digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Digg has anti-Ron Paul Bias on the 5th of November

giftedtwisted.com — From the online rumblings it appears that DIGG.com an online news/social media website who relies on the oppinions of it ’s readers to submit, rate and organize all sources of news, videos, photos etc made a broad decission to wipe all news stories in the up and coming category pertaining to Ron Paul out.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jagermeistr, on 11/06/2007, -3/+10Sean Hannity is doing it.
  • nissan4l0, on 11/05/2007, -3/+11I find this rather odd as well. He has raised 2 million dollars in about 12 hours. Something smells rotten in the state of Denmark....
  • RonPaulSpammer, on 11/06/2007, -8/+10Sources close to me are telling me that Rudy Giuliani has paid off Digg to censor out the thousands of Nov. 5th articles. My source told me it was either that or other Digg users fed up with what they call "Ron Paul spam" and burying the stories.
  • b3and1p, on 11/06/2007, -9/+8I don't understand this decision at all! At least with the HDDVD issue there were legal things digg was afraid of, but how could they possibly think it is a good idea to censor political news???

    I am very very disappointed and I would love to see digg users stand up to this!
    • theblueprint, on 11/06/2007, -3/+10I think you've got it a bit twisted.

      It is Digg users standing up to the incessant spamming and gaming of Digg on behalf of Ron Paul. We have essentially shut down the "revolution" today. It's what the Paulestinians refer to as "blowback".
      • bonked, on 11/06/2007, -5/+3Oh, that's right, your opinion is more important than mine theblueprint - let's see, basically looking through your comment history all you do is bash Ron and "truther" stories. Way to be a proactive light in the digg world. I just checked every single comment you have ever made on digg, and yes, that is literally all your bring to the table. Unlike the thousands of comments on hundreds of subjects that many of those you call spammers have on unrelated topics - who's gaming the system?
        • theblueprint, on 11/06/2007, -2/+7Do I despise Paul and his supporters? Absolutely. Did I come across as trying to hide it?

          Digg is an opinon-driven site, and I'm expressing mine. What happened to "liberty" and "freedom"? I thought that was the basis of Paul's campaign?

          I don't think you understand how "gaming the system" works. Which of my submissions was pushed to the front page via collusion and sockpuppets? Show some evidence of me gaming the system, or admit your ignorance.

          Don't be shy. It's apparent that RonBots have no idea how Digg works. Otherwise they'd realize that the spam is getting buried by the community at large, and submissions like this wouldn't exist.
  • nissan4l0, on 11/06/2007, -4/+8http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/DROP_THE_RON_PAU ...

    I finally found it.... wtf digg?
  • cyberdork, on 11/06/2007, -17/+18It's not digg, it's just digg users like me who just can't take your endless spamming anymore.

    BURIED!
    • obliviousfool, on 11/06/2007, -6/+4Why not give it a day off? Do you really like the direction this country is going? Who do you think the next president should be?
      • raitchison, on 11/06/2007, -3/+4If we did then every story on the digg front page would br Ron Paul related.
        • obliviousfool, on 11/06/2007, -4/+3No, I just mean today. Take today off. Today is supposed to be Paul's one day mega-fund-raising thing. Then you can go back to work tomorrow, oh brave protectors of digg's front page! You do fine work.

          Just out of curiosity, do you guys have a candidate? Do you think digg should have no political news?
          • raitchison, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3No you don't get a pass to use Digg as your own personal billboard today or any other day. Though if the RP supporters hadn't been so incessant with spamming Digg over the past several months (or took a break for the past few weeks even) I'm sure you'd be able to get at least one story to stay on the front page today.

            I'm not sure who you are referring to with "you guys", I doubt that the Digg users burying the RP spam have much in common besides being sick and tired of RP spam. Personally I'm a Libertarian leaning registered Republican living in the People's Republic of California so the only thing you can say about the candidates or issues I support is that they don't stand much of a chance of winning.

            Oh and yes I'm sure that many digg users do wish that Digg would be free of political news as it was originally.
          • obliviousfool, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2I mean "you guys" as in the guys that post just to complain about too many Ron Paul posts.

            My whole political life has been supporting candidates with little chance of winning, but I still do it! Maybe I'm an optimist.

            Digg has a filter, and you can choose not to view political stories. Oddly, I think a lot of our lives is becoming political. Think about net neutrality. Think about the NSA and data mining. These are essentially issues opened up by new technology that drag the tech-minded into the political arena. Capability brings responsibility. Sure, we'd all like to not worry about it and sit in our bubbles and play games or whatever, but not worrying about it leaves it to someone else, and that someone else may not have your best interests in mind!

            Sorry to take up your time, but I really do wonder about the dynamics of the way people see these things. I really think that if another "big money" candidate wins we might as well just start blacking out big chunks of the bill of rights and start issuing chunks of the national debt to children the moment they are born.

  • Scagli3tti, on 11/09/2007, -8/+18Digg does not have anti-Ron Paul bias...diggers have anti-Ron Paul bias because a large number of them are tired of having Ron Paul stories on the front page every day (I personally don't mind fyi). When an article is buried enough times, it is gone from the home page...for good. Notice how none of the Ron Paul stories have been deleted.
    • bonked, on 11/06/2007, -6/+3Is that why they don't show up in the searches too?
    • onetimer, on 11/06/2007, -2/+7Yes, when a storied is buried, it doesn't show up in searches unless you check the box "include buried stories." You and other ronbots need to be at least familiar with how digg works before you post comments like "Digg censorship!" that make you look like an idiot.
  • jeffiek, on 11/06/2007, -7/+10Anyone know who started the 5th of November campaign? He/she/they deserve a lot of credit.
  • LibertyCo, on 11/05/2007, -4/+4Thanks Nissan410: http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/DROP_THE_RON_PAU ...
  • meruru, on 11/06/2007, -11/+16We should introduce the Ron Paul spammers to the Truthers, they can get together and discuss the giant conspiracy to keep their stories off of Digg. Maybe then they would leave us alone.
    • cyberdork, on 11/06/2007, -4/+13You haven't noticed that they are mostly the same guys using the same strategies?
    • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 11/06/2007, -4/+10The Ron Paul / Truther convergence has already occur ed. That's why Ron Paul keeps showing up on Alex Jones' show.
      • bonked, on 11/06/2007, -4/+4Or maybe because Ron is the congressional rep in that district and has been on the show numerous times since it's inception. Gee, a show from a guy who has won numerous people's choice awards for favorite local radio talk show in Austin, TX having a Texas Congressman on as a guest for close to 15 years - weird huh?
  • zclip, on 11/06/2007, -11/+17I BURIED YOUR STUPID RON PAUL STORY
    because like so many said, everyone is sick and tired of them. You're making Ron Paul the anti-candidate ... I wouldn't vote for him BECAUSE of your incessant spamming *****.
    • bonked, on 11/06/2007, -6/+3I blocked you because I'm sick of apple stories but I don't think that we need to silence people, unlike you, I am intelligent enough to not read the stories that don't interest me. Douche.
  • Lenny, on 11/06/2007, -5/+13I'm assuming most diggers are just sick of all the Ron Paul stories that get submitted.
  • geoken, on 11/05/2007, -2/+9Are you serious? I clicked on this story from the upcoming section for all News. I sorted it by most diggs and 5 of the 15 stories were Ron Paul stories.
    • LibertyCo, on 11/06/2007, -2/+4I think the main one they are talking about is the one with nearly 3k diggs
  • stevefl209, on 11/05/2007, -3/+9Look people, I'm for Ron Paul but you need to start worrying less about digging every Ron Paul story and more about getting the message in front of more OFFLINE eyeballs who will vote in the primaries. There is a point of diminishing returns in Digg and we're seeing it by virtue of stories ending up being buried. It's not a conspiracy; this channel is saturated. If Ron Paul's going to make it, his Internet exposure needs to spill over into the brick-and-mortar world in a big way.
    • LibertyCo, on 11/06/2007, -2/+22.8 million dollars in donations in 12 hours... thats brick and mortar
  • GRTWHT, on 11/06/2007, -7/+83000 digg story buried? This can't happen by chance, this is the 'algorithm' at work (the chosen/annointed of digg being able to front page a submission at 59 (saw that this weekend) and kill a submission with 3000 diggs.

    Unless digg wants to be the AOL of social news, they had better stop screwing with success and go back to a more equal voting process.
    • ilikemike, on 11/06/2007, -5/+2It's all a conspiracy. Maybe it's the CFR in cahoots with Bush! P.S. - I'm being sarcastic.
  • reeder, on 11/06/2007, -8/+8To Drakin030 and theblueprint:

    What the ***** is wrong with you? If you don't like it, don't read or digg it. Portraying yourselves as "proud members of the bury brigade" only proves that you have sad, unhappy lives that you take out on everyone else. Especially when it comes to someone who would try to restore the Republic, instead of feed the greedy at the government trough.

    And for the rest of you Ron Paul complainers, you should probably try to get a grip on the definition of spam. Your comments are out of place, rude, and offensive, thusly you would be considered the spammers.
    • theblueprint, on 11/06/2007, -4/+7What the ***** is wrong with you? If the Digg community buries it, stop spamming the same *****, regardless of how it advances your interests.

      The buried submissions have been advertisements for Paul's fund-raiser. That is the definition of spam, and you're the spammer. Nice try, but remember... I'm in the Bury Brigade Hall of Fame. You're going to want to pick on an easier target.
  • GRTWHT, on 11/06/2007, -3/+8Wasted my time digging and commenting on this, it appears that all stories that include Ron Paul in any way shape or form are being buried by digg.
    At one time I used to get annoyed by all the Ron Paul spam, but what has happened today has made me change my mind. Anyone that represents a group that is considered so 'dangerous' by major new media (traditional and new social) that their answer is complete censorship...that's someone I have to do my damnedest to support.
    In other words, your censorship is having the opposite effect on at least one digger (not sure how much longer I will be able to call myself that - I will probably be banned simply for posting this, based on today's behaviour).
    • chaosium, on 11/06/2007, -4/+3"Anyone that represents a group that is considered so 'dangerous' by major new media (traditional and new social) that their answer is complete censorship"

      You don't even know what "censorship" means.
      • GRTWHT, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

        Censorship is defined as the suppression or deletion of objectionable information, as determined by the Censor.

        Typically censorship is done by governments, religious and secular groups, corporations, or the mass media, although other forms of censorship exist. The withholding of official secrets, commercial secrets, intellectual property, and privileged lawyer-client communication is not usually described as censorship when it remains within reasonable bounds. Because of this, the term "censorship" often carries with it a sense of untoward, inappropriate or repressive secrecy.

        Censorship is closely related to the concepts of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. When overused, it is often associated with human rights abuse, dictatorship, and repression.

        The term "censorship" is often used as a pejorative term to signify a belief that a group controlling certain information is using this control improperly or for its own benefit, or preventing others from accessing information that should be made readily accessible (often so that conclusions drawn can be verified).

  • ilikemike, on 11/06/2007, -8/+1We the people have a bias. Not so much anti-Paul, but pro the other candidates. That is why Dr. Paul is barely a blip on the radar of the scientific polls such as Rasmussen. It's not all a conspiracy. So, Paul may have a money bomb backed by his supporters, his supporters may bomb Digg with comments, and other candidates supporters may be getting out their anti-bomb and anti-spam devices to counter the arguments. We still live in a marketplace of ideas, and perhaps, just perhaps, we the people aren't buying what Ron Paul and his supporters are selling.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.