Tinfoil hat alert: Digg has secret editors!

by Mathew on January 17, 2008 · Comments

Must be a slow news day over at Valleywag, where Owen Thomas is trotting out the old “Digg has secret editors” meme again (not only that, but it has the laughable “Exclusive!” tag). According to Owen, a top-secret source — let’s called him Deep Digg, in Watergate style — was approached for a job at the social-news site, and was given the inside dope on the secret cabal known as the Illuminati. Oh, sorry; wrong conspiracy.

Deep Digg was apparently told about how each topic at Digg has a secret ringleader known as a “moderator” (part of Digg’s appeal is clearly the arcane titles that the Enlightened Ones use; plus I hear they wear silk capes and get to twirl their moustaches). The moderator not only looks for spam and obvious morons, but gets to “adjust the criteria to make it easier or harder for a story to make it big” (gasp!) and this means that they… wait for it… “exercise editorial judgment.” Eleventy-one!

Of course, this was confirmed over a year ago now. Owen then trots out the old straw man about how this means Digg has “failed to match its aspirations as a perfect democracy of news,” something I don’t recall anyone ever claiming it was. This is similar to the shock and horror that Nick Carr and others express at the notion that Wikipedia has a “cabal” of insiders who edit articles and block disruptive people and so on.

Why is that so terrible? It makes sense — and far from being a negative from a business point of view, as Owen tries to convince us it is, it’s actually a positive. About the only thing I can agree with him on is the fact that they could be a bit more transparent about it, if only so that we don’t have to read any more breathless exclusives.

Share:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • SphereIt
  • StumbleUpon
  • Ha Deep Digg. Nice.

    Yeah, as I've quite literally exhausted myself writing about this on numerous sites, the problem isn't with the editors, it's the complete lack of transparency in the process.
  • I definitely agree there could be more openness about the process, MG
    -- and the same goes for Wikipedia too, for that matter. It's just
    that all the over-the-top writing about "shadowy" cabals and secret
    handshakes and crap like that really pushes me over the edge
    sometimes.
  • I'll tell Deep Digg you said so right after I ask him "what's the frequency Kenneth?" :)
  • I have a brilliant idea. Don't read Valleywag. It comes thru my Google Reader as Snippets, and I never slow myself down by getting too involved.
  • carl plesser
    what a bizarre blog. you sit on your rump and spend your time putting down supposedly lesser scribes . i'm not a huge valleywag fan but i'd have a lot more respect for you if you actually got off your fat behind and did some real reporting. how `bout it, matthew?
  • Just one question, Carl: what makes you think my behind is fat?

    A piece of advice: Don't like the blog? Don't read it.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Older post: AT&T wants to read your mail

Newer post: How much is a SuperPoke worth?