-
Website
http://publishing2.com/ -
Original page
http://publishing2.com/2008/09/15/drudge-report-news-site-that-sends-readers-away-with-links-has-highest-engagement/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Or put another way, people only want one aggregator in any given category. So, there is only room for one dominant search engine (Google), one dominant technology leaderboard (Techmeme), or one dominant political link blog (Drudge).
Hmmm... are you advocating a mass media theory off the web, i.e. winner take all?
Has any original content site ever tried also to be an aggregator?
The wonderful thing about the web is that it's always disrupting the status quo.
And you don't have to be the dominant aggregator to realize the economic value of content distribution.
Here's how I put it in 2005:
"People come back to places that send them away."
http://bit.ly/26HqVh
Lots of examples. Search engines. My.Yahoo.Com. RSS aggregators of all flavors. Blogs.
I take your point about Drudge's site being a place people come back to, but when you don't mention the refresh rate in your post, it loses its credibility.
I think it's a fine example of how people actually use the internet, ot at least want to use, the net. They want their information quick and easy. All you need is a decent headline to know if something's pique's your interest and the Drudge Report is a shining example of that.
Can there only be one Drudge? Maybe. But I also think there's room for Drudge-type sites on smaller, more target scales. Hooray for news!
I "go" under my own control, but keep the news site open to explore more links later.
P.S. I hate the Flash content that has links, where I can't use that right-click!
Ian Lamont
The Industry Standard
What news site wouldn't want to be open in a reader's browser being refreshed all day?
Imagine if Drudge actually commented on the links, and let readers comment -- you know, like Digg.
On the other hand, maybe it renders invalid the assumption that time spent, etc. is any meaningful measure of "engagement"
However you slice it, Drudge is INDISPENSABLE to its users -- something every news site should want to claim
The newsPAPER industry has retained the ad-based revenue model from its print business. Journalists are aware of page view goals needed to support that model. It is afraid to lose ground in the one metric most clearly tied to revenue.
Although some in the industry are aware of other ways to measure engagement, it is very difficult to convince them of the high value of becoming a place where people (repeatedly) visit only to walk away.
No matter what Nielsen Online says, DailyKos is NOT a news site!
How did it make the list of new sites? My guess is they wanted something left-wing to top Fox News.
@Scott, to your question "Has any original content site ever tried also to be an aggregator?"
There are a bunch who are starting to, not yet at Google News scale but with small steps in narrow verticals: http://corp.daylife.com/partners.php - and not only that, they even brand their links: http://upendra.shardanand.com/2008/09/07/brandi...
As far as becoming aggregators at scale.. stay tuned.
If a smallish news pub with little brand (hell, even a big pub with some brand) came to you an asked, would you suggest blowing up editorial completely and just push a link farm?
I also agree with the commenter on drudge report is left running in the backgroud, but still a good post and a great observation to share.
Something to definately keep in mind as far as business models go. Thanks again.
You're suggesting a false choice. Why can't news sites be a destination for original content AND links?
Because they perform two essentially different functions. One is a destination, one is a starting point. You're simply not going to get the same behaviour.
People go to a story page on some news content site after having found the link on some aggregator or portal. They do not hang around on the news site's front page, refreshing the page and hoping for new links.
And while outbound links on the story page may well be useful, they're not going to hang out on that page hoping for new links on the story either. That's a job for aggregators.
Drudge is an aggregator. It links out to original content on news sites. I agree with Steve, you're comparing apples to oranges. News sites will not achieve the same levels of engagement, as measured by time-on-site and sessions-per-person, as a result of linking out. People just don't use those sites the same way.
There are still valid reasons why news sites should link out, of course. But this isn't one of them.
I am a long time admirer of Drudge and consider his site to be one of my all-time favorites. But his session trick, and it's hard to really characterize it as anything else, even though if you ask him he says it's because the site updates so frequently that he wants to make sure people have a recent version, means that that specific metric is skewed.
A site which is very similar in approach if not layout is RealClearPolitics.com. It updates less frequently and isn't seen as "the place", but the emphasis on links is the same. Note the disparity in sessions.
But why can't an original content news site ALSO be an aggregator? Why can't they put a link feature on their front page that people will want to refresh.
Or perhaps the better question is how can news sites afford NOT to get into the aggregation business, since that's where all the economic value is on the web?
Newspapers were aggregators in print -- that was the business model. Online, they think they are in the content business, which is why they only get 10 cents on the dollar in online revenue. They need to get into the aggregation business again.
News Sites are the Nestles and 3Ms (manufacturers).
So no, you can't compare Drudge to News Sites. Drudge is in a completely different business.
And news sites can't just suddenly go into the aggregator business. Wouldn't it be weird if Nestle suddenly opened a store and sold Post-It notes and other competitors' products? And manufacturers can't all open stand alone stores cuz no one has time to visit them all (same as news sites).
Stores in malls are the same way. The mall is the aggregator and the stores are the news sites. Separate businesses.
In essence, people spend more time in the mall than in any particular store.
Tycoon Dreamer
http://tycoondreams.com
How do you figure that? You mean that newspapers just contained references to other materials that you should go read, without any actual content (which is what the news aggregators we're talking about do)? or do you mean that it bundled a bunch of different stuff into a package? Don't conflate two different meanings of the word "aggregation".
Connectivity on a global scale breeds transparency and sharing. What part of sharing do people not understand.
If you provide a valuable link which turns into a new resource of information, then you the referrer become a valued friend as well as a must read!
dean
Previously, newspapers were the publishers of content and the aggregators of news. Now, sites like the Drudge Report assemble the day’s news.
So, a newspaper’s value is no longer in its thoughtful presentation of information, but rather in its individual stories. With this emphasis on the story, journalists are motivated to write sensationalized content, so their work is linked to from another site.
Is it fair then to criticize journalists for writing sensationalized stories, when these are the only stories that will be read? The portals to news content may further diminish the quality of news because when people visit the Drudge Report, they’re seeing only the selections of one individual. If we encourage news content sites to become more like the Drudge Report, then objective and thoughtful reporting may eventually become extinct.
Instead, I urge people to think about the news they may not be seeing when they access their news through such portals. I even encourage readers to occasionally visit news-content sites directly, where they can read a presentation of the news that was carefully gathered by a team of experienced journalists.
We can not provide all information on a topic. When other sites give our users more info or a different perspective, it helps them. Our users would find the other sites anyhow. But with our little service they feel better and... come back :-)
"So, a newspaper’s value is no longer in its thoughtful presentation of information, but rather in its individual stories. With this emphasis on the story, journalists are motivated to write sensationalized content, so their work is linked to from another site."
This is all about transparency and objectivity. You mean to tell us that the NY Time, Fox, and other news agencies do NOT have their own agendas?
You mean all the Sarah Palin fawning going on over at Fox is just my imagination running wild?
Let's get something straight. A newspaper's value is no longer in print it is online. And as every paper in America is quickly realizing, they NO longer hold the keys to the vault.
If you can't stomach what Drudge and other sites are doing in "shaping" our reading habits then consider all the American newspapers that have lied to the American public for the past 100+ years.
Get used to the world of reporting and information as you knew it is gone-
Second, his numbers obviously are whacked. A few weeks ago he posted at the top right column of his page a thanks and the number of visits -- the monthly visits to his site were MORE THAN DOUBLE the entire population in the United States and the yearly figure was just shy of the entire population on the planet.
Would you be complaining if you owned the site? The point is that you may not like his tactics but you are talking about it. You are reading it. And you are adding to the global discussion.
What newspaper allowed that kind of instant access? Now newspapers have sites but often they mismanage or outright lie about their comments as in the case of the SF Chronicle "incident."
Whether his numbers are whacked or not, the site is big time and for that he has you and everyone else commenting to thank.
You critics wallow in your own misery wishing you had dreamed up the same format.