I'll admit that I often post in anger about digg and about the blogosphere. Why? Because I've never seen so much shit thrown around since the last time I went t

I'll admit that I often post in anger about digg and about the blogosphere. Why? Because I've never seen so much shit thrown around since the last time I went to the monkey cage at a zoo. Pretty well every fact about the early origins of digg has been misrepresented. I've somewhat gotten past the personal insult in that. Now I'm just insulted by the fact that the promise of "democratizing the news" has been hijacked. What we had before was, if more expensive, better. There was more integrity, more craftmanship, more creativity. Here's a classic example: http://www.statesman.com/business/content/business/stories/technology/2009/07/20/0720plugged.html http://www.statesman.com/business/content/business/stories/t.... I'm sure that Mike Maples isn't a complete moron, nor completely dishonest, but somebody give me an explanation for "When I invested in Digg, Kevin Rose had started the company for $1,500 over a weekend." I was there. None of that is in anyway accurate. Just the fact that Mike Maples, reporters and editors at that particular publication are willing to say it's true says a whole lot about corruption and dishonesty. How can they even call themselves "The Statesman?"