Re-thinking Chowhound Digest - Requesting Feedback

[Dave MP]

Hi all,

I've been doing some work here thinking about the current format of the Chowhound Digests, since we're thinking about making some changes. In advance of this, I wanted to pose a few general questions to the general Chowhound community.

1) Do you read Chowhound Digests? If not, why not? (i.e. they are not in my city, they don't interest me, I didn't know they existed, etc). If so, how do you read them? (via the email newsletter? subscribe via rss? visit the site daily/weekly?)

2) In your mind, what is the purpose of the Chowhound Digest? In your opinion, to what extent is it meeting its goals? What could change that would make it more useful or better?

3) What aspects of the Chowhound Digest do you like? Why do you read it?

4) What features of the Digest would you change?

Because I have been thinking about this a lot, am a longtime Chowhound user, and have been talking to lots of people about this, I am going to write my own response to these questions - I'll post it below. I think my answers will provide a general sense of the direction we're moving, and I think I have a good grip on what Digest readers are thinking...but perhaps this thread will bring up some new ideas, too.

Thanks in advance,

Dave MP

For those who are not familiar with the Digests, here is a link: http://www.chow.com/digest/ On the right hand side, you can select a specific region/topic for the Digest - it's currently in 4 cities (Boston, NY, LA, SF), plus we have General Topics and Home Cooking Digests

[Allstonian]

I read the Boston digest occasionally; I would read it more regularly if it weren't so difficult to find. It's annoying that there seems to be no link through Chowhound, since I find navigating Chow to be pretty tiresome.

I prefer reading it on the website - not really interested in subscribing to an emailed version.

I like the suggestion to make it possible for board users to flag interesting topics or posts as suggestions for the digest - one way to do this might be as simple as adding a button in the "Report" options.

I do think the main purpose should be to highlight especially interesting topics on a given board. It's also nice to know that good writing is being appreciated - I certainly feel a special glow when a comment of mine shows up, especially in one of the "Overheard" posts.

[DuchessNukem]

1. I've heard of the Digests but never sought them out. (Not in my city, don't want more e-mail, I enjoy browsing all recent topics.)

2. Purpose: They seem to be a selection and summary of interesting topics, to pique interest.

3. When I did review them just now, it was nice to see a few topics I wouldn't have considered reading. I still prefer the serendipity of browsing new threads, and going to favorite boards to see their recent topics. For example, I love the Home Cooking Board, but baking is like another language to me -- so a summary of a great baking tips thread isn't useful.

4. Changes -- I'm not your target audience, not likely to read.

[HillJ]

What do you all (Digest Editors who have identified themselves and Dave MP) think of the idea of allowing Chowhounds to submit to the Digests rather than comb the threads and hand pick them? Something about this remark,

"I would love for Digests to be more connected to the rest of the content - searchable, maybe popping up in the sidebar when a relevant topic is displayed. I'd love for the posters and commenters to get more recognition for their awesome posts!"

made me ask the question.

[Dave MP]

Do you mean that you would send an email or press a button to alert us to a good topic to write about? What did you have in mind?

[HillJ]

Actually no, but buttons or tabs aren't an awful tool to consider.

I was thinking more along the lines of a member submission page like recipes are submitted now.

Looking at this thru the lense of a CH community blog, Digest could have ideas, tips, recipes, etc. actually submitted by Chowhounds specifically for a Digest issue. Highlight hounds that submit in addition to the combed tips and hot sheets.

[jen kalb]

speaking as a board participant where participation seems to be declining due to all the other available writing venues especially blogging I would prefer to see great content showing up directly on a board rather than a digest/chow blog, of course it could then be tagged for inclusion in the chow digest, but its a shame to take it off the boards. Maybe what is being proposed is offering content that isnt suitable for the boards, but if anything we should be putting up more and better on the boards instead of allowing ourselves to get sucked off it.

[HillJ]

hi jen kalb. The only suggestion I'm offering is to give Chowhounds who would like to contribute to a Digest or a CH Blog the opportunity to submit directly to a Digest/blog editor rather than be "plucked" from the boards.

There are most definately pros and cons to any changes that come along but since Dave MP has taken the position at CHOW to support Chowhounds and is offering the opportunity to speak directly to him about ideas as well as ask for feedback, I think the best thing to do is exactly what we are both doing-offering feedback. I'm cool with letting the folks working behind the scenes listen and decide what happens next.

[HillJ]

Also, jen k, when I read the Home Cooking Digest what is posted there are small tidbits of member information highlighted from existing HC board comments. The Digest doesn't change what's OP'd on the board or from the entire thread that is ongoing. They are two different "animals" in my read.

[Melanie Wong]

Speaking as a former editor of ChowNews, the ancestor of Digest, "spotting" and submission of interesting topics by chowhound readers of the boards was encouraged in the past. Selection of the week's entries was still up to the editor, but the extra eyes and perspectives were helpful and very welcome in choosing candidates to highlight.

[HillJ]

Good to know, Melanie. Keeping some of Dave MP's goals in mind for the community at large, a CH blog and so forth I'm hoping the timing is right for the next generation of Digests to be far more inclusive of the members input.

[Dave MP]

How was this done in the past? Just via email?

[Melanie Wong]

Yes, by email to the editor of each edition. They had email addresses on chowhound.com.

[Sarah Perry]

I am also an editor (of the General Topics digest).

I read LA, General Topics, and Home Cooking, through email (you can sign up to get the digests that are relevant to you in the upper right hand corner of your screen where it says "sign up for chow newsletters").

I see the digests as giving extra exposure to particularly great topics and comments, since not everyone has time (or inclination) to read every thread. As pane says:

>Sometimes people append interesting information into a thread that might not otherwise interest me, so I wouldn't have read it. I want the Digest to pick up both of those.

Exactly!

Sometimes, posters and commenters assume a level of expertise that not everyone has, so part of the job of Digest is to provide context (as pane said) to make sure that everyone can learn from the threads and participate in the conversation.

I would love for Digests to be more connected to the rest of the content - searchable, maybe popping up in the sidebar when a relevant topic is displayed. I'd love for the posters and commenters to get more recognition for their awesome posts!

[melpy]

Don't because didn't know they existed.

[meatn3]

1) Yes I read a few of the digests. I no longer subscribe since I am on site frequently enough to check them easily.
2) I've assumed the purpose is to showcase the most noteworthy items, those little gems which could easily be overlooked. I view it as a quick way to get a feel for a board. It meets those purposes IMO.
3) I read the city digests for places I visit semi-frequently or am planning to visit. I appreciate the summation and feel it helps me navigate the waters better when I am making my plans to visit.

I read the topical digests too. I like them for several reasons. I find it interesting to see which topics end up on the digests – out of hundreds of posts these stand out for some reason. After reading the summation of a post which I had initially not been interested in I often realize it does interest me after all!
4) I would change the placement so that they are more visible from the CH side. I would like to see more frequent updates. It seems as though there are many days of inactivity and then there will be 3 new updates at once. I may be wrong, with the erratic posts I tend to not check the digests daily.

It would be nice to have digests for broader regions too. Perhaps one for the rest of the U.S., one for Europe, etc. The food aspects of a place figure in strongly when I am deciding where to travel. Reading about an interesting market, festival or preparation could result in a trip to an area I had not considered otherwise!

[sedimental]

No, I don't read it. I don't read it because I prefer to schlepp through the threads on the boards I am interested in. I am not in a hurry on this particular site and don't need the readers digest version of chowhound.

I use CHOW only for chow tips and few articles that show up on the right side of the screen that catch my eye. I used to be a bigger CHOW fan, but the articles seem to have degraded and taken on a bit of a 'juvenile" flavor that I don't find appealing.

[pane]

As an FYI, I edit the SF digest, so my feedback is from the perspective of a long-time Chowhound user and a short-time Digest editor.

1) Do you read Chowhound Digests? If not, why not?

Yes :)

2) In your mind, what is the purpose of the Chowhound Digest? In your opinion, to what extent is it meeting its goals? What could change that would make it more useful or better?

I would say that it's to uncover the best of the best--but not to distill. I think the signal to noise ratio of concierge dining recommendations to reports has gotten out of whack, and distill makes me think that I am getting 10% of the boards--I don't want 10%, I want the good stuff.

I look to the Digest to:

**Find reports that I might have otherwise have missed
**Provide context that adds to my understanding

As an example of the first, there are plenty of people who write reports that never get a single response, or get maybe a couple, and those posts can get buried quickly on active boards. Sometimes people append interesting information into a thread that might not otherwise interest me, so I wouldn't have read it. I want the Digest to pick up both of those.

By context, I mean background information that exists outside of an individual report. That could include other reports (for instance, previous reports on the same topic or restaurant) or information encountered off the board. As an example of the second, it might be interesting that a couple who recently opened a restaurant worked at another well-known restaurant first. The person who writes the initial report may take for granted that readers have that information, but plenty of people do not, and I want the Digest to provide me with the basics.

3) What aspects of the Chowhound Digest do you like? Why do you read it?

I like that it highlights the best of the boards, and nudges me toward reading things I might otherwise miss. I also like that it acknowledges great reporters--I look out for new Hounds writing their first reviews and people who consistently bring great content. They deserve recognition.

4) What features of the Digest would you change?

I would make the format more flexible and modern. Ability to include photographs, for instance, and for the gap between writing and posting to shrink. At this point, I'm up to my fourth restaurant that closed between me writing a Digest and the Digest being posted.

Also, I think too many people have no idea the Digest exists, and that should change. I understand mailbox overload, but I think many people do not subscribe simply because they have no idea that they can.

Thanks again, Dave MP, for soliciting user feedback, and I look forward to all of your comments.

[jen kalb]

I have never read the Chowhound Digests (in NY). Think I signed up for newsletter in the pre-CNET era. Maybe i should, but I basically cancel every RSS feed and newsletter I sign up for because of mailbox overload. And as far as the site is concerned, the location of the Digest is non-obvious.

I looked around for it (its on CHOW, not CHOWHOUND) and is not labelled digest. the pulldown doesnt really differentiate it from the hot threads that show up in the list at the bottom of the page. - who would have know that this was the digests?

I think something like a blog format that was more highlighted would be a great resource for travellers and others - Like Spotted by Locals is for some Euro cities or some of the active food blogs in NY. or even the VVEats - I would actually be very happy to have "curated" chowhound information since its very hard to plow through the content on the Manhattan Board in particular when the occasion arises to go there for a meal (I am a very parochial outer boroughs person) Mea culpa for not looking at the existing content to see if it meets my needs, but as I said, the location is hardly highlighted on CHOW.

[Dave MP]

Here are my answers to these questions - they should give a good sense of what I'm thinking and where things are moving with the Digests, but nothing is set in stone. Feedback from all (including both regular Digest readers and non-Digest readers) is great!

1) Yes, I read the Digests, since I have lived in both Boston and SF. I subscribe the newsletters in my email, and also subscribe to them via my Google Reader. I like the Digests because they help highlight great Chowhound posts that I might have otherwise missed. When I don't have time to read the entire SF Bay Area Board, for example, I can count on the Digest to select interesting threads - I often learn about great restaurants just from reading the Digest.

2) In my mind, the purpose of the Digest is to be a "distilled version of Chowhound" (borrowing this terminology from a friend who I spoke to about this). It identifies the most interesting threads (making sure to cover a broad range of topics, price ranges, areas, cuisines) and puts them into an easy-to-read format.

Another purpose of the Digest is to recognize specific hounds for their contributions. When a user posts something really great, the Digest gives them credit for their writing/Chow-find. I think by mentioning specific users, it is meeting that goal as well.

3) I like that it's an easy-to-read, distilled version of Chowhound. I like that it offers links to full Chowhound threads, so I can find more by clicking the link.

4) I would make the Digest more blog-like - more frequent posts (some might be longer, some might be shorter), and pictures when possible. I would also increase its prominence on the site - make sure that users are aware of the feature, make easier links to the Digest from the Chowhound boards and the rest of the CHOW site.

Thanks in advance!
Dave MP

[HillJ]

I enjoyed all of your recommendations and comments for the Digests, Dave MP. If the coverage areas are expanded, some interesting blog features incorporated and an easier "arrow" pointing readers in the direction of Digest posts, I think you've hit some of the most obvious, initial areas for improvement.

Are the points you made also the goals for Digest? I understand the purpose of Digest but I don't recall reading anything before today about the goals so my comments reflect what you highlighted more than any new suggestions.

[Dave MP]

I think I was using the words "purpose" and "goals" somewhat interchangeably in that sentence.

[HillJ]

Understood. Then your goals are on track, reflecting the feedback CH's have offered on Site Talk for some time. Thanks for listening!

I do read the Home Cooking Digest from time to time while I'm visiting the site. I don't have any interest in rec'ing the Digest as an email. I agree with jen's comment about a travel food log for visitors (great suggestion there) and the inclusion of photos and how to steps for recipes is always a good idea.