You may have heard that Google is launching a social bookmarking-type service today, called Google Shares. Loads of coverage from the usual suspects, most of whom aren’t all that impressed, as its a pretty unsophisticated service that “even” allows you to bookmark *other* socially driven sites like Del.icio.us amongst other sites.

What’s the bloody point in all of this?

Is this yet-another half-baked Google product that is doomed to mediocrity? I think that we won’t really know until it all pans out, but in this case, I think its an issue of Google creating something that is quite deliberately a “me-too” type product.

Usually these fail. But this just isn’t “any” company — this is Google, the 900 lb Gorrila that only needs to break wind to turn Steve Ballmer into a quivering mass of incoherent insults (although, granted, it doesn’t take much to do that).

No, I think Google will probably do just fine in copying many features as it finds necessary, and then rolling it out quietly between its users who are also, quietly, using iGoogle, Google Reader, Gmail, Google Docs, and Picasa. While it _could_ do so, I don’t think Google needs to do anything extra other than keep up with other social news / bookmarking features, and keep itself at parity.

And let the non-early adopters who are familiar with Google to start having fun with this service, as it can probably be integrated fairly easily into its own suite of products.

Another rosy-glasses way to look at it is that by joining the social bookmarking / news group, particularly as you’ll be able to share stuff from other social sites, is that it will increase awareness *of* these other sites as well.

You know what they say about a rising tide and all that.

So, yes, you might think that Google Shares is “meh”. And it might be. But I don’t think Google’s really worried about it at this point, for a whole bunch of reasons. And even if it doesn’t really evolve into a killer product, there are reasons for _that_ as well.

So Gabe “Techmeme” Riviera released his thoughts on how to get listed on Techmeme. Basically, it involves writing good content that gets linked back to. Let’s translate this a little further: write notable content that is link-bait.

What he also divulged was there is an “x-factor” in all of this — a secret sauce, a trump card, an inside man, a tunnel to that honey pot of Techmeme gold.

What is it?

Its simple — send traffic to Techmeme.

Gabe wants Techmeme to get inbound links. Google juice. Pimp action. To be showered with praise. Have flowers strewn at his feet. First borns named after the news aggregator (”Techmeme Hung?” — that’s a direct IN, and what my next child is named — you heard it here first).

… I think you get the idea. :)

As was clear at the Pre-Mesh Hookup, people know I post frequently, and from time to time, it goes up to Techmeme. So what happens when you actually get listed? What about traffic? Does it compare to Digg? Well, its not what you think.

Here are my thoughts on the whole thing: (more…)

Today, one of the co-founders of Wikipedia Larry Sanger, has announced that he is creating a new entity called Citizendium as an offshoot of Wikipedia. Citizendium will be different from Wikipedia in the sense that Citizendium will have individuals acting as “judges” or “referees” for many different topics who will have the final say for a particular entry. We’ve already seen TechCrunch and Crunchnotes weigh in. So has Nick Carr. I’m not sure if they’re all missing the point.

Citizendium may be one of a few markers that reveal the evolution of user-driven content.

Wikipedia has been marked in the past with controversy, as although there are some limitations, virtually anyone can create an entry on something, and virtually anyone can edit them. For particularly contentious issues (say, “George W. Bush”, or “abortion”), it creates challenges as one or more parties can end up changing a post to support their particular biases — rather than, say, creating an entry with a balanced view on things.

What is fascinating is how this forking or offshoot may represent one step in the evolution of user driven social content sites — one that started with Slashdot, moved on to Netscape, and perhaps, continues with Citizendium. Reddit and Digg also have their roles, but they seem to represent the other end of the spectrum as we shall see.
(more…)

In what is shaping up to be a delicious bloodbath of corporate fisticuffs, Universal Music has set its sights on YouTube and MySpace over copyright violations.

Finally! Rich irony aside, it looks like copyright litigators have cut their teeth suing the recently deceased and little ol’ grannies with the RIAA, and have now moved on to a real challenge — some of the biggest heavyweights on the ‘net. And the blogosphere has taken notice.

Yes, with YouTube and MySpace on one side, and Universal on the other, this grudgematch currently looks like a handicap match, but will it move on to a battle royale? That is, for all you non-professsional wrestling fans — could this copyright contest look to envelop more music labels or even more web2.0 companies?

I’ve often wondered exactly how YouTube continues to get its free ride. People often wonder at its explosive growth, but its clear a signficant component of it is simply free, ripped and rebroadcast copyright material, be it movies or television shows. I mean, who doesn’t like to watch free episodes of Friends, The Colbert Report, or the Ali G Show, either at work or at school?

(more…)

I guess its somewhat validating to read that something that I’ve been blogging on ad nauseum (as in, even I am finding the amount of attention this is getting a bit nauseating) is getting traction in some very popular off - line media coverage, namely the USA Today.

This is pretty amazing, considering how the inciting event happened SIX days ago, and has been attempted to resolved since that time through a change in the Digg Algorithm.

We could talk about the laggardness of the off-line media to catch up with new media stories, but the thing I find most fascinating about this is how this story just won’t go away. For example, yesterday Bokardo picked up on this issue, an A-List blog if I have ever seen one and did the best blow-by-blow design-oriented analysis of the controversy. But it was five days after the fact (and they did a kind job of referencing one of my posts).

I think it does speak to a couple things:

1. Digg’s impact: Yes, we all knew Digg was onto something when Kevin Rose was featured on Businessweek — but quite frankly no one would care one whit about the controversy if something similar happened to a lesser web2.0 company. Flickr or even Wikipedia would have never gained as much coverage, I think.

(more…)

Well, I was going to do about how now is the best time for getting into GTD (watch for it … its still coming) — but the whole Digg controversy thing isn’t going away, so I’m going to stay with it until it does.

Having woke up this morning, there has been an utter explosion of news, commentary, and coverage over this most recent spate at Digg. Unlike ForeverGeek, Aliwood, or any other phenomena, the particular issue of the top 20 or 30 diggers ‘circle-digging’ each other (intentionally or no) seems to have really gone supernova, literally, over the course of less than 24h.

The Timeline

1. jesusphreak posts his article on his observation that FP posts seem to be dominated by the Top20

2. a firestorm of commentary erupts on Digg, with rumblings of group-marking all top20 submissions as “lame” or to be “buried”.
3. the original article is marked as innacurate, and gets Dugg into the stratosphere at the same time

4. the sheer volume of comments prompts Kevin Rose to issue an edict proclamation statement over how Digg will change its algorithm

5. top digger p9 leaves Digg amongst the implied accusation that he is gaming Digg.

6. news gets picked up by TechCrunch

7. coverage bursts into conflagatory orgy of commentary, news, finger wagging, and of course titles which play on the name “digg” (see below)

With the enormous amount of coverage TechCrunch gets on its own, I think it was the ‘tipping point’ to all the other major blogs / news sources picking it up.

So far the stories have hit:

• Guardian Unlimited: “Digg Confronts Circle-Digging Problem”
• Rough Type: “Undiggnified”
• Search Engine Watch: Digg to Change System to Stem Gaming
• ZDNet: Digital Micromarkets: Why Digg fraud Google bombing and Wikipedia vandalism will not be stopped
• Techmeme: Digg Friends
• CNN Money: Digg Erupts Over Who Controls the Headlines
• Wired: Changes at Digg Increase Diversity, Decrease Rigging

Digg History has yet been updated again.

Here is the text that has been addended to A brief history of digg controversy:

*********************************************

Circle-Digging: Elite Diggers Controlling Frontpage
September 2006. Jesusphreak posts an article questioning how democratic the digging processes is when he notices that a significant proportion of the frontpage articles are submitted, then dugg by elite, top20 (or 50) bloggers. It seems like these diggers digg each others submissions, thus propelling those submissions right to the frontpage — primarily because the Digg algorithm places weight on reputation. Something that elite Diggers have in spades. A firestorm of commentary erupts, causing it to hit all kinds of major news blogs, and even eliciting a reponse from Kevin Rose himself, wherein he goes on to state that Digg has plans to change the way top “Diggers” are recognized (Submitters vs. Diggers) in addition to subtle changes to the Digg algorithm so it will, apparently, offer a more equitable way for stories to be promoted to the Frontpage. Hemphill81 weighed on the issue himself, stating that he was just using the tools available; the commentary which followed was energetic to say the least.

Also of interest, p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, the Number One Digger decided to quit Digg after the whole debacle, and how Kevin Rose chose to handle things. [tip: Chrisek at DiggAddicts on this one!]. GregD similarly weighed in with his thoughts.

Interestingly enough, it pierces the consciousness of the blosphere, and quite a few other blogs begin to pick up on the story.

• DiggAddict — Controversy
• GoldenGod.net — “Digg Rigg Drama Bigg”
• ProfitPapers.com — “Is Digg Rigged?”