Why is Digg Censoring an Article on Defeating Censorship?
Have you heard of digg? It’s the social news site that lets people “vote” for what should be on the front page. Or, in their words:
Digg is a technology news website that combines social bookmarking, blogging, RSS, and non-hierarchical editorial control. With digg, users submit stories for review, but rather than allow an editor to decide which stories go on the homepage, the users do.
Digg has quickly grown because of the revolutionary idea of letting users decide what goes on the homepage. But do they really let users select which stories make the front page, or do they censor some articles without reason?
As I’ve seen in the past week, they censor articles without reason.
It started with a story written by a friend on Defeating Censorship. I posted the story to digg, thinking it would be relevant, as there had been a whole lot of news that week on Google’s censorship in China, and the censorship of sites questioning Scientology in the US. By the next day my account was deleted.
I didn’t know it then, but censorship is a touchy topic with the people over at digg. They had been publicly shown to censor articles a few months earlier by the guys over at slashdot.
Now, why would they bury my article and delete my account? The origional article was focused on helping the people of China access information about Democracy. But by showing how to circumvent censorship, we also showed how badly digg was censoring their articles.
The net was meant to be free. As in free speech. People in charge of major amounts of internet traffic should not be able to censor entire portions of the net. Digg is abusing their newfound internet popularity for their own misdeeds. They need to know the users of the internet will not tolerate censorship. If you already have a digg account, start asking why they censor news. Post links to this page, and we’ll build a collection of censored digg articles. I know I’m not the only one.
You can see my buried article on digg here.
Please pass this on to anyone you know who uses digg or believes in freedom of speech on the net!
Related Posts:
June 21st, 2006 05:43
Boo Hoo, The internet is a privilage not a right. The fact is your articles were more than likely marked as spam which would ban your account.
June 21st, 2006 07:15
b0n0, This is not just a flame, this is why I think your story was buried and your account deleted. You posted to your own blog, that is considered spam on Digg and enough people marked it as spam that it got buried. When a story gets buried as spam the account gets deleted to prevent further spamming. This was all automated and their was no “censorship” at all. Secondly, although some people have made the front page with links to their blog, they had quality content that could not be found elsewhere. You posted about using TOR and many other things that any digger already knows about AND you had many inaccuracies. Plus, I am not justifying this just stating well known fact about digg users. Diggers report sites that, in their opinion, “make their eyes bleed”. I think the site linked to could use a lot of design work and I think that is a main reason people decide to report your story, and since you posted to your own blog, they reported it as spam.
June 21st, 2006 07:31
By the way your new account is also going to get deleted if you keep linking to this post in comments on stories that have nothing to do with this. Again, it is not sensorship, you are just trolling. I either expect a response from you on why my assumption on how you got banned is incorrect or else you should remove this post and stop linking it in comments on Digg, otherwise you are just doing this to gain traffic which IS spam. I have talked with K Rose and I believe him that it is totally community moderated (Why would Digg “sensor” your story and not the many others talking about how to do the exact same thing.people like you are enforcing untrue rumers about Digg but if you truly didn’t realise why people reported your post you can help stop the rumers by admitting you made a mistake.
June 21st, 2006 08:00
I will agree with you and disagree at the same time.
Yes they don’t like those that spam. Some consider me as such yet they let me live… Why…
It is because I am a bonafide accredited news agency. I do have a personal blog on the site also and it does have very relative and noteworthy content on it. Yet that I never post on Digg. They know it is there and many read it. Now as far as my other content, well many there still wont digg my articles even though I may be the first to break the story. But that is ok, that is their right. I do not place every article on digg either, just what I believe will be great interest. Now one may not think so by looking at the few that do digg. Yet my Urchin stats say otherwise to that fact. We started about six months ago because we were sick and tired of all the half ass full of ads articles. I provide richer content with more graphics 80 percent of the time. No matter how much they dislike me at times, they also know this to be true. Many in private have spoke to me about the agency and also apologized for not digging more. That is ok as I tell them, one day they will be coming and getting the stories themself from us. Which brings me to another point. SFL ORG. News Center is not just one person such as yourself. We also receive embargoed and late breaking news before the general public. Yes they are a bunch of whiners over there, but for some odd reason I still like them, must be a gluten for punishment I guess!. What I don’t understand is the way you went about matters over there. If you want your articles seen then find other methods. Hate to tell you this, but I would have and would in the future stand behind them on this one… Damn I hate myself for saying that! But it is true. Good luck and success I wish for you.
Heidi-Ann Kennedy
Director
SFL ORG. News Center
June 21st, 2006 11:44
omggg digg is censoring teh free internets!!!1 :’( :’( :’( :’( :’( HLEP!!!!!11
June 21st, 2006 12:38
Trogdoor,
What you say would make sense, except for the fact that I was dugg a week earlier. With the exact same site. The post wasn’t even close to spam, and there was nothing spammy about it. Look at some of the engadget posts that make it to the front page for spam. I’m convinced this article was buried because the digg editors don’t approve. Oh yea, the article has 103 diggs now =( … so much for democracy of news
June 21st, 2006 12:58
[...] Help me fight back against internet censorship by posting any articles you see digg bury. You can post them at my blog, where they’ll be kept free of ads, and without censorship of any sort. Lets stop the people who would control the flow of information on the net together. [...]
June 21st, 2006 13:19
“Trogdoor,
What you say would make sense, except for the fact that I was dugg a week earlier. With the exact same site. The post wasn’t even close to spam, and there was nothing spammy about it. Look at some of the engadget posts that make it to the front page for spam. I’m convinced this article was buried because the digg editors don’t approve. Oh yea, the article has 103 diggs now =( … so much for democracy of news”
No, but what is spammy is the fact that, with your new user ( and likely your old one to although I can’t check that as easily ), EVERY comment you have made has had either a link to your site or a link to one of your stories.
http://digg.com/users/b0n0/comments
You spam your stories that much and people will start blocking you, enough people block you and your account gets deleted. Don’t spam and you won’t get ’sensored’.
June 21st, 2006 13:46
Trog, sorry to burst your bubble, but that wasn’t the account that got deleted. Obviously, that account is a new one. Search for burningion. Cheers.
June 21st, 2006 14:12
“Trog, sorry to burst your bubble, but that wasn’t the account that got deleted. Obviously, that account is a new one. Search for burningion. Cheers.” read my post, I know that is the new one I just couldn’t as easily check all of your comments as burningion because your account has been deleted so there is no comments page. But sure if you want me to I will google for pages on Digg with burningion in them and get back to you.
June 21st, 2006 14:18
Whell I just looked and it seems you were spamming your links in your comments as burningion also. How did I guess?
June 21st, 2006 14:49
Trog,
I find that hard to believe, as a search on the digg site for the user burningion turns up no results.
June 21st, 2006 14:53
It is a pet peve of mine when people make tall accusations like yours without any evidence when there are many more reasonable explanations ( you can’t deny that you were linking to your own page and that, on digg, constitutes spam.). Please try to look at other possabilities before making wild calaims, you will only end up making a fool of yourself.
On another note, reguarding the article you linked to, try Anonym.OS. It has many more features, and is much more secure as it is idependent of the operating system ( if the PC you are running it on has a software keylogger or is infected with spyware it won’t matter because you aren’t using the compromized OS ) it also runs completely in RAM, never touches the hard drive, so when you are done with it it leaves absolutely no trace. If you are looking for a thumb drive solution you can try Damn small linux with which you can bundle all of the OSS that you mentioned in the article and can be either be run within windows ( it comes with a preconfigured virtual machine) or you can boot it directly and since it is only 50 meg, you have plenty of other room for files. The other advantage of this is that you can have your prefered OS settings along with you favorite applications and, again, it is MUCH more secure.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/anonym-os/
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
June 21st, 2006 14:55
Again, READ MY COMMENT. I didn’t search on digg, I searched on google http://www.google.com/search?q=burningion%20site:digg.com
June 21st, 2006 20:36
OK if you don’t believe me that they are not trying to sensor your article ( again why would they even care about your article it doesn’t help Digg any to supress it ) submit the article again and this time DON”T LINK TO IT IN YOUR COMMENTS. Watch as it makes the front page. Also, next time you submit a story, look at digg spy http://digg.com/spy to see who is reporting your story and why. Unless you deny deny spamming your link in your comments ( weather YOU saw it as spam or not ) or you somehow don’t believe that that sort of thing will get people to start blocking you ( you were on my blocked list ) then, again, you should correct this article. Please tell me what I am missing because this seems pretty cut and dry to me and yet you still wont agknowlage the facts. You spammed, you got blocked, your post got reported, your post got buried and your account deleted all through the democracy / mob rule that is Digg.
June 22nd, 2006 00:02
I reposted the article as you suggested. It was burried in half an hour.
http://www.digg.com/security/Exhaustive_Guide_to_Circumventing_Censorship
No comment spam. Again, I ask you what you think? Is this not censorship? Why don’t you try posting it?
June 22nd, 2006 01:57
“I reposted the article as you suggested. It was burried in half an hour.
http://www.digg.com/security/Exhaustive_Guide_to_Circumventing_Censorship
No comment spam. Again, I ask you what you think? Is this not censorship? Why don’t you try posting it? ”
PLEASE READ MY COMMENTS MORE THAN ONCE IF YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING. I didn’t say to look for comments calling it spam, I asked you to watch digg spy, I even gave you the link, http://digg.com/spy and yet you didn’t do it. And now since you have already posted it again if it gets posted a third time it will definitely be marked as a dupe. Congratulations, you have ruined a good chance to actually find out why your post was being buried. Heck, if what you are saying is true you just missed out on proving me wrong by showing that it was not getting reported.
But none the less, let me quote someone commenting on your post
“If it was shite, it got more “non-diggs” then the 107 diggs it garnered. The number of diggs is not the only criteria. The voting contiues even after it gets to the fp and once there, it gets MUCH more attention and “critiquing”. If the “non-diggs” outweigh the diggs, it gets shit canned, even if it made it to the fp in the first place.
I am not saying it was shite, I am simply saying that this isn’t a 2 state question. The question is not “My article should be on the fp or digg censors”. There is much more to the equation.”
Have you noticed that NOBODY is agreeing with you that it is censorship? There are other, better, explanations. You are the only one who thinks this is a case of censorship and you have no evidence to back up your claim. If you are going to make such bold statements, and actually convince anyone that this is censorship, YOU NEED PROVE. All of the facts are against you, admittedly they do not prove your theory wrong ( because you didn’t watch digg spy ) but they certainly aren’t in your favor.
Tell me, how can you be sure this is censorship? If you can’t be sure then how do you justify writing a slanderous article about it?
June 22nd, 2006 03:12
trog,
I looked at digg spy after I submitted it. I got one digg, someone started posting comments, and then it disappeared. That was it. You are the only person disagreeing with me. Except for the digg lurkers on Netscape Beta. There are more articles there supporting Digg than digg has…
June 22nd, 2006 03:42
You still have not shown any prove nor any reason why Digg would sensor you. There have been other, (IMHO better) articles on digg many times before that outlined solutions for opressive governments and specifically the great firewall of China. Here is one example http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Anonym.OS
And were are these people that are supporting you that YOUR case is censorship. Yes, I know that there are other conspiracy theorists that believe that Digg sensors articles ( mostly just jaded diggers that can’t understand how thier amazing blog post isn’t considered front page worthy ) but I am not talking about them. Show me one other person that, after knowing that you spammed your link, were submitting your own blog post, and that the article was just a bad rehash of information that has been on digg many times before, still believe that Kevin Rose decided he just had a personal vendetta agianst you and for no aparent reason censored your post post but let others detailing the the same tools, tor, privoxy, hiddeen partitions, for the same goals of getting passed government firewalls and protecting your privacy, just hit the front page, get hundreds of Diggs, and ruin his master plan over keeping chinese from knowing the truth.
Do you know how the promotion and anti spam algorythms work? Is there anyone that benefits by sensoring your tiny blog? Does anyone else reading disagree with me?
June 22nd, 2006 03:44
By the way sorry for the spelling / run on sentence.
June 22nd, 2006 21:19
Hey, look what just popped up on digg http://digg.com/software/Chinese_Citizens_Using_Censor-Proof_Browser_To_Bypass_Government_Controls
I guess they are going to want to censor this too aren’t they?
June 27th, 2006 18:56
trog,
The article you pointed to is misleading. That software does not actually defeat censorship. It only has a proxy feature that allows its users to use a proxy to circumvent the most basic versions of censorship. My approach is much more sophisticated.
June 29th, 2006 20:12
Digg has some kick ass links to articles about censorship and how to avoid it:
http://www.digg.com/search?search=firewall+china
The one about defeating China’s firewall got 6oo diggs.
Cool articles BTW.
July 1st, 2006 00:18
“trog,
The article you pointed to is misleading. That software does not actually defeat censorship. It only has a proxy feature that allows its users to use a proxy to circumvent the most basic versions of censorship. My approach is much more sophisticated. ”
And what do you think of http://www.digg.com/linux_unix/Anonym.OS. I would say that thier approach is MUCH more sofisticated than yours and easier / more convinient for the user. Remember that if you are really paranoid about security you probably don’t want to be running a proprietary operating system that may have backdoors built in or spyware unknowingly installed. Anonym.OS has all the censorship busting advantages of your article and then some ( name one feature your article has that it doesn’t ).
February 3rd, 2007 16:17
Your article is very informative and helped me further.
Thanks, David
November 16th, 2007 04:37
raccnacari
December 20th, 2007 07:31
I would like to see a continuation of the topic