Not as much as you'd think, and it's a VERY slippery slope.

I bet there was arm-twisting/censorship/WHY behind the scenes. The estimate came from BP, there's no reason that information should have gone strictly to the White House, there are excellent reasons it should have gone to financial markets etc. With a red-hot story like this, it's hard to believe news organizations would not have direct contacts with BP. So, who told BP not to talk directly to the press?

>Without defending what happened in this case surely there's a very big difference between a government that chooses to withhold information from the media and one that actively prevents/controls what the media can publish?
>
>>I'm trying to recall what it is called when the government controls (censors) the media and the release of information to the public? Oh that's right: (comment withheld to avoid antagonizing the sensitive, ok, decided to go ahead: Fascism - although that can be a part of communism as well)
>>
>>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101006/ap_on_re_us/us_gulf_oil_spill_2
>>
>>I guess providing the information to the public on the worst case scenario of the number of gallons released (which came to pass anyway) would have been what, a national security threat?
>>
>>Where is Dragan and his conspiracy theories? They are coming true...