1 00:00:04,440 --> 00:00:12,440 Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey there, 2 00:00:12,440 --> 00:00:15,880 Speaker 1: and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. 3 00:00:15,960 --> 00:00:19,040 Speaker 1: I'm an executive producer with iHeart Podcasts and how the 4 00:00:19,200 --> 00:00:23,720 Speaker 1: tech are you? So, just last Friday, we published a 5 00:00:23,840 --> 00:00:28,480 Speaker 1: tech Stuff classic episode called the Dig Story, and I 6 00:00:28,520 --> 00:00:31,040 Speaker 1: was thinking, I should probably do a very quick update 7 00:00:31,440 --> 00:00:34,960 Speaker 1: on what's been going on with Dig since twenty seventeen, 8 00:00:34,960 --> 00:00:38,200 Speaker 1: except you know me, I don't do quick updates because 9 00:00:38,240 --> 00:00:42,479 Speaker 1: I'm a chatty Cathy. So we're gonna do that. We're 10 00:00:42,479 --> 00:00:44,480 Speaker 1: gonna do an update on what's been happening with Dig 11 00:00:44,520 --> 00:00:47,520 Speaker 1: since twenty seventeen. But first I want to go back 12 00:00:47,560 --> 00:00:50,159 Speaker 1: and talk over kind of what happened with Dig in 13 00:00:50,200 --> 00:00:52,400 Speaker 1: the first place, just in case you didn't listen to 14 00:00:52,400 --> 00:00:55,400 Speaker 1: the original episode or the classic that published on Friday, 15 00:00:55,720 --> 00:00:59,160 Speaker 1: so that you're not totally in the dark. So Dig 16 00:00:59,240 --> 00:01:02,600 Speaker 1: originally law lunched in late two thousand and four, and 17 00:01:02,800 --> 00:01:06,560 Speaker 1: it was essentially a news aggregator site. Dig started off 18 00:01:06,560 --> 00:01:09,360 Speaker 1: as a site where users, the visitors, the members of 19 00:01:09,600 --> 00:01:12,520 Speaker 1: DIG would be able to share links to stuff that 20 00:01:12,560 --> 00:01:16,959 Speaker 1: they thought was useful or cool or entertaining or you 21 00:01:17,000 --> 00:01:19,480 Speaker 1: know whatever, and It was a site that was all 22 00:01:19,520 --> 00:01:24,840 Speaker 1: about discovery and sharing discovery. So search engines are great, right, Like, 23 00:01:24,920 --> 00:01:28,039 Speaker 1: if you are looking for something specific, then you can 24 00:01:28,040 --> 00:01:30,680 Speaker 1: go to a search engine and you can find a 25 00:01:30,840 --> 00:01:35,000 Speaker 1: link to something that answers your specific question. That's fantastic. 26 00:01:35,600 --> 00:01:38,040 Speaker 1: But what if you're just in the mood to you know, 27 00:01:38,600 --> 00:01:42,360 Speaker 1: browse and to see what's going on specifically, like what's 28 00:01:42,560 --> 00:01:46,120 Speaker 1: what's more important right now today? What is happening? What 29 00:01:46,200 --> 00:01:48,840 Speaker 1: if you didn't really know what you wanted to see 30 00:01:48,960 --> 00:01:52,920 Speaker 1: or read, you just knew that you wanted something, Then 31 00:01:53,000 --> 00:01:56,920 Speaker 1: a site like dig or Reddit, which launched not long 32 00:01:56,960 --> 00:02:01,240 Speaker 1: after Dig did and was Dig's big competitor, a site 33 00:02:01,320 --> 00:02:04,120 Speaker 1: like that could be a huge help. So Dig really 34 00:02:04,120 --> 00:02:08,160 Speaker 1: focused on the recent and the timely. They really were 35 00:02:08,280 --> 00:02:13,800 Speaker 1: hyper focused on things like tech and gaming and sports 36 00:02:13,800 --> 00:02:16,120 Speaker 1: and news, that kind of stuff like that was really 37 00:02:16,160 --> 00:02:19,799 Speaker 1: where they were focusing. Sharing a link on Dig then 38 00:02:19,880 --> 00:02:23,360 Speaker 1: gave the entire community the opportunity to weigh in on 39 00:02:23,480 --> 00:02:29,320 Speaker 1: whether they thought that particular story was important or not. 40 00:02:29,960 --> 00:02:33,000 Speaker 1: So if folks thought it was interesting or important and 41 00:02:33,040 --> 00:02:37,080 Speaker 1: they had a Dig account, they could boost the story 42 00:02:37,200 --> 00:02:40,600 Speaker 1: up the page ranking. This was called digging, an article, 43 00:02:40,800 --> 00:02:43,639 Speaker 1: and if an article received enough digs, it would get 44 00:02:43,639 --> 00:02:46,880 Speaker 1: promoted to the front page of Dig, which in turn 45 00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:49,960 Speaker 1: was being called the front page of the Internet. If 46 00:02:50,000 --> 00:02:53,320 Speaker 1: the community thought the story was lame or that, you know, 47 00:02:53,440 --> 00:02:57,840 Speaker 1: maybe it was already represented within Dig, whatever that might be, 48 00:02:58,280 --> 00:03:01,800 Speaker 1: you could vote it down. This was called burying an article. 49 00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:06,400 Speaker 1: The philosophy behind Dig was that the community determined what 50 00:03:06,600 --> 00:03:09,280 Speaker 1: stuff on the Internet was actually worth looking at. It 51 00:03:09,320 --> 00:03:12,959 Speaker 1: was giving power to the people. Now, none of that 52 00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:16,200 Speaker 1: would matter unless people actually used Dig. If it had 53 00:03:16,240 --> 00:03:18,840 Speaker 1: never attracted users, then it just would have been a 54 00:03:18,880 --> 00:03:23,200 Speaker 1: curiosity and nothing more. But it actually did attract quite 55 00:03:23,200 --> 00:03:25,720 Speaker 1: a few users. People began to flock to the site 56 00:03:25,760 --> 00:03:30,320 Speaker 1: and use it a lot, so their participation would ultimately 57 00:03:30,400 --> 00:03:33,359 Speaker 1: end up having a larger impact on the web in general. 58 00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:36,320 Speaker 1: Because if you had a piece that showed up on 59 00:03:36,440 --> 00:03:40,000 Speaker 1: Dig's front page, that could mean a significant boost traffic 60 00:03:40,040 --> 00:03:42,000 Speaker 1: as people checked out, you know, they click on the 61 00:03:42,080 --> 00:03:44,440 Speaker 1: article and go to your site. So Dig could end 62 00:03:44,520 --> 00:03:47,400 Speaker 1: up being really influential. There was this thing called the 63 00:03:47,520 --> 00:03:51,240 Speaker 1: Dig effect that was a big deal when Dig was, 64 00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:54,320 Speaker 1: you know, in its heyday, but just a couple of 65 00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:57,520 Speaker 1: years after launching the site, one of the co founders, 66 00:03:57,640 --> 00:04:02,560 Speaker 1: Kevin Rose, who was a personality really at that time. 67 00:04:02,600 --> 00:04:06,840 Speaker 1: He was on tech TV and had a show, a 68 00:04:06,880 --> 00:04:12,280 Speaker 1: podcast that he launched called Dignation The Pretty Famous Dude. 69 00:04:12,400 --> 00:04:16,280 Speaker 1: He started to encounter a frustrating experience because there were 70 00:04:16,279 --> 00:04:20,320 Speaker 1: some companies that were interested in purchasing Dig, and Rose 71 00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:22,719 Speaker 1: was like, yeah, I don't mind the idea of selling 72 00:04:22,720 --> 00:04:27,159 Speaker 1: it because he really liked creating stuff and getting it going. 73 00:04:27,720 --> 00:04:30,960 Speaker 1: But he was less interested in just sticking around forever. Right, 74 00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:36,400 Speaker 1: He liked the creative process. But he couldn't just sell 75 00:04:36,839 --> 00:04:39,720 Speaker 1: Dig and then move on to something else because Dig 76 00:04:40,080 --> 00:04:44,000 Speaker 1: had a board of directors who ultimately had the authority 77 00:04:44,000 --> 00:04:46,960 Speaker 1: of that decision about whether or not to sell a company, 78 00:04:47,560 --> 00:04:50,960 Speaker 1: and the board was convinced that the incoming offers, such 79 00:04:51,000 --> 00:04:53,720 Speaker 1: as one from news Corp. News Corps, which had famously 80 00:04:53,760 --> 00:04:59,400 Speaker 1: purchased MySpace, just undervalued the company. So news Corp's offer 81 00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:03,000 Speaker 1: was said to be somewhere around sixty million dollars, but 82 00:05:03,040 --> 00:05:05,680 Speaker 1: the board director said, no, that's way too low. We 83 00:05:05,800 --> 00:05:07,840 Speaker 1: need to have a much higher offer before we will 84 00:05:07,920 --> 00:05:12,800 Speaker 1: consider selling. So Rose couldn't sell to news Corp. He 85 00:05:13,000 --> 00:05:15,400 Speaker 1: just had to sort of sit back and continue working 86 00:05:15,440 --> 00:05:19,679 Speaker 1: on the site. Reportedly, he became less interested in doing 87 00:05:19,720 --> 00:05:24,320 Speaker 1: that over his time at DIG, so he thought it 88 00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:26,120 Speaker 1: would have been better to cash out and created a 89 00:05:26,160 --> 00:05:28,920 Speaker 1: new project, but he was beholden to the board. By 90 00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:32,040 Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, there was a much larger deal 91 00:05:32,360 --> 00:05:35,520 Speaker 1: that was in the works between Dig and Google. Now, 92 00:05:35,680 --> 00:05:41,120 Speaker 1: the rumor was that Google offered to acquire Dig for 93 00:05:41,240 --> 00:05:47,160 Speaker 1: the princely sum of two hundred million dollars, so it 94 00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:50,000 Speaker 1: looked like maybe the Bard directors had been right right, 95 00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:52,200 Speaker 1: like they had said sixty millions too low, and then 96 00:05:52,279 --> 00:05:55,839 Speaker 1: a couple of years later the offer's two hundred million. However, 97 00:05:56,440 --> 00:05:59,520 Speaker 1: that deal never actually happened. Negotiations fell apart for one 98 00:05:59,560 --> 00:06:02,440 Speaker 1: reason or another, perhaps a whole bunch of different reasons, 99 00:06:02,800 --> 00:06:05,599 Speaker 1: and Google did not go through with the deal. In 100 00:06:05,680 --> 00:06:10,600 Speaker 1: twenty ten, Dig tackled an ambitious and drastic redesign known 101 00:06:10,640 --> 00:06:16,560 Speaker 1: as DIG Version four. Reportedly, Kevin Rose made a huge 102 00:06:16,640 --> 00:06:22,000 Speaker 1: number of changes as part of a venture capital funding round, 103 00:06:22,600 --> 00:06:27,359 Speaker 1: and upon launch, this rollout was a disaster. The redesign 104 00:06:27,480 --> 00:06:31,400 Speaker 1: went from the very foundation of how Dig worked, like 105 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:37,400 Speaker 1: even the actual technology that powered everything was changed, and 106 00:06:37,800 --> 00:06:40,960 Speaker 1: the changes went all the way through to user interface 107 00:06:40,960 --> 00:06:44,840 Speaker 1: and experience, and it turned out that not only did 108 00:06:44,839 --> 00:06:46,600 Speaker 1: it get rid of a lot of stuff that DIG 109 00:06:46,680 --> 00:06:50,840 Speaker 1: users valued, it was not ready for deployment when it 110 00:06:50,880 --> 00:06:54,720 Speaker 1: went live because people started to encounter frustrating glitches while 111 00:06:54,720 --> 00:06:57,640 Speaker 1: interacting with the new design. The whole website would crash 112 00:06:57,839 --> 00:07:02,160 Speaker 1: repeatedly throughout the day when the site was working, which 113 00:07:02,200 --> 00:07:04,960 Speaker 1: was never a guarantee. Users were very upset to see 114 00:07:05,080 --> 00:07:10,480 Speaker 1: historic features just missing from the experience, so, for example, 115 00:07:11,040 --> 00:07:15,440 Speaker 1: the option to bury a post was gone. Perhaps more 116 00:07:15,720 --> 00:07:17,880 Speaker 1: upsetting was the fact that this new version of dig 117 00:07:17,920 --> 00:07:21,520 Speaker 1: would allow news sites to automatically submit articles to DIG, 118 00:07:22,040 --> 00:07:26,520 Speaker 1: so instead of everything being user generated and user submitted, 119 00:07:27,160 --> 00:07:31,800 Speaker 1: now the news agencies could actually submit stuff themselves directly 120 00:07:31,840 --> 00:07:34,320 Speaker 1: to dig. It no longer was in the community's hands. 121 00:07:34,920 --> 00:07:37,800 Speaker 1: There was also a lot of complaints, although I never 122 00:07:37,880 --> 00:07:42,200 Speaker 1: found like any real strong corroborating evidence, but there were 123 00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:44,760 Speaker 1: a lot of complaints that some power users at DIG 124 00:07:45,280 --> 00:07:48,440 Speaker 1: had a disproportionate amount of control of what could be 125 00:07:48,560 --> 00:07:51,760 Speaker 1: seen and what would not make it to the front page, 126 00:07:52,320 --> 00:07:54,720 Speaker 1: and that meant the community as a whole found itself 127 00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,640 Speaker 1: unable to really get stuff seen on the main page, 128 00:07:58,640 --> 00:08:03,440 Speaker 1: so it was very disheartening. Alexis Ohanian, one of the 129 00:08:03,480 --> 00:08:07,160 Speaker 1: co founders of Reddit, you know, the big competitor to Dig, 130 00:08:07,280 --> 00:08:11,000 Speaker 1: actually published an open letter to Kevin Rose saying that 131 00:08:11,040 --> 00:08:13,640 Speaker 1: the new features in version four suggested that the team 132 00:08:13,680 --> 00:08:16,560 Speaker 1: had allowed investors to really weigh in on what should 133 00:08:16,600 --> 00:08:18,640 Speaker 1: and should not be part of the platform, and that 134 00:08:18,800 --> 00:08:22,600 Speaker 1: rather than listening to the community and responding to what 135 00:08:22,640 --> 00:08:25,560 Speaker 1: the community wanted, the site was listening to the money, 136 00:08:25,960 --> 00:08:29,680 Speaker 1: and that that in turn was alienating Dig's users. And 137 00:08:29,720 --> 00:08:32,160 Speaker 1: it turns out that, you know, a lot of what 138 00:08:32,200 --> 00:08:34,120 Speaker 1: he was saying was right, because a ton of Dig 139 00:08:34,200 --> 00:08:39,040 Speaker 1: users abandoned Dig. Many of them actually migrated on over 140 00:08:39,080 --> 00:08:43,080 Speaker 1: to Reddit. But that's another story, because Reddit itself has 141 00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:47,000 Speaker 1: had its own ups and downs, including a very tumultuous 142 00:08:47,040 --> 00:08:50,280 Speaker 1: twenty twenty three. Anyway, the various co founders of Dig 143 00:08:50,960 --> 00:08:54,559 Speaker 1: started to leave the company over time. By twenty eleven, 144 00:08:54,640 --> 00:08:58,040 Speaker 1: Kevin Rose was bouncing from the company as well. Lots 145 00:08:58,080 --> 00:09:04,559 Speaker 1: of users had Traffic was dr being precipitously. It was bad. Meanwhile, 146 00:09:04,640 --> 00:09:08,040 Speaker 1: social platforms like Facebook and Twitter were also growing rapidly 147 00:09:08,160 --> 00:09:10,679 Speaker 1: and taking over some of the functions that Dig had 148 00:09:10,720 --> 00:09:14,440 Speaker 1: performed because now folks could create a profile on a 149 00:09:14,480 --> 00:09:20,920 Speaker 1: system that prioritized communities and networks, at least that's what 150 00:09:20,960 --> 00:09:23,800 Speaker 1: they claimed to do. Then they could share stuff with 151 00:09:23,840 --> 00:09:27,920 Speaker 1: their friends on these platforms, So it was social first 152 00:09:28,360 --> 00:09:31,920 Speaker 1: and then content second. Kind of approach you could argue 153 00:09:31,960 --> 00:09:37,559 Speaker 1: Dig was maybe you know, content and social together, or 154 00:09:37,720 --> 00:09:41,440 Speaker 1: maybe even content first, social second. But the point is 155 00:09:41,520 --> 00:09:46,000 Speaker 1: Dig was seeing other sites drink its milkshake. On top 156 00:09:46,040 --> 00:09:49,360 Speaker 1: of all that, other companies were poaching talent from Dig. 157 00:09:49,720 --> 00:09:52,520 Speaker 1: The Washington Post company hired more than a dozen of 158 00:09:52,559 --> 00:09:55,920 Speaker 1: digs site engineers, for example, so it was pretty clear 159 00:09:56,000 --> 00:09:59,640 Speaker 1: Dig was on borrow time. In twenty twelve, Dig would 160 00:09:59,720 --> 00:10:02,360 Speaker 1: kind of of get sold for parts. Different parts of 161 00:10:02,400 --> 00:10:06,040 Speaker 1: Dig were sold off to other companies, but the site 162 00:10:06,080 --> 00:10:10,240 Speaker 1: itself and the underlying tech and the ip of what 163 00:10:10,360 --> 00:10:13,480 Speaker 1: made dig dig ended up going to a company called 164 00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:18,040 Speaker 1: Beta Works, and the price tag had dropped from that 165 00:10:18,120 --> 00:10:21,680 Speaker 1: theoretical high of two hundred million dollars with Google to 166 00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:25,680 Speaker 1: a much less grandiose half million. Don't get me wrong, 167 00:10:25,720 --> 00:10:28,600 Speaker 1: half a million dollars is a lot of money, It 168 00:10:28,720 --> 00:10:32,160 Speaker 1: just doesn't measure up to some of the earlier offers. 169 00:10:32,240 --> 00:10:36,360 Speaker 1: DIG had turned away in its history. I should also 170 00:10:36,400 --> 00:10:39,960 Speaker 1: add there's some dispute about that five hundred thousand dollars 171 00:10:40,320 --> 00:10:44,760 Speaker 1: sales price. That's what everyone reported, just about everyone anyway, 172 00:10:45,440 --> 00:10:50,000 Speaker 1: but tech crunches Frederick Lardinois reported that the actual deal 173 00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:53,560 Speaker 1: was considerably larger and included not just cash but also 174 00:10:53,720 --> 00:10:56,920 Speaker 1: equity in the company, and so the value was much 175 00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:00,720 Speaker 1: higher than what reports had suggested. In that same article, 176 00:11:00,760 --> 00:11:05,000 Speaker 1: he pointed out that Dig's annual ad revenue was likely 177 00:11:05,040 --> 00:11:07,800 Speaker 1: more than half a million dollars a year, so it 178 00:11:07,800 --> 00:11:10,079 Speaker 1: wouldn't really make sense to sell the company for half 179 00:11:10,080 --> 00:11:14,319 Speaker 1: a million dollars. But then again, Vox dot com reported 180 00:11:14,360 --> 00:11:17,560 Speaker 1: that Dig ran its entire service off of servers that 181 00:11:17,600 --> 00:11:20,800 Speaker 1: were on premises. You know, it wasn't a cloud based 182 00:11:21,280 --> 00:11:24,320 Speaker 1: company at that point, so it was really before cloud 183 00:11:24,320 --> 00:11:28,640 Speaker 1: competing had made it less expensive to run huge websites. Like, 184 00:11:28,880 --> 00:11:32,439 Speaker 1: if your website had a fairly modest user base, then 185 00:11:33,040 --> 00:11:36,720 Speaker 1: you probably wouldn't be seeing enormous bills per month. But 186 00:11:36,840 --> 00:11:40,600 Speaker 1: for Dig, because of how popular it was, Vox estimated 187 00:11:40,640 --> 00:11:43,160 Speaker 1: that it would cost a quarter million dollars a month 188 00:11:43,320 --> 00:11:46,160 Speaker 1: just to keep the site running. So then you're like, well, 189 00:11:46,800 --> 00:11:49,720 Speaker 1: even if your your revenue is more than half a 190 00:11:49,760 --> 00:11:52,959 Speaker 1: million dollars, If your monthly costs are two hundred and 191 00:11:52,960 --> 00:11:57,559 Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars, you're in trouble unless you're making significantly 192 00:11:57,640 --> 00:12:00,520 Speaker 1: more than half a million dollars a year. But whatever 193 00:12:00,559 --> 00:12:02,840 Speaker 1: the scope of the deal, however much it ended up 194 00:12:02,880 --> 00:12:06,080 Speaker 1: being under Beta Works, DIG would relaunch in the summer 195 00:12:06,080 --> 00:12:10,760 Speaker 1: of twenty twelve with an entirely different approach to content. 196 00:12:11,120 --> 00:12:14,240 Speaker 1: So instead of having users determine what material would make 197 00:12:14,320 --> 00:12:19,720 Speaker 1: up the front page, DIG featured an editorially curated front page. So, 198 00:12:19,760 --> 00:12:24,720 Speaker 1: in other words, DIG determined what went on Dig, not 199 00:12:24,960 --> 00:12:27,680 Speaker 1: users that were still like scoring systems in place and 200 00:12:27,720 --> 00:12:30,400 Speaker 1: that kind of stuff, but the fundamental operation of DIG 201 00:12:30,840 --> 00:12:34,320 Speaker 1: had totally transformed. Now that's pretty much where I left 202 00:12:34,360 --> 00:12:38,640 Speaker 1: off in that twenty seventeen episode. At that time, DIG 203 00:12:38,720 --> 00:12:41,360 Speaker 1: was still under the ownership of Beta Works, the company. 204 00:12:41,400 --> 00:12:44,880 Speaker 1: Beta Works typically focuses on startups that are at the 205 00:12:44,960 --> 00:12:47,800 Speaker 1: earliest stages of development. So Beta Works looks out for 206 00:12:47,880 --> 00:12:52,800 Speaker 1: interesting projects and then provides what's called seed stage funding, 207 00:12:53,080 --> 00:12:56,360 Speaker 1: which is the initial money that a startup needs in 208 00:12:56,440 --> 00:12:59,920 Speaker 1: order to kind of coalesce from an idea into something real. 209 00:13:00,400 --> 00:13:03,120 Speaker 1: Seed money helped startups do things like attract the right 210 00:13:03,160 --> 00:13:06,360 Speaker 1: talent and put together the earliest plans for how the 211 00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:10,360 Speaker 1: company will actually operate. To take over Dig was a 212 00:13:10,360 --> 00:13:13,640 Speaker 1: little bit outside the wheelhouse for that kind of company, though, 213 00:13:13,679 --> 00:13:16,679 Speaker 1: as I understand it, Beta Works mary Dig with a 214 00:13:16,760 --> 00:13:20,080 Speaker 1: socially driven news web app it had in development called 215 00:13:20,200 --> 00:13:23,560 Speaker 1: news dot Me. One thing Beta Works did have under 216 00:13:23,559 --> 00:13:26,280 Speaker 1: its belt was the service bit dot l y, the 217 00:13:26,640 --> 00:13:31,760 Speaker 1: URL shortener. That's another episode. It also helped develop tweet Deck, 218 00:13:31,800 --> 00:13:34,840 Speaker 1: which Twitter would ultimately purchase, but again that's a matter 219 00:13:34,920 --> 00:13:39,160 Speaker 1: for another episode. The heyday of Dig was over at 220 00:13:39,160 --> 00:13:41,880 Speaker 1: this point, and finding news articles and stuff from the 221 00:13:41,920 --> 00:13:45,200 Speaker 1: Beta Works era of Dig isn't that easy because people 222 00:13:45,240 --> 00:13:48,920 Speaker 1: had moved on. Reddit absorbed a ton of digs community, 223 00:13:49,400 --> 00:13:51,880 Speaker 1: and the new Dig was largely viewed as just another 224 00:13:52,320 --> 00:13:57,600 Speaker 1: web based news site. So really, in that stretch between 225 00:13:57,640 --> 00:14:02,800 Speaker 1: twenty twelve and two eighteen, there aren't that many news 226 00:14:02,840 --> 00:14:07,320 Speaker 1: items about Dig. But then things would change. I'll explain 227 00:14:07,360 --> 00:14:20,520 Speaker 1: more after we take this quick break. Okay, So, like 228 00:14:20,560 --> 00:14:24,280 Speaker 1: I said before the break, between twenty twelve and twenty eighteen, 229 00:14:24,800 --> 00:14:27,920 Speaker 1: you didn't see that many news stories about Dig. It 230 00:14:28,120 --> 00:14:32,800 Speaker 1: just seemed to be performing like a basic web page 231 00:14:32,840 --> 00:14:37,040 Speaker 1: that had news items on it, most of which were 232 00:14:37,560 --> 00:14:42,920 Speaker 1: either written by an internal editorial team or were connecting 233 00:14:42,960 --> 00:14:46,920 Speaker 1: to external news sources. So the next big bit of 234 00:14:47,040 --> 00:14:49,800 Speaker 1: Dig's history that I have to share happened. In early 235 00:14:49,880 --> 00:14:53,800 Speaker 1: spring twenty eighteen, Dig announced that it was shutting down 236 00:14:54,000 --> 00:14:57,360 Speaker 1: it's OURSS reader tool. So for those of y'all who 237 00:14:57,360 --> 00:15:01,840 Speaker 1: are not familiar with RSS, it stayed for really Simple Syndication, 238 00:15:02,880 --> 00:15:07,400 Speaker 1: or maybe it stands for RDF Site Summary. RDF in 239 00:15:07,440 --> 00:15:12,440 Speaker 1: turn stands for Resource Description Framework. There's actually disagreement on 240 00:15:12,480 --> 00:15:15,720 Speaker 1: what RSS stands for, but really the initialism doesn't matter. 241 00:15:16,520 --> 00:15:22,120 Speaker 1: RSS allows for the distribution of web updates or Internet 242 00:15:22,440 --> 00:15:26,680 Speaker 1: content in general to lots of other stuff. So what 243 00:15:26,720 --> 00:15:30,520 Speaker 1: does that actually mean? Well, let's take an example with podcasts. 244 00:15:31,600 --> 00:15:35,160 Speaker 1: How does your podcast app, whichever one you use, how 245 00:15:35,200 --> 00:15:38,480 Speaker 1: does it know when there is a new episode of 246 00:15:38,840 --> 00:15:42,640 Speaker 1: the shows that you subscribe to. Well, podcasts published to 247 00:15:42,680 --> 00:15:47,080 Speaker 1: a platform, and each podcast has an RSS feed associated 248 00:15:47,120 --> 00:15:51,000 Speaker 1: with it, your podcatching service checks for updates to the 249 00:15:51,080 --> 00:15:54,520 Speaker 1: various RSS feeds out there all the shows that you 250 00:15:54,560 --> 00:15:58,000 Speaker 1: subscribe to. So let's say that you subscribe to tech stuff, 251 00:15:58,040 --> 00:15:59,960 Speaker 1: it does a check to see is there a new 252 00:16:00,240 --> 00:16:03,320 Speaker 1: tech stuff episode? If there has not been an update 253 00:16:03,360 --> 00:16:07,720 Speaker 1: since the last time it did this check, nothing changes you, 254 00:16:07,840 --> 00:16:11,880 Speaker 1: no notifications, nothing like that. If when it checks the 255 00:16:12,040 --> 00:16:16,040 Speaker 1: RSS link and it finds an update, finds out there's 256 00:16:16,040 --> 00:16:20,280 Speaker 1: been a new episode added to the feed, your podcasting 257 00:16:20,280 --> 00:16:22,320 Speaker 1: app will say, Hey, there's a brand new episode of 258 00:16:22,400 --> 00:16:24,960 Speaker 1: that show you like, so you can listen to it 259 00:16:25,000 --> 00:16:29,720 Speaker 1: whenever you like. RSS tech led to the development of 260 00:16:29,920 --> 00:16:34,480 Speaker 1: RSS readers, So these tools let you subscribe to various 261 00:16:34,520 --> 00:16:38,680 Speaker 1: sources and you can view updates to those websites within 262 00:16:38,840 --> 00:16:44,560 Speaker 1: the reader itself. So instead of physically navigating to like 263 00:16:44,680 --> 00:16:47,880 Speaker 1: a dozen different websites that you like in order to 264 00:16:47,920 --> 00:16:50,440 Speaker 1: just see if anything's new. Let's say that you know 265 00:16:50,520 --> 00:16:54,360 Speaker 1: you typically visit four different news sites, a couple of 266 00:16:54,360 --> 00:16:59,680 Speaker 1: gaming sites. Maybe you visit I don't know, let's say 267 00:17:00,120 --> 00:17:03,920 Speaker 1: it's a financial site and you do all these and 268 00:17:03,960 --> 00:17:06,159 Speaker 1: those are typically the ones you go to. Instead of 269 00:17:06,160 --> 00:17:08,280 Speaker 1: going to each of those individually and looking to see 270 00:17:08,280 --> 00:17:11,119 Speaker 1: if there are any updates, you could use an RSS 271 00:17:11,119 --> 00:17:14,560 Speaker 1: reader that would just list out in chronological order reverse 272 00:17:14,640 --> 00:17:18,760 Speaker 1: chronological order, typically what the latest headlines are from the 273 00:17:18,840 --> 00:17:21,880 Speaker 1: various sources, and they would usually let you organize these 274 00:17:21,920 --> 00:17:24,359 Speaker 1: in various ways, so you could put all of your 275 00:17:24,640 --> 00:17:27,320 Speaker 1: sports relaid stuff in one place, you know, all of 276 00:17:27,320 --> 00:17:30,280 Speaker 1: your gaming stuff in another place, et cetera, and you 277 00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:33,280 Speaker 1: could just go through and look for headlines that caught 278 00:17:33,359 --> 00:17:35,400 Speaker 1: your interest. And you don't have to go to each 279 00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:38,879 Speaker 1: website individually just to see what the updates are. You 280 00:17:38,880 --> 00:17:42,520 Speaker 1: consolidate everything into a single view. It's incredibly useful. But 281 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:46,000 Speaker 1: by twenty eighteen, the glory of the RSS reader days 282 00:17:46,680 --> 00:17:49,240 Speaker 1: was well in the past. A lot of companies that 283 00:17:49,359 --> 00:17:53,200 Speaker 1: had previously offered RSS readers had since shut them down. 284 00:17:54,080 --> 00:17:58,919 Speaker 1: For instance, Google shut down Google Reader way back in 285 00:17:58,960 --> 00:18:03,199 Speaker 1: twenty thirty. There are still folks out there today, a 286 00:18:03,320 --> 00:18:07,680 Speaker 1: decade later who are sore about that. I'm one of them. Honestly, 287 00:18:07,960 --> 00:18:12,480 Speaker 1: RSS readers really made it useful to get a quick 288 00:18:12,520 --> 00:18:14,600 Speaker 1: look at news, and there still are some out there. 289 00:18:14,640 --> 00:18:16,720 Speaker 1: I don't want to say that they don't exist anymore, 290 00:18:17,400 --> 00:18:22,400 Speaker 1: but some of the biggest ones have long since gone away. Anyway, 291 00:18:22,480 --> 00:18:25,479 Speaker 1: Dig had maintained its own RSS reader tool, and it 292 00:18:25,520 --> 00:18:30,240 Speaker 1: was fittingly enough called dig Reader, but in March twenty eighteen, 293 00:18:30,840 --> 00:18:35,119 Speaker 1: Dig announced that the feature would end on March twenty sixth. 294 00:18:36,040 --> 00:18:40,719 Speaker 1: Molly Mchughotharinger dot com posted a full article about this 295 00:18:41,200 --> 00:18:43,600 Speaker 1: and lamented the fact that it was the latest in 296 00:18:43,680 --> 00:18:46,960 Speaker 1: a long string of setbacks for people who just wanted 297 00:18:47,000 --> 00:18:51,960 Speaker 1: to be able to view web updates chronologically or reverse chronologically. 298 00:18:52,520 --> 00:18:55,480 Speaker 1: MCEU pointed out that a lot of platforms were leaning 299 00:18:55,560 --> 00:18:59,520 Speaker 1: harder and harder on algorithms to determine what a user 300 00:18:59,520 --> 00:19:04,280 Speaker 1: would actually see, and that these algorithms valued engagement and 301 00:19:04,400 --> 00:19:09,320 Speaker 1: sharing over quality. This internment, we were getting a lot 302 00:19:09,359 --> 00:19:13,480 Speaker 1: more junk, fake stuff, and misinformation put in front of us, 303 00:19:13,760 --> 00:19:18,040 Speaker 1: things that would grab our attention but not necessarily reflect reality. 304 00:19:18,920 --> 00:19:23,200 Speaker 1: That probably sounds familiar, right because we we've been talking 305 00:19:23,200 --> 00:19:26,720 Speaker 1: about that for a couple of years a lot, But 306 00:19:26,800 --> 00:19:29,479 Speaker 1: this was way back in twenty eighteen. It just hasn't 307 00:19:29,520 --> 00:19:34,800 Speaker 1: gotten any better. MCEW expressed sadness that yet another RSS 308 00:19:34,840 --> 00:19:37,280 Speaker 1: reader was going the way of the DODO, because it 309 00:19:37,320 --> 00:19:40,919 Speaker 1: marked another example of how it was growing increasingly hard 310 00:19:41,480 --> 00:19:46,440 Speaker 1: for an individual to curate their own web experience. Instead, 311 00:19:47,359 --> 00:19:52,400 Speaker 1: the various platforms out there, particularly social networks, were taking 312 00:19:52,640 --> 00:19:57,800 Speaker 1: over that task for us and dictating to us what 313 00:19:57,880 --> 00:20:00,199 Speaker 1: we would see as opposed to letting us say, Hey, 314 00:20:00,280 --> 00:20:04,640 Speaker 1: I'm really just interested in reading information from these sources 315 00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:07,560 Speaker 1: because I feel those sources are really reliable, so I 316 00:20:07,640 --> 00:20:12,840 Speaker 1: just want to see those Those options were going away anyway. 317 00:20:13,040 --> 00:20:16,760 Speaker 1: Just one month later after they shut down dig Reader, 318 00:20:16,880 --> 00:20:21,439 Speaker 1: even bigger news came out of dig. Beta Works sold 319 00:20:21,480 --> 00:20:25,760 Speaker 1: off a majority steak in DIG to another company called 320 00:20:26,040 --> 00:20:30,080 Speaker 1: buy sell Ads. It would not be a total acquisition. 321 00:20:30,160 --> 00:20:35,560 Speaker 1: Beta Works CEO John Borthwick indicated that Dig's previous shareholders, 322 00:20:35,560 --> 00:20:41,480 Speaker 1: including Beta Works itself, would retain some steak in DIG. 323 00:20:42,119 --> 00:20:45,199 Speaker 1: The actual details of the deal remained private. So to 324 00:20:45,280 --> 00:20:48,960 Speaker 1: this day, I have no clue how much buy sell 325 00:20:49,080 --> 00:20:52,359 Speaker 1: Ads spent in order to get a majority steak. I 326 00:20:52,359 --> 00:20:57,120 Speaker 1: don't even know what level that majority steak is, right, 327 00:20:57,160 --> 00:21:01,720 Speaker 1: I don't know what percentage of dig i sell ads owns, 328 00:21:03,119 --> 00:21:07,360 Speaker 1: but what the heck is buy sell Ads. That all 329 00:21:07,400 --> 00:21:11,359 Speaker 1: started with a guy named Todd Garland. He got his 330 00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:14,840 Speaker 1: start as a web designer, and he found that the 331 00:21:14,840 --> 00:21:19,720 Speaker 1: part he liked the least about creating web pages or 332 00:21:19,800 --> 00:21:24,200 Speaker 1: administering web pages was the whole process of securing ads 333 00:21:24,720 --> 00:21:28,040 Speaker 1: for web pages to help generate revenue. He found that 334 00:21:28,320 --> 00:21:33,520 Speaker 1: entire process to be slow and frustrating and overly complicated, 335 00:21:34,040 --> 00:21:38,199 Speaker 1: and he thought, what if you could build some software 336 00:21:38,600 --> 00:21:42,240 Speaker 1: to automate as much of that process as you possibly can, 337 00:21:42,880 --> 00:21:46,240 Speaker 1: to make it faster and simpler for the end users. 338 00:21:46,560 --> 00:21:49,240 Speaker 1: What if you could remove all those hurdles that typically 339 00:21:49,280 --> 00:21:54,000 Speaker 1: exist and through software, just make it a much less 340 00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:59,320 Speaker 1: painful experience. To that end, he built buy sell ads 341 00:21:59,600 --> 00:22:03,960 Speaker 1: so that from say a web page standpoint, a publisher standpoint, 342 00:22:04,640 --> 00:22:07,680 Speaker 1: a web admin wouldn't have to do anything other than 343 00:22:07,760 --> 00:22:10,520 Speaker 1: perhaps set a rate, you know, say like, all right, 344 00:22:10,920 --> 00:22:14,680 Speaker 1: this is how much I will charge an advertiser to 345 00:22:15,200 --> 00:22:17,520 Speaker 1: make use of the real estate on my web page. 346 00:22:18,160 --> 00:22:21,840 Speaker 1: And then that person would just wait to see which 347 00:22:21,880 --> 00:22:25,959 Speaker 1: ad requests get sent to them through this service and 348 00:22:26,000 --> 00:22:28,720 Speaker 1: then approve or deny from there, and that would get 349 00:22:28,760 --> 00:22:32,199 Speaker 1: things going. On the advertiser side. All they had to 350 00:22:32,200 --> 00:22:36,000 Speaker 1: do was determine if the ad rate made sense, Like 351 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:38,480 Speaker 1: if they said, well, does it make sense for us 352 00:22:38,520 --> 00:22:40,080 Speaker 1: to pay this much? Are we going to get enough 353 00:22:40,119 --> 00:22:44,600 Speaker 1: traffic for that to be a good investment? And if so, 354 00:22:44,960 --> 00:22:47,600 Speaker 1: then they could say, all right, well we will. We're 355 00:22:47,640 --> 00:22:52,120 Speaker 1: interested in including this particular publisher as part of our 356 00:22:52,160 --> 00:22:56,040 Speaker 1: ad campaign, and that would be it. At least that 357 00:22:56,160 --> 00:23:01,199 Speaker 1: was the idea. I'll come back to buy sell ads 358 00:23:01,240 --> 00:23:05,480 Speaker 1: because the reputation of that company is a little up 359 00:23:05,560 --> 00:23:08,560 Speaker 1: in the air as far as I can tell, although 360 00:23:09,240 --> 00:23:13,920 Speaker 1: from extremely limited information, so keep all that in mind. 361 00:23:14,840 --> 00:23:17,040 Speaker 1: At any rate, Buy sell ads seemed like it was 362 00:23:17,080 --> 00:23:20,520 Speaker 1: an odd fit to purchase a majority share in an 363 00:23:20,560 --> 00:23:24,600 Speaker 1: online media company, But then you could also argue that 364 00:23:24,720 --> 00:23:27,480 Speaker 1: Beta Works was a weird fit, and Beta Works had 365 00:23:27,520 --> 00:23:31,439 Speaker 1: done it way back in twenty twelve. However, when you 366 00:23:31,520 --> 00:23:34,680 Speaker 1: really start to think about it, I argue the buy 367 00:23:34,720 --> 00:23:38,479 Speaker 1: sell ads acquisition makes a little more sense because an 368 00:23:38,560 --> 00:23:42,560 Speaker 1: ad company does serve two sets of customers. Right. You've 369 00:23:42,600 --> 00:23:45,280 Speaker 1: got your advertisers, who want to get ads in front 370 00:23:45,320 --> 00:23:48,560 Speaker 1: of people, preferably people who are more likely going to 371 00:23:48,640 --> 00:23:53,000 Speaker 1: act on the ad than otherwise. And then you've got 372 00:23:53,000 --> 00:23:57,760 Speaker 1: your publishers, the people who have real estate to offer 373 00:23:58,160 --> 00:24:00,280 Speaker 1: that they want to monetize on their sites or to 374 00:24:00,320 --> 00:24:03,399 Speaker 1: generate revenue. A company like buy sell ads has to 375 00:24:03,440 --> 00:24:06,399 Speaker 1: satisfy both groups, right. They have to satisfy both the 376 00:24:06,400 --> 00:24:11,399 Speaker 1: advertisers and the publishers, and by gaining majority ownership of 377 00:24:11,680 --> 00:24:14,719 Speaker 1: a publisher, because that's what dig is at this point. 378 00:24:14,840 --> 00:24:19,800 Speaker 1: It's a publisher. It's not an aggregator anymore, not really. Well, 379 00:24:19,800 --> 00:24:23,359 Speaker 1: that means that buy sell ads now has a platform 380 00:24:23,560 --> 00:24:27,159 Speaker 1: where it can actively test out new strategies. It can 381 00:24:27,240 --> 00:24:30,640 Speaker 1: deploy new approaches to matching ads to content. It can 382 00:24:30,720 --> 00:24:33,280 Speaker 1: look and see which of these are working well and 383 00:24:33,320 --> 00:24:36,359 Speaker 1: which ones don't like, which ones are generating more click 384 00:24:36,440 --> 00:24:41,639 Speaker 1: through which ones are not, and using that as like 385 00:24:41,680 --> 00:24:46,480 Speaker 1: a testing ground, it can then perhaps deploy strategies across 386 00:24:46,920 --> 00:24:51,640 Speaker 1: larger groups of customers. In addition to that, it also 387 00:24:51,960 --> 00:24:54,600 Speaker 1: this is something that Todd Garland has actually said, Buy 388 00:24:54,680 --> 00:24:59,280 Speaker 1: sell ads can try and design a publication platform strategy 389 00:24:59,400 --> 00:25:06,720 Speaker 1: that in theory maximizes the publisher's ability to monetize their site. 390 00:25:06,800 --> 00:25:09,920 Speaker 1: And then once they have figured out that strategy, they 391 00:25:09,920 --> 00:25:13,879 Speaker 1: can then license that to other publishers. So, in other words, 392 00:25:13,920 --> 00:25:18,479 Speaker 1: they come up with a process that other publishers can follow, 393 00:25:18,600 --> 00:25:20,960 Speaker 1: and by paying buy sell ads, they'll say, here's how 394 00:25:20,960 --> 00:25:23,160 Speaker 1: you do it, and just work with us, and we'll 395 00:25:23,160 --> 00:25:25,720 Speaker 1: make sure that we match you with advertisers that are 396 00:25:25,720 --> 00:25:28,800 Speaker 1: going to make the best use of your platform, and 397 00:25:28,840 --> 00:25:32,199 Speaker 1: everyone's happy. The advertisers get their ads acted on by 398 00:25:32,200 --> 00:25:35,800 Speaker 1: a larger audience, you get a bigger payout because of 399 00:25:35,920 --> 00:25:41,040 Speaker 1: the ad revenue coming in, and we all get rich. However, 400 00:25:41,160 --> 00:25:46,159 Speaker 1: buy sell ads. Purchasing dig made some folks feel anxious 401 00:25:46,240 --> 00:25:48,560 Speaker 1: is probably too big a word, because at this point 402 00:25:48,640 --> 00:25:54,200 Speaker 1: dig it really wasn't in the spotlight anymore. It wasn't 403 00:25:54,240 --> 00:25:57,760 Speaker 1: really in the mind share of your average netizin if 404 00:25:57,760 --> 00:26:02,399 Speaker 1: I am to use outdated terminology. So that being said, 405 00:26:02,520 --> 00:26:05,159 Speaker 1: people were still thinking, well, it might not be a 406 00:26:05,200 --> 00:26:10,800 Speaker 1: great relationship for an ad company to purchase a media company. 407 00:26:10,800 --> 00:26:13,879 Speaker 1: That almost seems like a conflict of interests right. You 408 00:26:13,920 --> 00:26:17,800 Speaker 1: can definitely see how an ad company might change the 409 00:26:17,920 --> 00:26:21,359 Speaker 1: media company so that it just is a vehicle for 410 00:26:21,440 --> 00:26:24,960 Speaker 1: delivering ads, similar to how the algorithm really just wants 411 00:26:25,000 --> 00:26:27,840 Speaker 1: to get as much engagement as possible. There's the fear 412 00:26:27,840 --> 00:26:30,000 Speaker 1: that an ad company would turn a media company into 413 00:26:30,200 --> 00:26:33,000 Speaker 1: just a way to display as many ads as possible. 414 00:26:34,280 --> 00:26:37,520 Speaker 1: The site had reportedly actually kind of made a slight 415 00:26:37,640 --> 00:26:41,040 Speaker 1: recovery over the years after the disaster that was the 416 00:26:41,160 --> 00:26:44,600 Speaker 1: dig version four rollout. It wasn't anything close to what 417 00:26:44,680 --> 00:26:49,200 Speaker 1: it was in its heyday, but it was doing better 418 00:26:49,600 --> 00:26:52,159 Speaker 1: than it had been, so there was this question of 419 00:26:52,720 --> 00:26:55,800 Speaker 1: would this mean that DIG would lose what little momentum 420 00:26:55,800 --> 00:27:03,760 Speaker 1: it grab back post Beta Works acquisition. Well, there's not 421 00:27:03,880 --> 00:27:07,160 Speaker 1: a ton of information out there about this, but Kaylee 422 00:27:07,280 --> 00:27:12,560 Speaker 1: Barber of Digit Day did cite some unnamed former Dig 423 00:27:12,600 --> 00:27:16,520 Speaker 1: employees who explained what happened in the wake of this 424 00:27:16,640 --> 00:27:20,240 Speaker 1: acquisition deal. This was in an article that was titled 425 00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:25,240 Speaker 1: ad tech companies have stopped innovating Why Buy sell Ads 426 00:27:25,320 --> 00:27:28,520 Speaker 1: is buying up media brands? So it wasn't just about 427 00:27:28,520 --> 00:27:31,120 Speaker 1: Buy sell Ads and Dig. There was also a discussion 428 00:27:31,160 --> 00:27:35,960 Speaker 1: about another outlay called Pando, but it was had a 429 00:27:35,960 --> 00:27:39,679 Speaker 1: lot of Dig in it. This article published back on 430 00:27:39,720 --> 00:27:42,560 Speaker 1: October twenty ninth, twenty nineteen, so it's a few years 431 00:27:42,560 --> 00:27:47,120 Speaker 1: old now, and according to those unnamed former Dig employees, 432 00:27:47,680 --> 00:27:51,120 Speaker 1: the technology team at DIG was essentially let go upon 433 00:27:51,160 --> 00:27:54,200 Speaker 1: the conclusion of this deal, So the whole tech team 434 00:27:54,280 --> 00:27:58,160 Speaker 1: at Dig is gone. Some of them would actually end 435 00:27:58,240 --> 00:28:02,719 Speaker 1: up being hired on by a blockchain focused journalism marketplace 436 00:28:03,240 --> 00:28:07,400 Speaker 1: that was called Civil. Unfortunately for them, Civil would give 437 00:28:07,480 --> 00:28:10,600 Speaker 1: up the ghost two years later in twenty twenty. It 438 00:28:10,680 --> 00:28:14,240 Speaker 1: shut down after the leadership team at Civil determined that 439 00:28:14,280 --> 00:28:18,000 Speaker 1: the business was just not sustainable, particularly in the wake 440 00:28:18,040 --> 00:28:22,200 Speaker 1: of a massive decline in the blockchain slash crypto industry. 441 00:28:23,320 --> 00:28:27,439 Speaker 1: By sell Ads reportedly absorbed the DIG sales team and 442 00:28:27,520 --> 00:28:31,760 Speaker 1: the business side of the staff into its own operations, 443 00:28:32,040 --> 00:28:34,040 Speaker 1: so they essentially said, all right, we're going to bring 444 00:28:34,080 --> 00:28:38,600 Speaker 1: you in as buy sell Ads team members, not specifically 445 00:28:38,680 --> 00:28:43,160 Speaker 1: DIG team members. Out of the editorial staff, things were 446 00:28:43,160 --> 00:28:47,640 Speaker 1: pretty rough. Within a year of the deal being announced, 447 00:28:48,840 --> 00:28:52,760 Speaker 1: a general manager, two full time original content editors, and 448 00:28:52,840 --> 00:28:58,440 Speaker 1: a video editor were all laid off from DIG. Others 449 00:28:58,560 --> 00:29:02,000 Speaker 1: who had been working in an editorial capacity left on 450 00:29:02,120 --> 00:29:05,480 Speaker 1: their own, and when Barbera wrote her article for digitay 451 00:29:05,520 --> 00:29:09,520 Speaker 1: back in twenty nineteen, she said the entire editorial staff 452 00:29:09,520 --> 00:29:13,000 Speaker 1: at dig at that point consisted of five full time 453 00:29:13,040 --> 00:29:19,320 Speaker 1: employees and one part time staff member. That was essentially 454 00:29:19,760 --> 00:29:24,000 Speaker 1: what was left of dig. Okay, We're going to take 455 00:29:24,000 --> 00:29:27,040 Speaker 1: another quick break. When I come back, I'll wrap up 456 00:29:27,520 --> 00:29:39,520 Speaker 1: this update on what's been going on with dig Okay, 457 00:29:39,560 --> 00:29:44,080 Speaker 1: So we're back. Uh. I was talking about how Digg's 458 00:29:44,080 --> 00:29:49,040 Speaker 1: staff was whittled down after the acquisition when Bisellads bought 459 00:29:49,040 --> 00:29:52,280 Speaker 1: a majority stake in the company. But as for DIG itself. 460 00:29:52,960 --> 00:29:56,400 Speaker 1: It still exists. Dig dot com is a website you 461 00:29:56,520 --> 00:29:59,520 Speaker 1: can go and you can visit it. The site posts 462 00:29:59,640 --> 00:30:02,560 Speaker 1: new art articles on a regular basis. I checked. I 463 00:30:02,600 --> 00:30:04,320 Speaker 1: was making sure because I mean, sometimes you go to 464 00:30:04,360 --> 00:30:06,200 Speaker 1: these things and you're like, oh, there's a ton of 465 00:30:06,280 --> 00:30:08,560 Speaker 1: articles here, and then you click through and you're like, oh, 466 00:30:08,680 --> 00:30:12,120 Speaker 1: this was posted like eighteen months ago. That's not the 467 00:30:12,120 --> 00:30:14,400 Speaker 1: case with Dig. There are a lot of new articles 468 00:30:14,520 --> 00:30:18,040 Speaker 1: on the various categories that Dig covers, which includes again 469 00:30:18,120 --> 00:30:22,920 Speaker 1: stuff like news and gaming and sports. Based on the 470 00:30:22,920 --> 00:30:26,160 Speaker 1: bylines that I saw, to me, at least, it looks 471 00:30:26,160 --> 00:30:29,680 Speaker 1: like there's a pretty small editorial staff in place. There. 472 00:30:29,880 --> 00:30:34,440 Speaker 1: There might be a couple of freelancers who write for Dig, 473 00:30:34,480 --> 00:30:37,360 Speaker 1: but mostly I'm just seeing the same names pop up 474 00:30:37,400 --> 00:30:40,239 Speaker 1: over and over again. It also looks to me that 475 00:30:40,560 --> 00:30:44,600 Speaker 1: they are mostly referencing news items that are posted elsewhere, 476 00:30:45,200 --> 00:30:48,000 Speaker 1: like maybe it's a press release, or in some cases 477 00:30:48,040 --> 00:30:51,920 Speaker 1: they're referencing a news article that went on some other 478 00:30:52,200 --> 00:30:56,000 Speaker 1: media outlet. That is not to cast shade on them, right, 479 00:30:56,120 --> 00:30:58,840 Speaker 1: I'm not saying they're doing a bad job because they're 480 00:30:58,880 --> 00:31:02,400 Speaker 1: going to other news sites and saying this article over 481 00:31:02,440 --> 00:31:07,120 Speaker 1: here says blah blah blah. Lots of outlets out there 482 00:31:07,160 --> 00:31:10,160 Speaker 1: do this. Business Insider does this all the time. You'll 483 00:31:10,200 --> 00:31:12,480 Speaker 1: go there and they'll say, like Reuter's Reports or Fast 484 00:31:12,520 --> 00:31:17,160 Speaker 1: Company Reports or whatever. I also can't imagine that any 485 00:31:17,200 --> 00:31:21,960 Speaker 1: of the staff on Dig's editorial group has an opportunity 486 00:31:22,000 --> 00:31:24,920 Speaker 1: to do any sort of investigative journalism. I don't think 487 00:31:24,920 --> 00:31:28,240 Speaker 1: that they have the time to do that, because from 488 00:31:28,240 --> 00:31:30,000 Speaker 1: what I see, it looks like a lot of them 489 00:31:30,000 --> 00:31:32,920 Speaker 1: are posting multiple articles per day, and at that level 490 00:31:32,920 --> 00:31:36,000 Speaker 1: of output, you don't have time to do things like 491 00:31:36,040 --> 00:31:41,000 Speaker 1: take extra steps and really do investigative work. It's just 492 00:31:41,080 --> 00:31:46,160 Speaker 1: impossible if you have an output quota that you need 493 00:31:46,160 --> 00:31:50,760 Speaker 1: to meet. Clearly, Dig does not resemble what it used 494 00:31:50,800 --> 00:31:53,880 Speaker 1: to be when it was first launched, not by a 495 00:31:53,920 --> 00:31:58,080 Speaker 1: long shot. But that raises another question, how is it 496 00:31:58,160 --> 00:32:01,360 Speaker 1: doing as far as performance goes. That's a great question. 497 00:32:01,560 --> 00:32:04,800 Speaker 1: It's also a question that's very hard to answer, largely 498 00:32:04,840 --> 00:32:09,120 Speaker 1: because third party web traffic analytics are not what I 499 00:32:09,120 --> 00:32:12,760 Speaker 1: would call accurate or even reliable. So let me give 500 00:32:12,800 --> 00:32:17,680 Speaker 1: you a pair of examples supposedly about DIG. This kind 501 00:32:17,720 --> 00:32:22,640 Speaker 1: of illustrates why it's hard to get insight into how 502 00:32:22,680 --> 00:32:25,640 Speaker 1: well a website is doing unless you have direct access 503 00:32:26,280 --> 00:32:31,000 Speaker 1: to internal analytics. So if I search for digs web 504 00:32:31,040 --> 00:32:35,320 Speaker 1: traffic analytics on like Google and I pull up a 505 00:32:35,360 --> 00:32:39,080 Speaker 1: couple of different firms, I can get very different information. 506 00:32:39,400 --> 00:32:42,160 Speaker 1: And in fact I did do this, So one of 507 00:32:42,160 --> 00:32:46,440 Speaker 1: the companies I looked at was sem Rush sem Rush, 508 00:32:47,440 --> 00:32:50,360 Speaker 1: and using sem Rush, I'm told that the most recent 509 00:32:50,440 --> 00:32:54,320 Speaker 1: number of monthly visitors to dig dot com was eight 510 00:32:54,360 --> 00:32:59,040 Speaker 1: point nine million. That that was for like August. Eight 511 00:32:59,040 --> 00:33:02,280 Speaker 1: point nine million monthly users isn't terrible, it is still 512 00:33:02,320 --> 00:33:05,640 Speaker 1: a fraction of what digsaw back in its glory days, 513 00:33:06,400 --> 00:33:09,920 Speaker 1: and sam Rush ranks the site as being eleven two 514 00:33:10,280 --> 00:33:13,640 Speaker 1: and twenty seven by web traffic in the world or 515 00:33:13,680 --> 00:33:17,640 Speaker 1: twenty eight hundred nineteenth in the United States. Further, it 516 00:33:17,680 --> 00:33:21,440 Speaker 1: says the average person who's visitingdig dot com sticks around 517 00:33:21,480 --> 00:33:24,440 Speaker 1: for around eight and a half minutes per visit, and 518 00:33:24,520 --> 00:33:28,320 Speaker 1: that there is a bounce rate of fifty six point 519 00:33:28,560 --> 00:33:31,720 Speaker 1: h four percent, which means slightly more than half of 520 00:33:31,800 --> 00:33:36,240 Speaker 1: the people who visit dig navigate away immediately. Like they 521 00:33:36,240 --> 00:33:38,240 Speaker 1: come to dig dot com, they take a look and 522 00:33:38,280 --> 00:33:41,640 Speaker 1: then they go somewhere else, and that the other slightly 523 00:33:41,720 --> 00:33:44,160 Speaker 1: less than half are the ones who are sticking around 524 00:33:44,200 --> 00:33:46,680 Speaker 1: and apparently spending eight and a half minutes on the site. 525 00:33:47,680 --> 00:33:51,400 Speaker 1: But let's say we hop over to a competing web 526 00:33:51,480 --> 00:33:55,680 Speaker 1: analytics service called similar web. Well, then we get some 527 00:33:56,280 --> 00:34:00,320 Speaker 1: very different information. So similar web marks the bounce straight 528 00:34:00,360 --> 00:34:03,320 Speaker 1: at fifty four point one seven percent. Now that's actually 529 00:34:03,360 --> 00:34:06,440 Speaker 1: pretty darn close to sem rush, right. Sem Rush said 530 00:34:06,480 --> 00:34:09,680 Speaker 1: fifty six point oh four. Similar web says fifty four 531 00:34:09,680 --> 00:34:12,719 Speaker 1: point one point seven. That's close enough where you could say, oh, 532 00:34:12,719 --> 00:34:16,680 Speaker 1: there's probably some margin of error that accounts for this discrepancy. 533 00:34:17,200 --> 00:34:21,040 Speaker 1: That's not too bad. But sem rush says the most 534 00:34:21,080 --> 00:34:26,320 Speaker 1: recent monthly analytics had eight point nine million visitors. Similar 535 00:34:26,320 --> 00:34:31,360 Speaker 1: web says, no, no, no, it's four point one million visitors. 536 00:34:32,280 --> 00:34:35,839 Speaker 1: That's less than half of what sem rush said. That 537 00:34:36,440 --> 00:34:40,399 Speaker 1: is a huge discrepancy. There's no margin of error that's 538 00:34:40,440 --> 00:34:43,640 Speaker 1: gonna say greater than fifty percent. You do be useless 539 00:34:43,640 --> 00:34:45,879 Speaker 1: to use the tool. If there's a greater than fifty 540 00:34:45,920 --> 00:34:47,960 Speaker 1: percent margin of error, why use the tool at all? 541 00:34:48,000 --> 00:34:52,279 Speaker 1: You don't have any idea what the real answer is. So, yeah, 542 00:34:52,320 --> 00:34:55,879 Speaker 1: four point one million monthly visitors, according to one web 543 00:34:55,920 --> 00:35:01,400 Speaker 1: analytics site and eight point nine million. According to another 544 00:35:01,960 --> 00:35:05,560 Speaker 1: these do not line up. Moreover, sam Rush said the 545 00:35:05,600 --> 00:35:08,480 Speaker 1: average person would stick around for eight and a half minutes, right, Well, 546 00:35:08,520 --> 00:35:10,759 Speaker 1: similar Web says no, no, no, it's two and a 547 00:35:10,800 --> 00:35:16,000 Speaker 1: half minutes. So again huge discrepancy here. So you see, 548 00:35:16,080 --> 00:35:19,600 Speaker 1: I can't really draw any conclusions about how dig is 549 00:35:19,880 --> 00:35:23,360 Speaker 1: doing as far as performance and web traffic goes. I 550 00:35:23,400 --> 00:35:25,960 Speaker 1: can't even say with any confidence that the site gets 551 00:35:25,960 --> 00:35:29,640 Speaker 1: somewhere between four million and nine million visitors per month, 552 00:35:30,160 --> 00:35:33,759 Speaker 1: because when you've got a discrepancy that that's big, how 553 00:35:33,800 --> 00:35:38,040 Speaker 1: can you draw any conclusion whatsoever. I do think it 554 00:35:38,120 --> 00:35:42,080 Speaker 1: is safe to say that whatever dig is seeing in 555 00:35:42,160 --> 00:35:44,719 Speaker 1: monthly traffic, it is not close to what it was 556 00:35:44,760 --> 00:35:49,520 Speaker 1: before the disastrous rollout of dig version four. I also 557 00:35:49,600 --> 00:35:51,640 Speaker 1: mentioned that I would get back to saying something about 558 00:35:51,680 --> 00:35:54,560 Speaker 1: buy sell ads. Now, before I get into any of this, 559 00:35:55,320 --> 00:35:57,279 Speaker 1: there's some disclaimers I need to make. I have to 560 00:35:57,320 --> 00:36:00,759 Speaker 1: stress the information I saw is based off a a 561 00:36:00,960 --> 00:36:05,719 Speaker 1: very very small number of reviews for the company from 562 00:36:05,920 --> 00:36:09,799 Speaker 1: supposed customers of buy sell ads. And we should also 563 00:36:09,880 --> 00:36:13,200 Speaker 1: remember that the people who are most likely to post 564 00:36:13,280 --> 00:36:16,080 Speaker 1: ads are the ones who have had a negative experience. 565 00:36:16,520 --> 00:36:19,239 Speaker 1: It is much more rare for someone who had a 566 00:36:19,280 --> 00:36:22,800 Speaker 1: positive experience to just say that everything went smoothly, unless 567 00:36:22,840 --> 00:36:25,600 Speaker 1: it was a truly positive experience, in which case then 568 00:36:25,640 --> 00:36:27,680 Speaker 1: they might leave a review. So I don't want this 569 00:36:27,719 --> 00:36:31,080 Speaker 1: to come across as anything close to a definitive overview 570 00:36:31,160 --> 00:36:34,200 Speaker 1: of buy sell Ads. What I will say is the 571 00:36:34,239 --> 00:36:38,480 Speaker 1: trust Pilot score for buy sell ads is in the gutter. 572 00:36:38,840 --> 00:36:42,080 Speaker 1: It is at one point nine out of a possible five. 573 00:36:42,760 --> 00:36:47,040 Speaker 1: Ninety three percent of the reviews are one star. But 574 00:36:47,160 --> 00:36:51,000 Speaker 1: again this is for a very very small number of reviews. 575 00:36:51,080 --> 00:36:54,439 Speaker 1: There are just fourteen reviews on trust Pilot about buy 576 00:36:54,480 --> 00:36:58,880 Speaker 1: sell Ads. The reviews do reference similar complaints. So on 577 00:36:58,920 --> 00:37:02,680 Speaker 1: the publisher side, one review claimed that they signed up 578 00:37:02,719 --> 00:37:06,200 Speaker 1: for service with bisell ads, received a notification about an 579 00:37:06,239 --> 00:37:09,640 Speaker 1: advertiser wanting to post an AD to the site, and 580 00:37:09,680 --> 00:37:12,480 Speaker 1: so they then approved the ad. Like that's how it works, right. 581 00:37:12,520 --> 00:37:17,040 Speaker 1: Buysell ads matches advertisers to the sites, says they're offering 582 00:37:17,080 --> 00:37:20,640 Speaker 1: to publish an AD on your site, yay or nay, 583 00:37:20,840 --> 00:37:24,560 Speaker 1: and this person said yay. Then they said that they 584 00:37:24,640 --> 00:37:27,279 Speaker 1: saw by sell ads had been canceling some of the 585 00:37:27,440 --> 00:37:30,759 Speaker 1: agreed upon ad deals that they had agreed on this 586 00:37:30,840 --> 00:37:33,360 Speaker 1: ad deal. The ad maybe ran for a while, but 587 00:37:33,400 --> 00:37:37,760 Speaker 1: then got canceled early on, and the reason sited was fraud. 588 00:37:38,520 --> 00:37:41,560 Speaker 1: Then they found out that their entire site was removed 589 00:37:41,560 --> 00:37:47,840 Speaker 1: from buy sell ads marketplace because it quote unquote attracts fraud. Now, 590 00:37:48,800 --> 00:37:51,880 Speaker 1: if we assume that this is an honest review, which 591 00:37:51,920 --> 00:37:55,640 Speaker 1: is a big assumption already, this obviously raises flags because 592 00:37:56,280 --> 00:37:59,200 Speaker 1: it was by sell Ads that was sending the ad 593 00:37:59,239 --> 00:38:02,239 Speaker 1: offers to the public sure in the first place. So presumably, 594 00:38:02,320 --> 00:38:05,960 Speaker 1: if there are any issues with fraud, Buy sell ads 595 00:38:06,040 --> 00:38:08,840 Speaker 1: should have an obligation to find that out and prevent 596 00:38:08,880 --> 00:38:12,640 Speaker 1: it from getting to this stage. If the publisher is 597 00:38:12,760 --> 00:38:17,319 Speaker 1: just approving opportunities that buy sell ads is presenting to them, 598 00:38:17,960 --> 00:38:22,080 Speaker 1: how is the publisher responsible for the ads if those 599 00:38:22,120 --> 00:38:25,880 Speaker 1: ads are actually fraudulent. But again, this is all assuming 600 00:38:26,040 --> 00:38:29,640 Speaker 1: the review itself is honest. Other reviews came in from 601 00:38:29,680 --> 00:38:32,640 Speaker 1: the advertising side, with several people saying they had engaged 602 00:38:32,680 --> 00:38:36,959 Speaker 1: buy sell ads to place ads in various campaigns, only 603 00:38:37,000 --> 00:38:39,919 Speaker 1: to find the campaign account shut down after a short 604 00:38:39,920 --> 00:38:43,840 Speaker 1: amount of time, and then they were trying desperately to 605 00:38:43,880 --> 00:38:48,040 Speaker 1: get a refund on the ad campaign because the campaign 606 00:38:48,040 --> 00:38:50,920 Speaker 1: would be shut down prematurely, their own account would get 607 00:38:50,920 --> 00:38:52,880 Speaker 1: shut down, and yet they would have been charged for 608 00:38:52,920 --> 00:38:57,279 Speaker 1: the service. And the ads often mentioned that getting in 609 00:38:57,320 --> 00:39:01,399 Speaker 1: touch with customer service at buy sell ads was practically impossible. 610 00:39:01,960 --> 00:39:06,320 Speaker 1: But again, this is just fourteen reviews. That is far 611 00:39:06,400 --> 00:39:08,920 Speaker 1: too small a number to even remotely call it a 612 00:39:08,960 --> 00:39:12,040 Speaker 1: sample size, and it could very well be that none 613 00:39:12,080 --> 00:39:15,240 Speaker 1: of those reviews are entirely honest or accurate, or even 614 00:39:15,280 --> 00:39:18,719 Speaker 1: remotely so I think it's only fair to point out 615 00:39:18,760 --> 00:39:20,160 Speaker 1: that if you were to go to a site like 616 00:39:20,280 --> 00:39:24,560 Speaker 1: G two dot com, there are just twelve reviews for 617 00:39:24,640 --> 00:39:27,719 Speaker 1: by sell ads there. But those twelve reviews create an 618 00:39:27,760 --> 00:39:31,520 Speaker 1: aggregate score of three point eight out of five, which 619 00:39:31,560 --> 00:39:34,960 Speaker 1: isn't stellar, but it's way better than one point nine 620 00:39:35,040 --> 00:39:39,080 Speaker 1: at trust pilot. Right. So again, a lot of the 621 00:39:39,120 --> 00:39:41,960 Speaker 1: reviews that are on G two dot com are actually 622 00:39:42,080 --> 00:39:45,880 Speaker 1: four or five star reviews. There's one was like a 623 00:39:45,880 --> 00:39:49,040 Speaker 1: no star review which brought the average down, and in fact, 624 00:39:49,040 --> 00:39:50,600 Speaker 1: I think it may have been one of the same 625 00:39:50,600 --> 00:39:53,920 Speaker 1: people who left a review over at trust pilot. So 626 00:39:54,239 --> 00:39:58,560 Speaker 1: I can't make any real conclusion about by sell ads. 627 00:39:58,560 --> 00:40:01,080 Speaker 1: There's just too little data. There's no way to tell 628 00:40:01,120 --> 00:40:04,640 Speaker 1: whether or not people like it or don't like it. 629 00:40:05,000 --> 00:40:06,920 Speaker 1: There's just not that much information, and part of that, 630 00:40:06,960 --> 00:40:10,760 Speaker 1: I think is because it's still a relatively small company. 631 00:40:11,600 --> 00:40:15,880 Speaker 1: But that's the update on Dig and its current corporate overlord. 632 00:40:16,640 --> 00:40:19,640 Speaker 1: I think about Dig the same way I think about MySpace, 633 00:40:19,920 --> 00:40:24,000 Speaker 1: because technically there is still a site that's still Dig, 634 00:40:24,480 --> 00:40:26,880 Speaker 1: but it doesn't remotely resemble what it used to be, 635 00:40:27,200 --> 00:40:29,279 Speaker 1: and it has a fraction of the mind share that 636 00:40:29,400 --> 00:40:32,320 Speaker 1: it once commanded. Like, I don't think people talk about 637 00:40:32,400 --> 00:40:35,640 Speaker 1: Dig anymore unless they're like, hey, do you remember when 638 00:40:35,680 --> 00:40:38,960 Speaker 1: everyone was using dig? That's the context they use that in. 639 00:40:39,480 --> 00:40:41,800 Speaker 1: I wouldn't go so far to say that Dig's grave 640 00:40:41,880 --> 00:40:44,640 Speaker 1: has been dug, because trust me, there's no shortage of 641 00:40:44,719 --> 00:40:47,719 Speaker 1: articles out there that have a similar pun to them. 642 00:40:48,200 --> 00:40:51,160 Speaker 1: But I will say Dig is not even close to 643 00:40:51,200 --> 00:40:53,440 Speaker 1: what it used to be, and I have no reason 644 00:40:53,480 --> 00:40:57,320 Speaker 1: to expect that to change in the foreseeable future. Maybe 645 00:40:57,320 --> 00:40:59,319 Speaker 1: there'll be another change in ownership of Dig in the 646 00:40:59,320 --> 00:41:02,800 Speaker 1: future that brings it back to this more democratized approach 647 00:41:03,440 --> 00:41:07,600 Speaker 1: as what Dig was when it first launched. But unless 648 00:41:07,640 --> 00:41:09,480 Speaker 1: you can do that and also find a way to 649 00:41:09,520 --> 00:41:12,200 Speaker 1: generate revenue so that you know you could pay for 650 00:41:12,239 --> 00:41:16,080 Speaker 1: the whole thing. It may be a non starter because 651 00:41:16,120 --> 00:41:18,480 Speaker 1: if the only thing you can do is seek out 652 00:41:18,640 --> 00:41:22,840 Speaker 1: endless rounds of venture capital funding, sooner or later that 653 00:41:22,920 --> 00:41:26,000 Speaker 1: gravy train is going to come to an end and 654 00:41:26,200 --> 00:41:29,640 Speaker 1: you'll be really stuck. I think a lot of Dig's 655 00:41:29,680 --> 00:41:32,320 Speaker 1: problems actually came out of the fact that the company 656 00:41:32,480 --> 00:41:36,360 Speaker 1: was looking for ways to monetize in a way that 657 00:41:36,400 --> 00:41:40,680 Speaker 1: would be sustainable, and unfortunately a lot of those ways 658 00:41:40,880 --> 00:41:45,040 Speaker 1: were in conflict with the very features that the community valued, 659 00:41:45,320 --> 00:41:48,359 Speaker 1: and that was really a problem. We've see this over 660 00:41:48,360 --> 00:41:51,040 Speaker 1: and over. Right. Twitter is the same way we saw 661 00:41:51,040 --> 00:41:53,920 Speaker 1: a lot with Twitter, where the things that people valued 662 00:41:53,960 --> 00:41:57,520 Speaker 1: with Twitter were things that weren't easily monetizable, and the 663 00:41:57,560 --> 00:42:00,480 Speaker 1: ways to monetize Twitter were things that rubbed people the 664 00:42:00,520 --> 00:42:05,080 Speaker 1: wrong way. And that's continuing today as Twitter has transformed 665 00:42:05,120 --> 00:42:08,880 Speaker 1: into x. So. Yeah, not an unusual story when it 666 00:42:08,920 --> 00:42:12,400 Speaker 1: comes to web startups. Anyway. That's the update on Dig. 667 00:42:14,520 --> 00:42:17,320 Speaker 1: Not much else I can say of any real substance. 668 00:42:17,880 --> 00:42:20,400 Speaker 1: I would love to learn more about it, and maybe 669 00:42:20,400 --> 00:42:22,640 Speaker 1: I'll reach out to some of the people who are, 670 00:42:22,880 --> 00:42:25,799 Speaker 1: you know, apparently writing articles for Dig just to kind 671 00:42:25,800 --> 00:42:28,400 Speaker 1: of get an idea of what it's like, because you know, 672 00:42:28,840 --> 00:42:32,160 Speaker 1: it could very well be that everyone there is incredibly happy. 673 00:42:33,800 --> 00:42:36,200 Speaker 1: Based upon the output, I would imagine it's got to 674 00:42:36,239 --> 00:42:40,120 Speaker 1: be pretty stressful. I remember when I was writing an 675 00:42:40,239 --> 00:42:44,080 Speaker 1: article a day and how that was really putting a 676 00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:46,600 Speaker 1: large stress on me. I mean, I do a podcast 677 00:42:46,600 --> 00:42:49,759 Speaker 1: a day pretty much here, and that is pretty stressful. 678 00:42:50,000 --> 00:42:52,560 Speaker 1: I can't imagine doing multiple ones a day. That would 679 00:42:52,600 --> 00:42:57,480 Speaker 1: be pretty tough. Anyway, that's the update. I hope you 680 00:42:57,520 --> 00:43:01,239 Speaker 1: are all well, and I'll talk to you again really soon. 681 00:43:07,680 --> 00:43:12,360 Speaker 1: Tech Stuff is an iHeartRadio production. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, 682 00:43:12,680 --> 00:43:16,400 Speaker 1: visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen 683 00:43:16,400 --> 00:43:17,480 Speaker 1: to your favorite shows.