Last week I had two stories Dugg and two stories Slashdotted. The difference in traffic is striking. Digg delivered three times the amount of traffic as Slashdot did. Granted, my stories hit Slashdot in an off-peak time, but it got me thinking: Is Digg the future of web traffic? The tyranny of the mob,?
If so, I'm concerned. I like the traffic Digg gives me, but I also like the editorial function that Slashdot provides. I have no clue how something becomes popular on Digg - I'm constantly surprised by the types of stories I get Dugg. But I know how to get something Slashdotted: Deliver something.
Certain kinds of stories are more likely to be Dugg: anti-Microsoft screeds, pro-Linux (and especially Ubuntu) and Apple posts (See below). To get Slashdotted, an article needs to chart new territory, even if in these old paths. That's because Rob knows what is new and interesting, and what isn't. Digg doesn't. It's just a crowd (Read: Lowest-common denominator).
Again, I'm not complaining about the traffic. I would simply like to have the crowdsourcing power of Digg with the editorial oversight of Slashdot. Impossible?
Interestingly, CNET is the biggest driver of traffic to this blog. The problem is it only works as a driver for CNET-based traffic. I find that being one link among many in any publication is not a big traffic driver, whether on CNET or elsewhere.