According to Hitwise, last week visits to Twitter surpassed visits to Digg for the first time. Hitwise measures visits in terms of “market share,” which isn’t a very helpful metric (both have 0.021 percent market share, but Twitter is ranked No. 84 and Digg is No. 85). This data is of last week, when visits to Twitter surged following the much-Tweeted emergency landing of a plane on the Hudson. (Note that these numbers do not include usage on mobile devices, desktop apps, or through other Websites via Twitter’s API).
Today, traffic to Twitter was even higher with everybody feeling compelled to let everyone else know that, yes, in fact, the U.S. has a new president and that they saw his inauguration speech. (You too?) Twitter co-founder Biz Stone blogs that Twitter saw five times as many Tweets per second today compared to last week. (See chart below). So maybe those two lines between Digg and Twitter will keep diverging, or at least keep converging.
For what it’s worth, Google Trends for Websites also shows Twitter catching up to Digg (but not yet passing). Other measuring services, such as Quantcast, Compete, and comScore, still show a wide gap. For instance, in the U.S. for December, comScore shows Digg.com at 6.8 million unique visitors versus 1.9 million for Twitter.com. (Update: See second chart below). That’s a pretty big gap to bridge in less than one month. I don’t buy the Hitwise numbers. Do you?
comscore worldwide still shows a big gap:
I updated with the U.S. comScore chart, which goes through December and keeps it apples-to-apples with Hitwise.
That chart ends in November. Two months is a lot of time to catch up but I doubt they surpassed them.
But who knows… Obama inauguration was a huge thing and everyone was twittering about it.
Wow! twitter is getting so popular- i am def. a twitter addict now. i just hope twitter stays a networking tool for businesses. please spread the word to help twitter stay a business marketing tool
http://twitter....m/justinrfrench
@justin I don’t think Twitter needs help becoming a marketing tool. The spammers seem to be taking advantage of it just fine.
Personally, I’ve almost totally abandoned Digg for Twitter. It’s a better community and information source.
Interesting question, but I’m wondering if HitWise isn’t tracking “mobile devices, desktop apps, or through other Websites via Twitter’s API” then Twitter passed them eons ago in traffic …. and even longer ago in usefulness. Digg is too tech heavy and Twitter has a much broader/diverse user base, IMO. Add to that, conversations happen on Twitter in *almost* real time, quite often. Digg is closer to a forum than IM, such as Twitter.
If somebody could measure all that, I think Twitter’s audience/users might be bigger than Digg’s. But when you look at just Twitter.com vs. Digg.com, the Hitwise numbers look suspect.
I’d agree on numbers. Compete.com shows them to be *very* far apart. That said, all of these tools leave much to be desired with regard to true counts.
http://siteanal....com/?metric=uv
only cos they dont support your biased theory.
Twitter sucks!
Digg is much more useful than Twitter for me. I can go Digg and find something to entertain or inform me at any time of the day.
Twitter is a waste of time unless you are a blogger who depends on breaking news and direct influence.
And maybe in your bubble-world Twitter is biggest thing, but are you trying to tell me people who Twitter on their devices don’t visit twitter.com even once a month? Hah!
“Digg is too tech heavy and Twitter has a much broader/diverse user base, IMO.”
When’s the last time you went to Digg??? If anything, there’s now less tech on digg than on any other crowdsourced news site.
Here’s some actual data and not vacuous, and wrong, opinion: http://bit.ly/iifM
Well, Daves, you likely anonymous commenter … those numbers are still high compared to the tech audience, IMO. Also, you’ll note I added IMO here and in my original post. This should remind you of the various audiences and interests of the many readers of both TechCrunch and Digg.
I visit both sites often. ;o) I find them to be many things, with regard to discussions: mostly anonymous, too often impolite, rarely vetted, and often lacking 3rd party references.
Oh, and you’ll also note that I, unlike, you didn’t resort to ad hominem *and* I use my real name with a link. You might try these two new things: being nice and transparency. It really works to help people take your views a bit more seriously.
I knew if I posted my opinion, particularly here, it would probably bring out a troll-like response from someone. Sigh. One more reason I give both TechCrunch and Digg little useful regard for *my* purposes.
Well, TechCrunch just took … then deleted my comment to you, Daves.
Suffice to say, as I’m not going to retype it, you need to think of relevant audiences and their appeal to individual readers. To me, it is way too tech involved. Note, please, I included IMO in my comment.
My thoughts too. I read somewhere that 80% of Twitter users make use of a third party app to Tweet. If these figures are only reporting 20% of use then Twitter far outstrips Digg.
Ian Hendry
CEO, WeCanDo.BIZ
http://www.wecando.biz
I don’t buy it.
http://siteanal...com?metric=sess
Digg is just an overhyped slashdot clone with no clear revenue model besides “lets act like were tech-hipsters and hope some conglomerate buys us.”
Twitter has some of the same problems as digg, notably no clear way to make money, but its certainly more popular and culturally relevant.
http://www.goog...digg%2C+twitter
“So maybe those two lines between Digg and Twitter will keep diverging, or at least keep converging.” Eh?
It’s hard to disagree with Google. HitWise doesn’t seem to be measuring unique visitors, just total hits. A lot of people still update their status through the web, probably driving the number of total page hits up.
If we believe their account, as well as their disclaimer that their study doesn’t account for mobile devices, twitter has far surpassed Digg, as other studies have shown at least 60% of Twitter activity is through the API.
I don’t buy it either.
“It’s hard to disagree with Google.”
Really?! I’ve never seen a site where google’s trends for websites were correct. Their numbers are off by several magnitudes. Do you even know how Google gets their estimates?!
Wouldn’t surprise me considering how crappy Digg is these days. Have you seen the Digg’s top dugg stories? It’s garbage piled upon garbage.
Digg was good in 2007 and it all went downhill from there.
Agreed. There’s a dictatorship with the top Diggers, and the stories show it!
BestJobsOnline
http://tinyurl.com/7uj5ay
You’re right about that Obama-president-I’m-watching tweet phenomenon.
@goobimama
I find both sites are aptly named. Digg is crap that was dug up from who knows where, and Twitter tends to be a whole lot of noise with nothing of consequence. And you thought bloggers were self-important.
It shouldn’t be a surprise that Twitter would pass Digg at some point. Twitter’s exponential exposure (thanks to re-tweets) is its strength. Plus, the way Digg can be manipulated by bots, the way it displays stories on the front page, and limited methods to communicate top stories puts it at a huge disadvantage.
With Twitter’s re-tweets, sms & other mobile access, apps for the API, and other uses besides promoting news, Twitter is sure to be THE way to spread news in the future.
I personally use Twitter more than digg, but this doesn’t track mobile. I use twitter on my blackberry much more than twitter.com or digg.com
Im sorry but IMO twitter & digg are on opposite sides of the spectrum and should not be compared at all on any stat. Ones a microblogging site and the other is a huge link list that people vote on which every one who reads this site should already know.
I do not even know what the big deal is on who gets more traffic, one you can advertise and the other you can’t. So to end this babbling, im wondering why i wasted my time typing this and why you decided to post this topic. Both are pointless.
Digg is sh*t.
I hate Digg. I hope Twitter chews Digg and spits it out in the Hudson one day.
The most stupidest run organization ever. Also, they disabled my account for no reason and froze it. No emails returned, nothing.
They need to vanish from the face of the web already.
Why are we comparing Twitter to Digg anyway? That’s like saying Yahoo has more traffic than Sony. wtf
With EACH day Techcrunch mentioning the word ‘twitter’… I have no doubt their traffic has been increased..
I’m not surprised that Twitter passed Digg. Twitter still isn’t making any money yet.
I’m actually surprised that Digg doesn’t use Twitter more often or in a more engaging way than they currently do with their twitter.com/digg account. We’ve tried to use Twitter to help spread our new social news website and it seems to help a little bit. If any of you like Digg and NCAA sports, follow us on Twitter here: http://www.twit...com/ncaablotter
Digg actually uses twitter alot. They have at least one twitter account per catagory (i.e. Apple, Technology, Buisness, etc.) for the top stories in these catagories, as well as the Digg Frontpage account, the Digg2000 account (anytime a story reaches 2000 diggs, it tweets the story), and the normal Digg Company account.
All in all, i believe all in all its somewhere around 16 different twitter feeds. It’s hard to say you’re surprised they don’t use it more often, when they have sixteen feeds. You can see the feed list here: http://blog.digg.com/?p=463
The question is not Digg versus Twitter but Twitter versus Facebook!
Facebook actively tries people to update their status as often as possible (see new design, see CNN.com/facebook).
Both Twitter and Digg have large User Bases. But like most Web 2.0 Companies, they don’t earn enough revenues that can exploit their User numbers.
Would love Techcrunch to do a feature on the Top Ten Web 2.0 Companies – and list what each Company earns annually.
My Top Ten Web 2.0 Companies are
1. Wikipedia.
2. Facebook.
3. YouTube.
4. MySpace.
5. Flickr.
6. Skype.
7. Zoho.
8. Last FM.
9. Digg.
10. Twitter.
I’m not so sure about the comparisons between Digg and Twitter either. It’s fairly obvious though that Digg users who now use Twitter will spend less time digging their favorite stories whilst Tweeting.
@b.moore is correct: Digg and Twitter are two different applications, offering different benefits to users, requiring different type of interaction from point of entry to finish. The closest thing to Digg on Twitter is the Retweet (RT) feature. A potentially more interesting comparison to Twitter is facebook status updates (I’m betting we’ll start see a decline is Twitter is adopted more) or, specifically for today–how many FB inauguration updates were made, how many related posts were published on blogs, how many SMSs were exchanged.
I’m not a big fan of Twitter. I think Arrington and Scoble way overestimate its importance due to the fact that it is a sweet tool for professional bloggers. But at least it is foundational and has many interesting directions it can develop.
Digg on the other hand is just a way to waste time for bored cubicle drones. Its structure guarantees that quality is inversely proportional to the number of users. Maybe they’ll eventually become profitable (how about firing half the staff?), but there’s nothing interesting about the tech. Digg will never affect anything–does the National Enquirer affect the New York Times?
It’s a real shame Facebook stole their thunder with that CNN inauguration partnership.
I’m still not very excited about the whole Twitter craze. I guess it’s just not for everyone
wow – two companies which lose money and have no business model overtaking one-another… how funny.
holy %^&^!
http://thecashc...am.blogspot.com
No way dude, no way and no how. It’ll never happen!
RT
http://www.privacy-web.us.tc
time for kevin ross to say “burbye”
yeah but i’d like to see it get more backlinks than digg