Fake News Story Games Thousands of Digg Users

A Reuters news story alleges that Sony is recalling its brand new Sony Playstation 3 console. Problem is the game's on us. This story is fake and it fooled hundreds of digg users yesterday and arguably thousands more who clicked on the link. You can read how it was done here.

This isn't the first time this has happened and it's not limited to socially driven news sites like digg. The blogosphere widely reported last week that Yahoo had acquired mybloglog after Techcrunch broke the story. An formal announcement has yet to be made.

All of this points to a real problem in the social media world. The only yardsticks we use to measure the trustworthiness of a source are purely based on popularity - e.g. in-bound links, votes, etc. Now often popularity and quality are closely aligned. However, both of these incidents demonstrate that the current system isn't working. We need more.

Someone - ideally a third party we trust - should start a star rating system similar to what works so well on eBay.  It could become a standard the way tags are today. Even if this isn't a big sweeping movement, digg should adopt a similar system and the front page algorithm should take one's rating as well as vote into determining what stories rise to the front page.

(Edelman, my employer, represents Xbox, which competes with Sony.)

Comments

[ritchie]

I don't think that calling in a "third authority" would solve the problem at all; in fact, the lack of this 3rd authority is the key-strength of social content filtering (which works fine in most cases). I really don't think that such incidents should lead to quickfixes; as these quickfixes, whoever the "content authority" might be, are just bound to re-establish the old gatekeeper-structure.

[duvet-dayz]

We documented a similar incident a few weeks ago on our web site (http://www.duvet-dayz.com/archives/2006/11/06/126/) showing that basically nobody looks at the posts before "digging" them once these got beyond a particular level - or on the front page.
To say it less euphemistic the only thing that's needed to play that game is a large enough "pool of friends" to get you there. Then you just put up an error page on your web site (???with some advertising)

MuLife has also written a story recently discussing the topic on a broader scale (http://themulife.com/?p=256).
----

Within the discussion of his and our post it also became clear that quite a large group of the few who "really digg" stories use the system to bookmark interesting posts.

----

There might be a few other ways to tackle this besides user ratings. We are currently working on some solutions for that.

Overall one should also not forget that the same way stories are gamed to the front page others are made disappear. We are moving fast from "democracy" to the "rule of the mobs".

[Jim Kukral]

How do you really stop this from happening? Really? The information flows so fast, if it's juicy even faster.

I'm not convinced a third party would do any good.

[Pete]

Techcrunch didn't break the MyBlogLog story - Valleywag did. Techcrunch originally credited Valleywag with the story, and explained how VW had pieced it together from tipsters. They then removed the credit.

[tish grier]

Steve,

I have to agree that a third-party won't necessary be all that beneficial.

A better ethical standard by those who employ "scoop" mentality in blogging might work. Arrington made some talk of an interest in a discussion of ethics after the OJA conference (but also neglected to look at the blogging ethics standards that have already been circulating for years.)

The confusion of popularity and authority has been going on for awhile in the blogosphere (Technorati's been struggling with the two concepts.) From following your stats, Steve, we can see how you are both popular *and* authoritative. You, however, have a pretty good ethical standard for your information reporting :-) I know that, as a reader, I normally expect sites that are authoritative and popular to have a fairly good ethical standard, But I've learned over the time I've been blogging (and even longer in social media in general) that if the first evaluation of a site is its popularity that I should be a little hesitant to consider it a good and authoritative source of information. Only time proves both authority and lasting popularity.

[John Dowdell]

Summary: Less faith, more reason.

"Someone - ideally a third party we trust - should start a star rating system similar to what works so well on eBay."

I think it's not so much "who do I trust" than "how can I test what they say".

Think about it -- CBS News was very authoritative at one point, which made it all the more attractive to those who might wish to manipulate public perception. If you or I were "blessed" with a high authority ranking then we'd attract more attention from manipulators too. The incentives would destroy the system.

Better, I think, is to ask "How do you know what you say you know?" Bloggers link back to source posts, and host comments which can challenge the details. Newspapers rely on "a highly-placed source who wishes to remain confidential". We need to strengthen the ability to doubt, to ask questions... we need to diminish the habit of taking things on faith.

How does this sound to you, Steve...?

jd

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why the Digg Team or Kevin simply ignore these conversations.

First they're all Hush-Hush about the Digg algorithm and no word from them on this incident. I guess they obviously have editors so they should just admit to it.

[Jeff Caylor]

I've thought for a long time that perhaps the most significant contribution of Ebay was the user rating system, yet few web sites employ it. There has to be a way to decide what blog to read or what podcast to download when the 'sphere gets so crowded. This is a great use of user ratings.

[fling!]

i'm all for more accurate algorithms, but really, is the occasional fake story such a big problem? how much time does each individual lose clicking on the bogus link, versus the attention the scandal creates, which possibly increases the scrutiny of digg users?

the lesson is that we all need to think critically, and not rely on some authority/technology to protect us from griefers.

[A to Z of World]

No doubt the content filters for front page will come into act as they are already duplicate filtering in digg. But the general issue is one trying to fool others. It may be for several reasons. One being just for fun another being intentional practice. Competitors can bring down your brand loyalty levels to a great extent. Imangine how many would have postponed their decision to purchase PS when they were falsely alarmed.

[Charles H. Green]

It's the big trust issue facing the digital world: how can I trust 'em when I have no context?

The answer is, give 'em context.

That's what eBay does--provides a history of specific people commenting on their specific experiences with an individual.

Here are a couple of trust principles that should affect design of such a system:

1. The narrower the issue, the more trust it's possible to create (it's easier for me to trust you to buy a book from me than it is to get me to introduce you to my sister);

2. The more context, the more potential trust. (Bloggers gain credibility to the extent you can see their ouvre, link to their bios, and are cross-linked to other, known, bloggers);

3. The more a selfless motive is evident, the more trust potential (see Rapleaf, a strange attempt at trust creation which actually invites users to have their friends write in and say 'Joe is really trustworthy'--a pretty clear case of motives you wouldn't trust).

[Moe Frank]

Well this is bad news for Sony and PS3. First Assassin's Creed and Grand Theft Auto IV are going to Xbox 360. Here's a link. And so is Virtua Fighter 5. And a rumor saying that kingdom hearts 3 will go to the Wii. Can you say ouch. Sony is with there Blu-Ray anyways. And there where a crop load of PS3's at my local Walmart and none of them got sold don't even clear the shelves. But today I saw the manager of that Walmart have all the PS3 off the shelves and so where all the X3 Blu-Ray disk. A do to this Walmart being small I asked the manager what was going on and she said that Sony wanted them all back and that's all she knows. And that's all I know. Sorry.