Why Does Digg Hate Porn?

Jan 04, 2008 | Posted by Dashiell

2008_01_03_digg.jpg(See update below.) Fans of the Digg phenomenon know how valuable it is for any site to get a link featured on the social bookmarking behemoth. That's why our fellow Gawker Media siblings are constantly sending out emails asking us to check out their Digged stories ... emails that we immediately delete. You see, to us gentle pornsmiths, a Digg button is little more than a useless hunk of code, one that automatically rejects any submission deemed "obscene" or "pornographic"—i.e., any link that includes Fleshbot.com as part of the URL.

That fact alone wouldn't bother us so much if we didn't then have to sit on our hands as Diggers bestow link love on all kinds of racy material from more "respectable" sites. For example, recent front page winners on Digg included a link to Terminator fuckbots that we featured here a while back (before it became a traffic bonanza for our geeky brothers at Gizmodo—and don't even get us started on that doggie sex toy post .) The point is that we often engage in some good, relatively harmless fun that the Digg community obviously enjoys, yet we aren't allowed in the the front door because we're "one of those" sites.

2008_01_03_fox.jpgNow, we don't expect folks to start linking to our daily hardcore Flesh Flicks videos or anything ... but surely there must be some middle ground where porn lovers and folks with generous workplace filters can live in harmony. True, there have been several attempts to emulate the Digg model for adult sites, but they've all come up short.

Still, people love Digg and Digg lovers like sexy stuff. They helped earn a reprieve for that Fox News Porn parody after it was famously banned, other links submitted with "porn" or "extremely NSFW" in the headline do just fine ... and if you check out the "Best Of" lists from any of our sister sites, the most popular items (with or without Digging) are frequently sex related. So why can't we play along too?

2008_01_03_dogs.jpg Of course, cynics might say that this very post is just another shameless attempt to bait Digg and score some sweet hot pageview love of our very own. (And they'd be right—too bad we can't Digg this link.) Just don't tell us that you didn't want to share that Jesus fuck doll ad with all your friends in the 2.0 world. Even if stuff like that is probably what got us banned in the first place.

· Digg Terms of Use (digg.com)

Update: Those techie suck ups at Valleywag respond to our reasonable request.

Related (sorta): · "Hotdoll: The Sex Doll for Dogs" (the most popular story of 2007 @ Gizmodo) · In SF, Third Breast Is More Common Than Third Eye (io9) · "The Top Five Reasons Digg Is Completely Useless For Finding Anything Related To Music" (Idolator) · "All You Need to Know About Digg" (Gawker) · "Denton to pay bloggers based on traffic" (Valleywag)

* * * * *

Previously: Is Fox News Too Hot For TV?, Hot Hexadecimal Dildo Porn: Digg This!, Dig for Porn, MoSexIndex, Splutr: More Social Porn, Fantasti.cc Videos: Community Rated Smut, Porn 2.0: Haven't We Been Here Before?

Tagged in: Straight, Text, teh internets, Feature, Opinion, Community, Valleywag, Web 2.0, Digg, complaint department

Member Comments