Rand's post on low referral traffic from Digg inspired me to write about a little-known potential traffic goldmine—Digg comments. I noticed some time ago that first post comments on front page stories can drive some remarkable traffic. Here are two recent examples.
Last week I posted the first comment on "4 Gas Saving Myths" just before it hit the main page and linked to two relevant articles about fuel efficiency and gas prices. This comment generated 1,438 visitors. The first comment on "Is Mythbusters The Best Science Show on the Telly?" about Mythbuster's flawed statistics drove 1,901 visitors. Thousands of visitors for simple comments? Here’s my guide to traffic from Digg comments. Read carefully—go about Digg comments the wrong way and you just might get death threats—I’m not kidding, more about that later.
- First, your links must post to quality content. The three articles I linked to above are well-written, well-researched articles. Two of the three articles that I linked to have even been featured on Slashdot (1, 2). Quality, of course, is a relative term. Given the typical Digg banter, the threshold for adding quality content can sometimes quite low. The links, however, cannot point to pages that are clearly blogspam or you are sure to face Digg's wrath.
- Must be on topic. This is probably more important than the quality of the link. It may seem obvious, but if your comment/link doesn’t relate to the article, especially if it contains a link, then it will be buried.
- First posts comments are going to receive exponentially more traffic than later posts. They can set the tone for the rest of the discussion and can be almost as important as the actual article being linked to. If the Digg article already has a comment then it is usually better to reply to the first comment than submit a new comment. This is true even if your comment isn’t a direct response to the comment you are replying to. Otherwise, the first comment will eventually get dozens of replies, pushing the second comment way down the page where it will not be seen by most. For example, I replied to the first comment on a post about Google searches. The first post was buried with 16 negative votes which effectively gave me the first post. This comment brought 509 visitors. In my opinion, this is a flaw with the Digg comment system where you can only reply to root comments. It provides an incentive for disjointed discussions. I suspect that Digg will redo their comment system at some point in the near future.
- If you are looking for traffic from your posts, it does little good to comment on articles that are already on Digg’s front page. There are two reasons for this. First, you no longer have the first post advantage and your comment will be lost among the masses. The second reason is that the highest amount of traffic will come while the post is at the top of main page. Each minute that passes is lost traffic. It’s much better to find future front page stories from the upcoming stories section. This is not hard. Checking the “hot in technology” on the right side of the page will show you which posts are most likely to hit the front page in the next few hours. Of course, you can drill down to other topics besides technology as well. The cloud view and other tools can also be used to predict which stories are most likely to hit the front page.
- As with all forums and websites, if you focus solely on promoting your website it will eventually come back to haunt you. All your links and submitted stories should not be to your own sites.
- Digg, as a general rule, has a negative bias towards all things SEO and marketing. If you have a name like SEOmoz (sorry), there are some people that aren’t going to give you a fair shake.
- Digg does not use the NoFollow tag. However, if you receive a 'thumbs down' from four users your comment will be hidden by default. At some point in the future Digg may follow Wikipedia's lead and move to NoFollow tags. I'd recommend it to prevent link spam but generally the community is quick to bury.
- Realize that although you may receive many new visitors they may be less likely to stay around than traffic you receive from other sources. As you can see from the statistics below, the bounce rate was between 74-92%. The average time on site was 20 seconds for the Mythbusters article and just over a minute for the fuel and gas articles. I'm sure that there are ways the site can improve its stickiness (any ideas?), but the point remains the same—Digg visitors are less likely to stick around than traffic from other sources.
By way of full disclosure, the site I linked to, OmniNerd, is not my site. I have no financial relationship with the site and don’t know how their GoogleAds performed, but I suspect that very few visitors from Digg clicked on ads. If AdSense earnings are your primary motivation, Digg is probably not your best option.
Although this is not my site, OmniNerd did let me peek into their Google Analytics for this story. Since the stats used above are from Google Analytics and not the server logs, the actual traffic may be higher than I reported. According to something I read on StumbleUpon, “A large portion of...Firefox users have added the NoScript add-on to their browser. This is one of the top-10 most popular extensions for Firefox. This extension blocks any javascript calls...caus[ing]...Google Analytics...to not work." If that's true, then the actual traffic from these comments could be higher than recorded. Currently about 50% of OmniNerd's recorded visitors use Firefox. How many are not being counted? Does anyone have experience with Google Analytics not counting all their traffic?
Although Digg comments can be a valuable source of traffic, the reaction to spam can be painful. A couple months ago Chandler Kent learned that the hard way when he submitted a comment with a link to his blog under his name, as is common practice in most forums. It quickly received hundreds of “thumbs down” but didn’t stop there. Someone posted his phone number and he began to receive creepy phone calls and comments such as he "deserves to be hunted down and stalked." Ironically, his recounting of the fallout was widely publicized as “The Most Hated Comment on Digg” and brought him a ton of traffic.
Comments on Digg can bring you some nice traffic if you are willing to risk your life.
This the best and most personally useful article I have read thus far on Youmoz, thank you.
Thanks feedthebot. I'm glad you liked it.
And probably one reason why it's now on the main blog. Good job tom6a
Not wanting to state the obvious, but places other than digg can drive quite a bit from the comments as well. We had quite a spike from my comment on the greatest living american post here on SEOmoz.
I'll second that Ghost Rider.....
There are virtually unlimited markets and communities that can be used (and exploited) in order to increase the traffic to a website. The cost to use them is the time and effort in comparison to the results that same time and effort would earn using alternative methods / strategies. What does the digg comment traffic source do when they get to your site? Link to it, convert commecially, or bounce? I'm not sure trying to use digg commenting to gain traffic has the correct ROI. Digg traffic in general has a high bounce rate and I imagine digg comment traffic to be a lot less useful than regular digg traffic.
That's what great marketers do... They are always discovering new sources for marketing. Thanks for revealing it tom6a.
so i can spam digg comments, as long as i don't have my real contact info available anywhere for prank calls, etc. & i'll be fine. i really haven't spent much time on digg, but what i keep hearing is that the crowd in general is pretty mean spirited and immature. doesn't sound too enticing to me.
what i found really interesting in this post was the noscript plugin for firefox skewing the analytics. thanks for sharing that, i didn't know.
& now i do.
Great post and it makes sense since the same thing can happen by being the first to post on a popular blog.
Loren Baker wrote an article at Search Engine Journal a couple of months ago Digg & the Power of Commenting on Blogs. Loren noticed you could get a lot of traffic by commenting on the actual post that makes the front page. As the Digg traffic hits the article, some of that traffic will go on to follow your comment link to your site,
Another way to combine Digg and comments to get traffic.
Nice find. I've thought about this strategy before too. Used it a couple of times but I didn't check traffic stats to see how it turned out.
Just happened to be in the right place at the right time. One of the things I like about the tactic is that there's no spamming involved. You're simply carrying the conversation over to your site as you would do with any blog post.
It's all about timing it right to bring in the traffic.
Hey, you beat me to it. I was going to cover how to generate traffic using digg comments in this week's whiteboard friday.
Win some, loose some, lol. There's always next time!
Thanks Matt. I'd certainly be interested in your insights. I'm sure that I haven't covered everything. You have found quite a bit of success on Digg. I've been watching your submissions.
Matt, does this mean we won't be seeing you now on Friday? Or does it mean you have to come up with another topic?
great post... this should be moved to the main Moz page.
I would like to see how many people that visit your site from Digg comments actually come back as a return visitor.
I'm just questioning the value of Digg these days... maybe I'm just frustrated with the whole Digg user base.
I believe most visitors are not return visitors, digg is great at generating spikes of traffic, most of which are of no real value. Then again, if you wrote something of value and wish to be heard, digg is the ultimate way to go. Also great for link building
I understand the link building value when your main post gets dug...
but for a person with limited time, is it worth spamming comments with your link or is that time better spent elsewhere?
Risk vs. Reward is what I'm looking at.
Kurt, I'd say no, it's not worth spamming articles with your link. I hope I made it clear that "spamming" is not going to be successful on Digg. Personally, I don't think it's a good strategy anywhere. If you are going to be successful on Digg you are going to have to spend some time there, see what the audience likes and provide it. You also have to consider your reputation. Digg will be quick to criticize and point our all your failings if they think you are spamming them.
You did make it clear. I would imagine you would see similar results to making the front page only to a lesser degree. Less traffic and less links, but somewhat in the same proportion to each other as getting an article on the front page.
Of course it's easier to have a comment at the top of front page post then it is to get to the front page you should be able to do it more frequently.
I never thought about that idea.
I will give it a try right now.
And thanx for all those fantastic tips :-)
Hee man really nice article.. its sure handy!
First comments on SEOmoz blog posts tend to get the most thumbs up too :)
This is a really well thought out article. Thanks. You know, I'm not so impressed with Digg either.
digg comment =traffik
yes, we can get more traffic from digg
I've heard from Matt before but you've got some good ideas coming from your fingertips.
Many thanks and keep them coming
Smart thinking indeed! Thanks for sharing.
From #3 - "I suspect that Digg will redo their comment system at some point in the near future."
Did I call it or what? One month later...
TechCrunch: Digg Gets Real Threaded Comment System
Digg Blog: Site Downtime / New Features
Hmmm....now I'm going to have to write a whole new post.
haha, excellent call. You're like nostradamus of the tubes
I also predict that Oatmeal will get a bounty fishing article on the front page of digg...now. Man, you're good.
digg = my bitch
This was a great article - superb! I see this as on more ingredient in the large soup of website marketing.
Again incredible post. Posts like this one, are the reason why I came here each day. You guys are great people. I know that one of the golden rules are - "give to receive". I mean you gave great and valuable information for free and I hope you receive good clients and they pay you good ;)
I will try this way to drive traffic to my site. I will also be carefull. But let me ask you something: what kind a post must write fir Digg.com and win a attention form the users? I hear and know of course that people like to read more for Sex, Money, Scandals, Celebritys and things like this. How to uderstand what kind of inromation Digg users want to read about?
Also I want to share other way to drive traffic to your site. I read for this a week ago. It's easy, only make a account and make you own page https://www.squidoo.com/addsiteonline/ . I think that is also good way to drive traffic :) What you think?
Digg users don't care about sex, money, scandals, or celebrities. They're a fickle mob, one week they'll all digg top 10 lists and the next week they'll bury them. Generally speaking though, stick to easily digestable geek/techie material.
From what I hear Squidoo has become so overrun with SEO spam that it pretty much counts for nothing at this point, both in terms of traffic and link value. (at least that's what our resident social media link building expert tells me)
interesting. i was going to tell you you're wrong, but it looks like you may be right. we used to have squidoo pages ranking in the top 10 for fairly competitive terms. i just checked several of them and didn't see any in the top 50 anymore.
i'll still use squidoo for links just because it's so easy though.
This is exactly what I've seen, too. Part of the problem may have been Squidoo's bragging about how highly they could rank in the results and how link-friendly they were. In some ways, they were screaming, "SPAM ME!"
You can indeed still use Squidoo for links, but I'm also seeing their pages fall into supplemental, not get indexed and generally be shafted by the Google and Yahoo. Live is still indexing some of them, but they aren't ranking well.
I guess the moral of this story is to use social media to your advantage, but don't rely on it. And don't tell users that they should create their free profile now since the engines love your pages and your links!
*pouts because Squidoo did indeed used to rule G's top 10 and was so_darn_easy*
I guess I am pouting also now...
;)
Does anyone have insight into the somewhat off-topic question I posed above?
"According to something I read on StumbleUpon, 'A large portion of...Firefox users have added the NoScript add-on to their browser. This is one of the top-10 most popular extensions for Firefox. This extension blocks any javascript calls...caus[ing]...Google Analytics...to not work.' If that's true, then the actual traffic from these comments could be higher than recorded. Currently about 50% of OmniNerd's recorded visitors use Firefox. How many are not being counted? Does anyone have experience with Google Analytics not counting all their traffic?"
we must've been posting at the same time. this is the first i've heard of it. i'd like to know more too. if it's that popular why haven't we heard of it?
I have a case where I suspect Google Analytics wasn't including all traffic, but I can't say with 100% certainty. I ran a couple of (javascript) blog ads for a client, and one blog seemed to be sending a tremendous amount of visitors to the main site and to the places linked in the ad - so much traffic that the server resources being used shot up to around 90%. Even though the server logs showed individual IPs and it looked like normal traffic, Analytics was recording maybe 10-20%. Unfortunately, the client doesn't have a decent server log program like AwStats or anything, and I had to pause those campaigns so I can't do a retest.
But short answer, yes, I have had discrepancies with numbers tracked through server logs and on-site tools compared to GA. The predominant browser on this site is Safari, followed by Firefox.
I used to have the noscript extension installed and it does block all javascript unless you specifically allow it. Analytics uses JavaScript to track so if JavaScript is disabled then no tracking. I don't know if the extension is still one of the top 10 downloaded, but it may have been when the StumbleUpon FAQ was written.
That extension certainly isn't the only way to turn off JavaScript and it certainly isn't the only reason stats won't match between programs.
I no longer have the extension installed since it was a memory hog and after awhile it got annoying having keep explicitly allowing sites to show JavaScript.
Excellent post there :)Will try this way and see how much increase in traffic i get.
Nice post. I never thought about getting traffic in such way, I'll definately have to try but as you have said, digg doesn't like seo much...
p.l.u.r.
I followed the link through to Chandler Kent's post about his comment, and I loved what he said about people who called him and hung up or said "hello" and nothing else. You can guarantee that those tongue-tied Diggers were not so shy about leaving tirades on Digg!
I can't believe Diggers consider blogspam enough of a crime to warrant stalking and death threats. That's just a tiny bit obsessive.
Tom6a nice post :-)
There has been a good discussion on this article and I appreciate all the kind comments. I'm glad most of you like it and have found it useful. I know there is a wealth of knowledge here on SEOmoz and I'd like to ask (again) the subtle question I posed above.
"As you can see from the statistics below, the bounce rate was between 74-92%. The average time on site was 20 seconds for the Mythbusters article and just over a minute for the fuel and gas articles. I'm sure that there are ways the site can improve its stickiness (any ideas?), but the point remains the same—Digg visitors are less likely to stick around than traffic from other sources."
OmniNerd is going through a complete redesign right now (version 3) and I've provided some input on how I think they can improve things. I've noticed that the bounce rate is pretty high from all traffic sources and I was wondering if anyone had suggestions on how to improve the stickiness of the site. Add suggestions here or on this comment thread. Thanks for your help!
Very interesting. I will have to give this strategy a try.
Not much of a Digger, but I have noticed a few visitors from Digg post comments I made. They didn't send too much traffic, but the post wasn't on their homepage and didn't really get that many Diggs.
It would be interesting to see what kind of amounts a post on the front page would bring. Thanks for the insight and knowledge.
you will get banned
By the way check this company MDFI. Their stock is set to increase because of their association with Apple iphone and Complete Care Medical. Find more about this company and stock https://www.growurmoney.com/medefile/
Wow, it's so kind of you to spam our comments! Enjoy your nofollow tag, bitch.