Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.
Project Censored's Top 25 Censored Stories of 2008
crooksandliars.com — If you haven ’t been exposed to Project Censored, plan on spending several hours reading about the kind of media suppression and bias that we cover daily here at C&L.
SeaMowse- 857 diggs
- digg it
- HughManBeing, on 11/08/2007, -11/+17Let's publicize this stuff and take our country back.
- 7Mystery, on 11/08/2007, -4/+12And give other people’s country back.
- GrassrootsNinja, on 11/08/2007, -4/+8Commentjack to say DUPE: http://digg.com/politics/Top_25_Censored_Stories_o ...
Honestly, it was frontpage less than a week ago...- spucky, on 11/08/2007, -2/+9So? If people digg it up, it makes the front page. That's how it works. Some people don't see every single submission.
- idiotkings, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2Gosh, we'd hate for important news to take away a front-page slot from pictures of hard drives in 80's and Leopard reviews.
- Hobbes24, on 11/06/2007, -2/+2it's a good thing we have deskchair revolutionaries like you...oh wait, you're all talk.
- mb3581, on 11/08/2007, -12/+47We've seen this a hundred times. Lets talk about the top 25 stories censored by DIGG.
- perot9296, on 11/08/2007, -2/+0I hate to bring it up again, but the Mike Gravel being blacklisted from the MSNBC debates. Microsoft runs the ads on Digg so maybe thats why... Although I think its just most Americans are too dumb or just plain dont want to hear the truth.
Mike Gravel 2008
- perot9296, on 11/08/2007, -2/+0I hate to bring it up again, but the Mike Gravel being blacklisted from the MSNBC debates. Microsoft runs the ads on Digg so maybe thats why... Although I think its just most Americans are too dumb or just plain dont want to hear the truth.
- dukeeeey, on 11/08/2007, -24/+38Top censored story of TODAY. Ron Paul received 3 million dollars in donations. Amazing work from grass roots organizations. Digg is censoring the story, the mainstream media won't touch it. What are they so afraid of ?
"As of 5pm CST donations have topped $2.5 million and look set to break the single day donation record of $3.1Million. Still only 1 mainstream news outlet has covered this amazing achievement. "
http://www.ronpaul2008.com- a3r0, on 11/08/2007, -23/+20It's not censored, it's buried. Because nobody cares.
- a3r0, on 11/08/2007, -22/+17It's not censored, it's buried. Because nobody cares.
- a3r0, on 11/08/2007, -12/+5Double post, even though I clicked it once. Now I can't edit it.
- cnot3, on 11/06/2007, -8/+1it was an opinion so nice he said it twice. /sarcasm
- mb3581, on 11/08/2007, -19/+9I know everyone is getting sick of seeing these stories, but the community post them and the community diggs them. If this keeps on, I see another Digg revolt coming.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com- mightydavefish, on 11/08/2007, -10/+8What I don't get is why all the rightards push Ron Paul think the country needs four more years of GOP stupidity.
The GOP has ***** up everything they've touched, we have citizens suing the federal government because under Bush they don't do their jobs, and you people are so firmly deluded that you think a right wing GOP tool can fix things.- toxicshok, on 11/08/2007, -5/+8vote for the idea not the party.
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -5/+7That's not nearly as retarded as voting for someone because they have a D or R next to their name... Seeing the hostility Paul has met from his own party, he must be doing SOMETHING right...
- mightydavefish, on 11/08/2007, -10/+8What I don't get is why all the rightards push Ron Paul think the country needs four more years of GOP stupidity.
- biggychong, on 11/08/2007, -15/+10Sorry to break the news to you, but RP will go down as a footnote, if that, in history. The libertarian platform sucks, and we know this because we tried it in and called that time "The Gilded Age." Furthermore, most support for RP is from a small clique, not a majority of people. Lastly, all RP represents is a disenfranchised public, not a revolution or even a new idea.
- D3koy, on 11/08/2007, -1/+22There is a difference between "censoring" and people burying it...Didn't Digg decide they weren't going to censor anything anymore?
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -8/+1Whether it's caused by the Digg staff actively deleting stories, or their broken spam reporting feature being abused to hide legitimate stories, the end result is the same.
- Lukesed, on 11/08/2007, -1/+9Actually burying wasn't just for spam... hence the various options you have when burying a story.
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -3/+2Right, but the 'spam' one is the one abused by those trying to censor Digg, as it has a much higher burying power than the others.
- bitspace, on 11/08/2007, -5/+2What about when the community just buries it into nothingness? Is that censorship too?
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -2/+2Obviously not. I have no problem with a mechanism for burying stories and taking them off the front page. My only beef is that the 'spam' burying option is able to override the diggs by many more people, in effect allowing a small group of people to censor Digg of any topic they have a problem with. Seeing the rates of Diggs some of these Paul stories are getting, it's fairly obvious that there are a lot of diggers interested in them, so who are these few self-professed Bury Brigade members, to decide that it's actually spam just because it's about Paul, and that it should be hidden?
Obviously, Digg is by its very nature going to have stories that don't appeal to you personally on the front page, but that doesn't mean that you or anyone else has the right to censor the whole site to make it fit your preferences. The same problem affects other topics, such as anything game console-related for example, as there are many people who feel strongly about those as well. I don't have a problem with people burying stories they think are lame; I only have a problem with the Digg algorithm making it so easy to censor Digg, as it's one of my last great hopes for a site where interesting non-mainstream stories are able to break through. If everyone did what you did and actively censored their pet topics on Digg, then the entire system would be screwed, with only the most bland non-controversial stories being able to get through. We don't want a site with lame lowest-common-denominator stories like the latest viral pic or video, so it's clear that something needs to be changed so that even the more controversial stories have a chance of being seen.
All I'm calling for is a check that makes it harder to hide stories as spam if they are getting such huge rates of Diggs.
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -2/+2Obviously not. I have no problem with a mechanism for burying stories and taking them off the front page. My only beef is that the 'spam' burying option is able to override the diggs by many more people, in effect allowing a small group of people to censor Digg of any topic they have a problem with. Seeing the rates of Diggs some of these Paul stories are getting, it's fairly obvious that there are a lot of diggers interested in them, so who are these few self-professed Bury Brigade members, to decide that it's actually spam just because it's about Paul, and that it should be hidden?
- Lukesed, on 11/08/2007, -1/+9Actually burying wasn't just for spam... hence the various options you have when burying a story.
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -8/+1Whether it's caused by the Digg staff actively deleting stories, or their broken spam reporting feature being abused to hide legitimate stories, the end result is the same.
- fuzzmeister, on 11/08/2007, -0/+11People burying stories is not "censorship", it is exactly the way digg is supposed to work. If people like a story, they digg it, and if they don't, they bury it. What is displayed on the front page, therefore, represents the views of the majority of the readership, which is entirely the point of digg.
- D3koy, on 11/06/2007, -1/+9You mean this story: http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Is_Money_Raises_ ...
Currently on Digg's front page... - madroneDorf, on 11/06/2007, -0/+4Unless I'm mistaken, most newspapers write the vast majority of their material the day before they publish it. Hence news that happened on November 5th, most people won't see until the 6th.
Washington Post has it, although NY Times doesnt atm, Its probably because they upload the vast majority of their content for a day between Midnight and 1AM EST. - Arcotik, on 11/06/2007, -3/+3Why the ***** are people being dugg down who are telling you you're wrong? It's been on Digg. It's been in major media. Shut your ***** mouth.
- Inflammo, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1How has that been censored?! It's on the front page of the Drudge Report. That's not very censored
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 11/06/2007, -17/+5I don't see any mention of the massive environmental, welfare, or U.N. frauds on the list.... .buried for standard leftist fear mongering.
- toxicshok, on 11/06/2007, -2/+4those weren't censored
- x083, on 11/08/2007, -8/+8wake up america, wake up america
- iericg, on 11/08/2007, -6/+5What an appropriate article to Digg today :)
- bumblefoot, on 11/08/2007, -4/+30the top 25 stories censored next year?
wtf?- mongoloidplease, on 11/08/2007, -2/+2read them why you can
- nsummy, on 11/07/2007, -3/+171st of all, the original story that crooks and liars links to was on the front page of digg a few weeks ago. I know the submitter had to see that when he submitted this story.
2nd of all, is anyone else confused how they can have a top list of censored stories in 2008 when its still 2007? - leogodin217, on 11/07/2007, -6/+4I'm a little weary of these one sided sites. Whether liberal or conservative, if you only pick on the other side, it is you who should open your eyes.
- D3koy, on 11/08/2007, -3/+7I think the bigger question here is if they can see the future, why don't they do something more productive...like bet huge sums of cash...
- Tempest261, on 11/06/2007, -3/+15Soylent Green is people!
- RobLiefeld, on 11/06/2007, -10/+2It seems a lot of these stories are pure rubbish, I've never heard about any of them. If we believe every story we hear, everyone would never leave their homes. 'Nuff said...
- jonmlm, on 11/06/2007, -1/+5um, isn't it a little ironic that you're complaining about not hearing about censored stories? please tell me you were joking.
- SelfAbortion, on 11/06/2007, -1/+5Uh...maybe you missed the point of Project CENSORED, but the reason you haven't heard about any of them is exactly why they've been posted.
- Divals, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3You've never heard them because they were censored, eh?
- chyperbola, on 11/06/2007, -3/+9Too bad this made front page six days ago.
http://digg.com/politics/Top_25_Censored_Stories_o ... - digbird, on 11/06/2007, -8/+10Dugg down for number sixteen. The fact that that is on the list speaks volumes about the mentality of the people who made it up.
# 16 No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -3/+6I hate stupid 9/11 conspiracy theories but the truth is that the evidence between 9/11 and Bin Laden isn't there. If you look at the FBI most wanted list for the reasons he is wanted, it says he is wanted for the connection between him and the U.S.S. Cole and the first WTC bombing.
- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.h ...
- fuzzmeister, on 11/06/2007, -2/+2He isn't on the FBI most wanted list for 9/11 because he has never been officially indicted for 9/11 in a Federal court. The crimes listed below his name are ones that he has been officially indicted for. I realize you aren't a "truther" per se, but I'll make this argument anyway: don't you think that a government willing to kill 3000 of its own people wouldn't have any qualms about fudging an indictment? Use your minds, people, this isn't evidence of anything but a backlogged FBI.
- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3O.K. where is the evidence that he was behind 9/11. The only thing out there is Osama making allusions that he was the mastermind on videotape much later. It's like he realized how much power he got from it and decided to take credit. Al Qaeda is not a centralized organization. In fact, the term Al Qaeda was coined by US attorneys when prosecuting terrorism cases.
- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -1/+2Yeah because the F.B.I. is too busy to indite someone on the biggest mass murder in U.S. history.
- fuzzmeister, on 11/06/2007, -3/+1Yes, because in the end, it is very unlikely that he will be tried in a US court.
- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1Osama doesn't control every pissed off Arab.
- chillypacman, on 11/06/2007, -1/+0I'm sorry but it's fact the FBI haven't managed to find enough evidence against Bin Laden to charge him on that crime, look at their own website and you'll see the FBI do not want bin laden for 9/11 but other crimes (http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.h ...
If you honestly want to burry it because it supports conspiracy theorists then you're burying the truth for hatred of other peopels opinions rather than for a desire to see the truth. Ultimately you're letting your own personal prejudice get in the way of cold hard fact.
- FriedTurkey, on 11/06/2007, -3/+6I hate stupid 9/11 conspiracy theories but the truth is that the evidence between 9/11 and Bin Laden isn't there. If you look at the FBI most wanted list for the reasons he is wanted, it says he is wanted for the connection between him and the U.S.S. Cole and the first WTC bombing.
- mongoloidplease, on 11/06/2007, -6/+3ITT conspiracy theory *****
- Holosoth, on 11/06/2007, -2/+6Forget neutrality; It's all about making someone look as evil as possible. Democrat and Republican extremists are the problems that drive our country down to hell. The internet is full of them; especially digg.
- huskerdude, on 11/06/2007, -3/+4As soon as I saw this headline, I knew the Paulbots would be descending on the thread to gab about their favorite future also-ran.
- mongoloidplease, on 11/06/2007, -5/+5Top 25 poorly written, selectively researched and biased stories ignored in 2007.
- bigjimslade, on 11/06/2007, -8/+4Thanks God nuts like C&L affiliate themselves with Democrats - it's ammunition like this that can sink their election hopes.
Keep on wearing them, tinfoil-hat boys!- jonmlm, on 11/06/2007, -1/+2i like how the people that are into the real hard core consipiracies out there(world government, microchipping, etc) are conservatives(not republicans, but constitutionalists and alex jones types).. but democrats who talk about ending war and human rights are the ones wearing tinfoil hats? makes me chuckle.
- bingobongony, on 11/06/2007, -4/+7Didn't we already thoroughly mock this when it was posted and spammed to the front page last week? They are not censored, they are just stories thet the wackos misinterpret, or blatantly purposely lie about.
- KaptainKandy, on 11/06/2007, -3/+2Now the question is if they will actually DO anything about it.
- RonObvious, on 11/06/2007, -2/+3Ron Paul killed bin Laden with his bare hands back in 2003. The neocons have been covering that up too!
- fade510, on 11/06/2007, -4/+2dugg for being a good story and because this organization is part of my school.
- sfrench, on 11/06/2007, -2/+1Granola U FTW!
(class of '03)
- sfrench, on 11/06/2007, -2/+1Granola U FTW!
- madroneDorf, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1This is project censored 2006 list, not the 2008 one. (How the ***** could people censor news that hasn't happeend yet?)
Although has some good points, a lot of the stories are nothing but anti-globalist, anti capitalist tripe. - sivsta, on 11/06/2007, -1/+3# 15 Toxic Exposure Can Be Transmitted to Future Generations on a “Second Genetic Code”
- SelfAbortion, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2Still unclear on how a 2008 list exists...is it purely speculative or predictive? Typo? Loik, WTF mate
- smithfly114, on 11/06/2007, -2/+1Go Sonoma State!
- cnot3, on 11/06/2007, -3/+4idk why people bury this *****, if it pisses you off just go in your profile and turn off political news... just like I did with apple.
- endlessoul, on 11/06/2007, -2/+2Nothing against Crooks and Liars, but skip the blog.
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2008/ - Zoshchenko, on 11/06/2007, -0/+2As many times as they repeat it, apparently they really don't know what year it is. Kind of hurts your credibility when you can't get the frickin' year right.
- doofy440, on 11/06/2007, -1/+0I love this series, i have to read the 2007 one for an english class, its time that the media takes over control over the media
- Zenas, on 11/06/2007, -1/+0"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
Alexander Hamilton - a Founding Father of these United States. Our nations was founded on the principle of self defense.
Did you get that? "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents....there is then no resource left....the citizens .....must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
Time to stop being concerned about using violence to defend ourselves and start defending ourselves while we still can. With our 2nd amendment arms. - wramos, on 11/06/2007, -1/+1This website is a shill for liberals, and they lie 10 times worse than conservatives do. Remember liberals are the party of "Do as I say, dont do as I do"
- Treoinmypocket, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1This is dreck. I would love to feel good about a site like this but it is just as politicized as the media it claims to be outing. OK so they have a revelation about Feinstein - good. But, it doesn't serve an educated populace. We should treat our government with suspicion - the WHOLE government. Not just the Republicans or just the Democrats. THAT game has been established for us by the very people so many are rallying around.
Its a ruse.
I really am starting to feel that Jefferson's prediction that we "see a revolution every 20 years" is overdue. Our government is NOT looking out for us it is keeping itself in power.
We still have one trump card. The media and the parties have done such an effective job of telling us its useless we ignore it tho. The write in ballot. Of course it takes organization and money to get people to have someone, ONE someone, to write in but only one third of the voting age people in any election have the power to change whose running things. - BulkHedd, on 11/06/2007, -0/+1Let me summarize:
George Bush _____________________
Dick Cheney ______________________
Condi Rice _______________________
Alberto Gonzales _________________
Fox News _______________________ - mahdaeng, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1So, Project Censored is based in California. Big surprise.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is