Cease and desist letters are flying back and forth between candidates and lobby groups (such as the National Rifle Association), as well as between media outlets and the Obama and McCain campaign machines.
Legal action is apparently being regularly threatened over a broad area.
After a failed attempt to allegedly buy internet censorship, Obama has relied on a number of websites in his attempt to control this spin.
His Fight the Smears site asks for help in spreading the 'truth' about political rumours and falsehoods.
However, his supporters appear to be going a little overboard and are apparently attempting to censor what goes up on the Internet.
As a Wikipedia discussion points out in relation to the Obama-Ayers matter (raised again by Palin on the weekend):
It's clear this is a hot potato, but something has to be done about Obama/Ayers wording. Look over the last few days and you'll see sections and sentences about Obama appear and disappear. Some of the wordings are clear vandalism, or, at best, provocations, but even short, sober mentions of a controversy has been removed.
The topic is not without interest or published material to work with. Today the NYT published a front page article on the Obama/Ayers relationship—the overall thrust of which cannot cheer Obama's detractors, but which spends some column inches investigating the relationship. And Sarah Palin made it a campaign issue. Yet the Bill Ayers page has no mention of the principle reason most people will be visiting it in the weeks to come.
Image from TinyPic
Which raises an obvious question - if Obama wins the White House will the harpies he has unleashed still try to censor what is said about him out in hyperspace and is that what he really intends/condones?