Did You Know? It Will Blow Your Mind.

Today's Digg leader is a four minute, fifty-five second long YouTube video about interesting statistics that reflect a changing, globalized age. It doesn't sound like something that would be at the top of Digg; yet it is. The video is embedded below:



Here's why it works:

1) Excellent presentation: The video is nothing more than a vehicle to present certain statistics. Yes, the statistics are fascinating, but if they were presented as plain text in a relatively unexciting web page, Digg users would have passed right over it. The video is visually stimulating, giving the eye something to focus on every four or five seconds. It's also audibly stimulating, featuring a song that matches the theme of the presentation. Only because those two elements work together does the overall video work as well.

2) Fascinating information: Generally, as most scientists and math-based people are aware of, statistics are pointless, and can be twisted and distorted to convey almost any point the twister/distorter wishes to convey. However, this property of statistics makes them highly effective at evoking emotion, which masses of people will respond to. The statistics that the authors of the video used provoke a mind-boggling, somewhat-pessimistic/somewhat-optomistic emotion. Whatever the emotion was exactly, it worked well for Digg.

Finally Found Him!!

Today's Digg leader comes in the form of a specific location on Google Maps where Waldo, from the Where's Waldo? series, can be found. I've spared you the suspense and provided you with a screenshot from the map below. Here's why it works:


1) Comedy: Funny things work extremely well on Digg. It's in the nature of jokes to pass them on, or retell the joke, and the same is true for online jokes. How better to retell a joke than to Digg it, or email it to a friend? Besides, most people that use Digg are simply browsing to find interesting stories; they're not going to sit and read a thousand-page treatise on, say, economics. Keep it funny, keep it pithy.

2) Childhood reference: Remember, most Digg users are twenty/early thirty-somethings. This means references to child trends in the 80s/early 90s will bring back feelings of nostalgia and delight, and hopefully provoke a reaction like, "Oh, snap: I remember that!" References to Waldo accomplish just that. So do references to He-Man, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, GI Joe, etc.

Obama To Overturn Major Bush-Era Marijuana Ruling

Today's Digg leader signals the discovery of a new motif: marijuana advocacy. It comes in the form of an article from NationalJournal.com concerning President Obama overturning orders stemming from the Bush administration. Here's why it works:

1) Obama idolatry: In the eyes of most Diggers (remember, we're talking about predominantly white, San Francisco-based, tech-savvy men), Obama can do no wrong; therefore, any article expressing the same sentiment is likely to do well on Digg. The article presents wonderful Obama words without any sort of accompanying criticism; e.g., Obama said, "The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions. Public officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions." Hey, that sounds nice -- would he apply the same mindset to evidence against man-made climate change? This writer thinks not.

2) Marijuana advocacy: The gist of the article is that marijuana is good and many public officials feel the same way. That's great news if you're in favor of legalizing marijuana, and in our case most Diggers want marijuana legalized, so it's no surprise this article was Dugg so many times.

Virginity rates among students by major

Today's Digg leader is a "study" of the correlation between the percentage of virgins and their college major at Wellesley College. I hesitate to proclaim this a true study, because there is literally zero supporting data presented on the page (e.g., sample size, author, etc.). At any rate, the Diggers love it, and the resulting graph is below, followed by why it works.1) Sex: Sex sells; everyone knows this. More importantly though, when it comes to Digg, sex sells if and only if it's about women. Remember, the main Digg demographic is nerdy white college-age men. They don't care about the newest cute picture of David Beckham. But show them a study of the "easiest" girls at school sorted by major, and they're gonna be sending it all the brothers at their fraternity.

2) College: Most people's first impression when they hear the word "college" is not books and studying, but beer and partying. Because beer and partying is exciting, college is exciting; people like to pass on exciting information; because college is exciting, people want to pass on information about it. You follow?

Largest Swimming Pool in the World (PICS)

Today's Digg leader is an article in the Los Angeles Times about a resort in Chile boasting the world's largest swimming pool. Here's a quick glimpse (check out the article to find more beautiful pictures):


Here's why it works:

1) Exotic destinations: Remember your main Digg demographic: white men between 18-35, 100% of which are sitting in front of a computer, most likely in an office or some sort of enclosed, indoor area. That means posts about exotic locations -- think beaches, sunlight, and palm trees -- are very appealing and are sure to get Dugg.

2) Pictures: What's likely to work better on Digg: an article merely commenting about the world's largest swimming pool, or an article showing you the world's largest swimming pool? Obviously, the article wouldn't be at the top of Digg without a few glamorous pictures.

3) Authority: The authority is this case doesn't come from the source, the Los Angeles Times, but from the Guinness Book of World Records. Because how can you claim to be the "largest" of anything without Guinness' approval?

Visualizing 1,400,000 Gravestones [PIC]

There's an exception to every rule, and today's Digg leader is the exception to the rule that only liberal-friendly content will reach the front page. It's a picture of 1.4 million gravestones, the amount of people killed under the Cambodian socialist Khmer Rouge regime. The image is too large to upload to my blog, so you'll have to go here to check it out. Here's why it works:

1) Real-world depiction of a statistic: Statistics have more impact when they're taken out of their raw numerical context and made more "real," thereby utilizing not only logos but pathos as well. "One-point-four million" is simply unimaginable to most people, as most people don't have 1.4 million of anything. But turn it into a cute web graphic, and you're getting somewhere.

2) Picture: It's a picture. Pictures work. We've gone over this before.

3) Relevancy to Bush: Digg users hear the term "war deaths" and immediately their brains think "George Bush" and "Iraq." I'll bet a lot of users Dugg this picture without realizing that the Khmer Rouge was not a rogue Christian government attacking the Middle East, but a Stalinist/Communist/socialist regime in southeast Asia. So even though the picture had nothing to do with George Bush, on Digg -- it did.

My Reponse to Whiny Digg Power Users

Digg, like any company that dominates its sector (Wal-Mart, Microsoft, McDonald's, Exxon, etc.), frequently comes under harsh scrutiny. However, this time the scrutiny is coming from the inside: Digg's top users have banded together and submitted a letter to Digg management, complaining about Digg policy. Here's the best, i.e. worst, parts of the letter, along with my poignant commentary:

The authors are troubled that "the premise of [Digg] is such that it is based on competition." How interesting that they are quick to lash out against competition, yet it is precisely they who have benefited most from it. Without competition, every Digg user would be a top user, and the opinions of those writing the letter would be no different from anyone else. Without competition, Digg users wouldn't really care or put the effort into finding interesting articles to submit, making the site much the worse overall.

The authors charge that "Digg has repeatedly failed to respond to its users and address their concerns." So what? Do they have an obligation to respond to every user? Certainly not; they are a private company.

The authors complain of "unexplained and unacknowledged banning of top users," and remark that "these are not the actions of a 'democratic news site',"thereby fully acknowledging that they have no respect for a private company. Despite what these idealists think Digg is all about, it is first and foremost a profit-generating machine. If Digg determines it will be better off with certain users banned, so be it.

The authors' closing point is that Digg has displayed "repeated and flagrant disrespect of its top users," and they request that they be given more power to control the content of the site. It reminds me very much of big business lobbyists in Washington, D.C., begging the government to meet their special interest needs. Sorry, top Digg users -- you can't keep your place forever.

The last line of the letter reads "What happens if the most powerful users in the community decide to leave?" I say, Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

There's roughly three million Digg users. A few less whiners wouldn't be such a bad thing.