What Content Reddit Users Are Clicking On
People like to dump Digg, Netscape, and Reddit all in one basket and label then as "social news sites". In reality, however, not all these sites are the same, and not all of then are as news driven as others would have you believe.
When referring to these sites, I prefer the label "social driven sites" or "socially driven news and content sites" because while news is an important part of the content that gets promoted, a lot of the content is from niche oulets and blogs that cannot be classified as news (as much as opinion or just "interesting stuff"). The content here is voted on by the users and is more of what they find interesting or entertaining, and while this content varies from site to site, what is considered as "news" is often left-leaning and sensationlist. Pundits have long been predicting great things for these sites but these content aggregators are far from a reason to not read news-specific sites.
While technology-related articles rule on Digg, politics and breaking news is popular on Netscape, people have had a hard time figuring out Reddit. Here is a look at what content Reddit users are clicking on:
As you can see, Reddit users prefer pictures and images that present a mishmash of news, politics, science, and some totally bizarre content that can best be described as offbeat.
Enjoy the post? Here are some more that may interest you.
Trackbacks (0)
There are no trackbacks for this post yet.
Reader Comments (4)
- RBA, July 26, 2007
-
I've been thinking a lot about the term "social news" as well - for obvious reasons :-)
Looking at your suggestions, I think "social driven sites" is a bit too shy, and "socially driven news and content sites" is a bit too long.
In our case, we went for "social content networks" or "social content sites" for a few reasons.
First, as you say, many of the content isn't news (if you expand the concept of submitting and voting into sites like http://vou-naovou.corank.com/ it's clear that we're not talking about news at all :-)
Second, I think it's safe to talk about "networks". No matter how large and decentralized the Digg community is, it is still a community with some very precise characteristics (in Digg's case: young, male, techie, etc), so talking about a social network is fair - it just so happens that neither Digg nor Reddit et all have connected the dots to truly build a "social network", but I'm certain that's the right direction for this kind of sites anyway.
Last, going back to the "it isn't just about news", it makes a lot of sense to talk about "content" and let the ambiguity of the term include whatever can be aggregated and ranked/voted: news, blog posts, videos, photos of cute babies or Orkut profiles :-)
The term (Social Content Networks) isn't too far from your "socially driven news and content sites" suggestion, but I think if you talk about "social XYZ network" you're already implying that it's all about the actions of a group of people ("social" in this case would be similar to saying "socially driven").
Anyway, perhaps too long of an explanation for a much simpler thing. What do you think?
- nate, July 26, 2007
-
Take a look at a better pattern.... pictures. Reddit folks love photos, comics, pics, imagery. I think it's because it's quick, to the point, and doesn't take a lot of consumption time. But, that part is total speculation.
I have a feeling if you have a picture on your post, and you reddit it with "[PIC]" in the title, you're more likely to get more votes. Of course, it's hard to tell because you can't A/B test it, but that's my thought.
- nate, July 26, 2007
-
Sorry for the double... but I re-read my comment and it looks like I was saying just having a photo on your post would do it. I seriously doubt that. The photo has to be compelling in some fashion, not just eye candy alone.
- Brett Borders, July 26, 2007
-
The flood of pictures and comics on Reddit is a fairly recent phenomena. I hope it comes to an end. Reddit (Read it?) was once a place for thick, heady, well-researched articles and quirky stories.
