nasty and serves no purpose, however on the other hand I can see exactly why there needs to be sharing or re-posting of articles to as many people as possible.

  • dingo

    I really dont agree with the evaluation here. The problem is that your blog or a persons blog may never get seen, hence your contribution to greater mankind is lost in the shuffle. So places like digg and others have an important contribution to all of us when someone posts a link to this site or others that may have very important information on it that many of us don’t get time to see. For instance .. this blog has a very low PR and ranks highly for nothing. I actually found it listed on a blog that you have just said is spam like, in part anyway. They do have some good articles that they have put together themselves but also repost other important articles that really do need to find a bigger “Pool” then a lonely blog a nowhere@noplace.net.

    Blog spam is just that.. people that use backtracks and link spamming under comments and false articles that is very nasty and serves no purpose, however on the other hand I can see exactly why there needs to be sharing or re-posting of articles to as many people as possible.

  • http://girlskissing.cjb.net/ girlskissing
  • http://girlskissing.cjb.net girlskissing
  • http://thethoughtsofroger.blogspot.com/ Roger Ritthaler

    Change your background color. How can anyone even read the comments? Or is that the intention?

  • http://thethoughtsofroger.blogspot.com/ Roger Ritthaler

    Change your background color. How can anyone even read the comments? Or is that the intention?

  • http://devolute.net devolute

    > “This is what the Internet is about” Well, it’s not. But still… here here! It jolly well should be. There are two many crappy “Steal some ‘cool’ pictures and put in a load of ads” blogs getting bumped up reddit’s front page.

  • http://www.devolute.net devolute

    > “This is what the Internet is about” Well, it’s not. But still… here here! It jolly well should be. There are two many crappy “Steal some ‘cool’ pictures and put in a load of ads” blogs getting bumped up reddit’s front page.

  • Pingback: Dear Readers, Please Submit Your Own Content | dmiessler.com

  • http://meadowhill.org/ John Stansbury

    And the girlskissing up there is the good old-fashioned blog spam.

    There are some people in these networks who think that anything from a site built with WordPress is blogspam, since…it’s a blog…thus sullying the good name of Digg. I agree with the Digg definition of middle-manning (ironic, as Digg is the internet’s biggest middle-man). Linking to something without the relevant commentary besides “hey, look at this” is virtually worthless.

  • http://meadowhill.org John Stansbury

    And the girlskissing up there is the good old-fashioned blog spam.

    There are some people in these networks who think that anything from a site built with WordPress is blogspam, since…it’s a blog…thus sullying the good name of Digg. I agree with the Digg definition of middle-manning (ironic, as Digg is the internet’s biggest middle-man). Linking to something without the relevant commentary besides “hey, look at this” is virtually worthless.

  • http://www.qualityblogger.com/ Michael Erik of www.qualityb

    Couldn’t agree more. Self submit is right and necessary like you said, paraphrased, from the perspective of “here’s my stuff, take a gander, hope you like it”. I am trying to promote quality as well, something else you talk about. That said, take a look at my site, and I hope you like it!

  • http://www.qualityblogger.com Michael Erik of www.qualityblogger.com

    Couldn’t agree more. Self submit is right and necessary like you said, paraphrased, from the perspective of “here’s my stuff, take a gander, hope you like it”. I am trying to promote quality as well, something else you talk about. That said, take a look at my site, and I hope you like it!

  • http://www.kangwon.ac.kr/~histo/upload20/files/article.php?id=8&page=dodge Mihal

    Respect4

  • http://www.kangwon.ac.kr/~histo/upload20/files/article.php?id=8&page=dodge Mihal

    Respect4

  • Pingback: Why People Should Submit Their Own Content to Social Sites

  • Pingback: Social Blend 03 - Episode Pi: “Hello my future girlfriend…”

  • Pingback: Article Database » The Dangers of Digg Self-Submission (And How To Avoid Them)

  • Pingback: lbrandy.com » Blog Archive » Submit Yourself (to Social News Sites)

  • http://www.terminaljunkie.com tjunkie

    Well said on that line “Remember that writers submit their work to publishers; they don’t wait for it to be found.” I don’t see what is the “sin” off promoting one’s own content as long as they are original and useful.

← Older Comments

Top

Popular

Information Security / Technology

Politics

Philosophy & Religion

Technology & Science

Culture & Society

Miscellaneous

Arguments

Projects

Collections

Twitter

What I'm Reading

Favorite Books and Essays

Top Blog Categories

Inputs