Join the Live Demo and find out how Coremetrics can support ALL your online marketing
The leading worldwide SEM firm. It’s pure logic. Let us take care of the maths. Download
The online exchange for behaviourally targeted advertising. To join free CLICK HERE
Talented and trained graduates with a passion for digital are available now through our new Digital Graduate Academy
And win a racing weekend at legendary Nürburgring in Germany
Muhammad Saleem at The Mu Life wrote an article last week claiming that social media is more effective at disseminating news than Google News.
Muhammad’s article, ‘Why Socially Driven News is Better’ used the news of US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation as an example of social media beating Google News to a major story.
Interesting argument, but it doesn't stand up...
Essentially, Muhammed's argument is that the story appeared on social media sites such as Digg, Netscape and Reddit before Google News picked it up (about 20 minutes later). Therefore he claims that social news is better, or at least faster.
But the article / methodology is wrong on a few points:
Heather Hopkins at Hitwise has looked at the behaviour of users on these sites - check out her comparison of Digg and Google News.
Her analysis of clickstream data from the two sites suggests that Digg is more about video and games site than news. For instance, Heather’s stats show that One More Level, a games site, accounted for 16.83% of upstream visits to Digg.com last week, and that Digg accounts for a smaller share of visits to news websites than The Register.
Meanwhile, Danny Sullivan has an interesting case study which compares traffic sent to SearchEngineWatch’s blog from Digg and Google News. In this case, Google News won.
Further Reading:
How much traffic can Digg or Google News drive to your site?