Skip to content

Wake Up America Banned From Digg, Are Obama Supporters to Blame?

August 19, 2008

 Crossposted on Grizzly Groundswell


By Mr.Pink Eyes

By Mr.Pink Eyes

Some of you may have noticed over the last few days that the little “digg this” icon that used to appear on my posts is missing. It is not because I no longer wish to have my posts “dugg”, it is because digg no longer wants anything to do with me.

 Last week I tried to access my account on Digg and found out that my account has been suspended and that the decision is final and irreversible. I have been banned from digg. Me, just a nobody with an opinion who happens to write about his opinions on the internet.

 Anybody who has visited digg knows that it is a bastion of liberal intolerance, so this is not really surprising. I tried to get another point of view on their site, but I have been silenced. Only in America, huh?

 The part of this that bothers me is that on August 5th I posted an article about President Obama’s supporters who were reporting websites that were anti-Obama as spam and getting them shut down. Ten days later I am no longer allowed on digg, I was reported as submitting spam. What a coincidence. The only crime that I committed was posting conservative articles on a liberal website, if that is spam so be it.

 Needless to say, when I received the email explaining to me why I was banned and that I could never be reinstated as a digg contributor I fired off a reply that after several versions was cleaned up quite a bit. In this reply I accused them of considering a conservative viewpoint spam, and asked them if it could possible have been Barack Obama supporters that got me banned. I will be interesting to read their reply, if they do.

  On August 12th I posted an article about how the fairness doctrine may be used to control web content if the Democrats widen their majority in the house and senate and Obama becomes president. My fear was misplaced as I didn’t even have to wait that long, it is happening right now. It has happened to me.

 My first amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press have been violated. I have no voice on digg any longer but you do. I ask everyone to stand up and shout, get your voices on digg, don’t let them silence the conservative agenda. We need to be heard. Please flood digg with conservative articles, they can’t shut every conservative account down, can they?

 If you are up to it submit my articles to digg, don’t let them infringe on my rights, let my voice be heard. Don’t let them silence me. I am an American dammit and I have a right to be heard!

 Where is the ACLU when you need them?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

16 Comments leave one →
  1. silencer permalink
    August 19, 2008 8:36 pm

    “My first amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press have been violated.”

    First of all, DIGG isn’t an American’s only club.
    Secondly you have the ability to express your opinion because I just read it, so your first amendment rights are intact.
    Thirdly, how dare you invoke the constitution because you got banned from a website.
    People have the right NOT to listen to you, but you seem to think shouting in people’s ear is acceptable free speech.
    No, you cannot post everything you want on sites you do not own.
    That is a violation of everyone else’s freedom.
    Deal with it.


  2. August 19, 2008 8:42 pm

    There was some sarcasm intended in that statement. Do you really think that I consider myself part of the press?


  3. Terrant permalink
    August 19, 2008 10:14 pm

    The irony of it is that if the fairness doctrine was in place, you would be able to use it to get back on. I never had much respect for them and the Slashdot crowd (Ars Techica is more moderate and better researched).


  4. Terrant permalink
    August 19, 2008 10:15 pm

    Fyi… Ars had an interesting article about fairness doctrine recently.


  5. August 20, 2008 9:19 am

    Good point Terrant, reinstate the fairness doctrine! 🙂


  6. Some Guy permalink
    August 20, 2008 5:39 pm

    Firstly, you’re giving your opinion here, so none of your rights about free speech have been broken (not that they necessarily apply anyway, you’re on private property where your rights can be curtailed). Secondly, you have no right to demand a private website advertise you, why on earth would you? I agree from digg’s system it should be down to the users what gets viewed,. but this is digg’s issue nto yours, and if it is such a loss that conservative websties are no longer posted then people will go elsewhere for their news.


  7. August 20, 2008 6:26 pm

    Again, I was using sarcasm. I understand that a private business can regulate their business the way that they see fit. Just as a private company should be able to allow smoking if they want to, yet that right is being taken away from them.
    It seems that whenver the law is applied to someone that they claim that their rights are being violated, so I claimed that my rights were violated. Doesn’t anyone see the irony here, the sarcasm intended. I guess it just doesn’t translate well to the written word, at least as I am able to type it.

    However I am in favor of everyone submitting my articles to digg, please do!


  8. Name Required permalink
    August 20, 2008 6:46 pm

    Did you ever think to read the Digg FAQ?

    # Does Digg differentiate between spam and spamming?
    Spam is very subjective. Many times, the spammer honestly doesn’t think they are spammers, so we generally leave that up to the Digg community to decide with the report/bury feature. We may delete users who blatantly and consistently submit obvious spam. Additionally, comment spam is against our TOS and will result in an account ban or deletion, depending on the severity. Submission spamming is different because it may be quality content but the submitter is “spamming” every story from their blog/site. While we welcome users to submit their own content, overdoing it often incites the users to mark the user as a spammer, the site as a spam site, and otherwise decent content as blogspam. We recommend considering this before you engage in this activity. Remember, if domains are consistently buried and reported as spam, the site may be banned.

    When I look in Google I see YOU have submitted 134 of your own writings from this site to Digg since April 1st of last year.

    And THAT is what got you banned from Digg. Maybe you should have read their FAQ earlier.

    And as others have pointed out, your statement “I am an American dammit and I have a right to be heard!” is wrong. No one has a right to be heard. You can speak all you want and everyone is perfectly within their rights to ignore you. You cannot come into someones living room and practice your free speech at your discretion. I suggest you actually read the US Constitution.


  9. August 21, 2008 10:08 pm

    well, digg is mainly a popularity contest anyway, huh?

    sorry to hear about your experience there.


  10. August 22, 2008 10:26 pm

    Name Required, for the third and final time, IT WAS SARCASM! I thought that my final sentence about the ACLU would make people realize this, I guess I was wrong.
    Thanks though for the explaination, I had a feeling that is why I was banned. I have been emailing digg about my banning and they have been very vague with me so far.


  11. Oatlord permalink
    September 4, 2008 11:37 pm

    Seriously, your first amendment rights weren’t violated at all. That’s just ridiculous. Digg nor any other website on the internet is required to post your blog, and revoking your access to their sites is wholly their decision.

    Having said that, I find it interesting that liberals (who so obviously control Digg) are so afraid to read or even see opposing viewpoints of their own. According to them, they’re intelligent, thoughtly people, so why be so afraid to see or hear the opposite side?


  12. September 5, 2008 4:17 am

    Sarcasm was meant, I thought the line about the ACLU would have made people see the sarcasm, but I was wrong. I was srceaming about my rights as a play on all those people who claim their rights have been violated every time something doesn’t go theis way.
    Good point about liberalsthough.


  13. September 8, 2008 5:18 pm

    I believe Digg deletes accounts of people(they actually had good reason to delete me) whose commentary may affect their bottom line. All the people deleted for negative Katie Couric commentary are a prime example. It had nothing to do with Diggs view on the nature of the commentary, Digg simply did not want Katie to decided she was done with Digg. Digg does not want to piss off the people whose presence allows them to monetize the site. In the end it is all about dollars plain and simple.

    Confessions Of A Banned Digger


  14. September 8, 2008 7:36 pm

    I finally got them to send me the link that caused them to ban me. The link they sent me was a spam link, but I never posted it. I still think that I was banned for posting anti-Obama stuff.


  15. September 16, 2008 1:50 pm

    I, too, have been banned from Digg because of the “SMEAR LIST” on my website. The Smear List is where I add links to the profiles of radical digg liberals who employ smear tactics on digg, in addition to a host of other things, such as digging 20 stories a minute, submitting only HuffPo spam, wishing for McCain/ Palin to be killed, etc.

    I guess Digg didn’t like the fact that I am taking a stand against radical diggers. If you would like to take a look at my smear list, then just head over to my blog at It’s under the pages category to the right. I also have a page up which could help you get back on Digg EVEN if they have banned your IP. I hope you find my blog useful.

    Take care Sir.


  16. TJay permalink
    September 16, 2008 4:16 pm

    Name required,
    “No one has a right to be heard.”

    You, my friend, are the one who is wrong. Everyone has the right to be heard. The forum, however, where this constitutional right is protected is the court of law.

    Sarcasm aside, perhaps Mr PinkEyes meant to invoke another absolute right of every American citizen; the right to voice an opinion on whatever the issue might be and to expect this right to be respected and protected by the constitution. Another person’s website is not an arena where this individual right can be exercised and thereby defended by any person other than the owner of the site, however, and back to the original article, this same right to voice an opinion is allotted to every website owner out there and if some other individual or group who disagreed with that opinion was able to have the site shut down then that IS unconstitutional.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: