<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Potential Buyers for Digg: Print Media?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/07/16/potential-buyers-for-digg-print-media/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/07/16/potential-buyers-for-digg-print-media/</link>
	<description>News, opinion, and fresh thinking for web developers and designers. The official podcast of sitepoint.com.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:54:05 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/07/16/potential-buyers-for-digg-print-media/comment-page-1/#comment-762411</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=2648#comment-762411</guid>
		<description>As a former employee of &quot;the Hitwise&quot; (is that anything like &quot;the Google&quot;?), I can say all those metrics indicate is that sites in the News and Media category are a good place for The Guardian to invest some of their online marketing spend.  It has absolutely nothing to do with potential buyouts at all.  There isn&#039;t even a mention of The Guardian in that Hitwise report.

There are much more detailed reports available from them which will confirm your suspicions without the wild conjecture.

If you want access to the Digg traffic for ad impressions, I doubt it&#039;s going to work well if you are a news company.  It goes against the whole grain of what Digg is about.  Can they really own a site like Digg and remain impartial and drive traffic to their print media site?  Would their users ever really trust the links on the site if they could never be 100% sure the displayed links weren&#039;t influenced by the owner news company?  They are better off concentrating on the sites that benefit directly from Digg traffic rather than Digg itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a former employee of &#8220;the Hitwise&#8221; (is that anything like &#8220;the Google&#8221;?), I can say all those metrics indicate is that sites in the News and Media category are a good place for The Guardian to invest some of their online marketing spend.  It has absolutely nothing to do with potential buyouts at all.  There isn&#8217;t even a mention of The Guardian in that Hitwise report.</p>
<p>There are much more detailed reports available from them which will confirm your suspicions without the wild conjecture.</p>
<p>If you want access to the Digg traffic for ad impressions, I doubt it&#8217;s going to work well if you are a news company.  It goes against the whole grain of what Digg is about.  Can they really own a site like Digg and remain impartial and drive traffic to their print media site?  Would their users ever really trust the links on the site if they could never be 100% sure the displayed links weren&#8217;t influenced by the owner news company?  They are better off concentrating on the sites that benefit directly from Digg traffic rather than Digg itself.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
