At a Digg townhall meeting earlier this month, Digg's founder, Kevin Rose, and CEO, Jay Adelson, announced that Digg's shout feature would be removed sometime this week and replaced with a share feature. This change just went live on the popular social media site. Users on Digg used to be able to share stories on Digg with other users right on the site, a feature that was often abused. Now, Digg's users can only email stories, or share them on Facebook and Twitter.
According to the announcement on the Digg blog, the Digg team "listened to your feedback, crunched some user data, and decided to remove shouts. As some of you know, shouts have been a controversial feature since their inception and considering the ever-changing landscape of the social web, we've elected to remove them in favor of more popular options."

To share stories, users can now hover over the 'share' link on the digg homepage and select the service they want to share the stories on (email, Facebook, or Twitter). Digg also removed the 'blog this' feature, which, according to Digg's Jen Burton only saw really low usage.
For a more detailed discussion of the pros and cons of shouts on Digg, please see our earlier report from last week.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
didn't visit digg for some months because it was chaotic there. now, it looks much better, cleaner, and easier.
I hated the shout feature, so it's a good move in a certain way. BUT, I don't know how long Digg will be able to survive in this fast paced information sharing world. Honestly, with twitter, I don't see the need for Digg anymore.
What Digg does can be a good mirror of social media in general. I remember when "blog this" was a needed feature because reblogging was what Twitter is now.
Then shouts came along, which was another Digg attempt at social sharing. Ultimately, though, what Digg learned with the rest of us is that social sharing is all about platform integration. Web 2.0-esque startups need not develop things that are already available and widely used elsewhere. But hindsight is always 20-20.
What Digg does can be a good mirror of social media in general. I remember when "blog this" was a needed feature because reblogging was what Twitter is now.
Then shouts came along, which was another Digg attempt at social sharing. Ultimately, though, what Digg learned with the rest of us is that social sharing is all about platform integration. Web 2.0-esque startups need not develop things that are already available and widely used elsewhere. But hindsight is always 20-20.
this is wise move in my opinion. they just had to incorporate social networks.
FriendFeed's sharing is much better than digg. Posting to twitter is automatic, I wish they could do it that way.
Digg is missing what I refer to as "the period of socialization". Like the "age of aquarious", these days are crucial to interfaces like Digg. Speaking of interfaces, why does it have to be so labor intensive. I agree with Raymond; we want automation!
But what about the other changes - like the fact you cannot now 'share' to your blog? This was a big advantage of Digg - you could posted directly to your blog from Digg without doing anything else.
This was the feature I used most and I find it ridiculous they have swapped this for the weak options of only Twitter, Facebook or email. Digg should be making it easier to share and disseminate, not harder. This is a big FAIL in my book.
well there goes my only chances at getting dugg.
The question i have is what are the new digg features for 'friends' you have collected in Digg.com.
No more shouts, so friends will be un-usefull?
I don't know, what do you think about?
Digg remains a useful tool, although it is now absorbed by hundreds of similar sites.
I saw an article today that hopes these types of devices or applications may be the saviour for the newspapers. I still have my doubts because you don't need a kindle to get your news, it's still free online.