It can be a liberative strategy, by allowing one to free oneself from the hegemonic ideologies of the elite. All these things may in fact be true, but the problem with many Left contrarian attacks on the Left is that they are long on posturing and very short on argument, documentation, or critical analysis. Briggs hints at none of these points. There may be valid criticisms of Project Censored's operative concept of censorship, though, having just finished the 1999 Project Censored book, I didn't see anything glaringly problematic. If it has flaws, you won't learn about them from Briggs, and they're dwarfed by the structual flaws in the corporate media system and in Briggs's foolishly contrarian attack.
Censorship is often a subtle, but no less important, phenomenon.
Subtle but important phenomena deserve a more discerning analysis than Mother Jones saw fit to give to Project Censored. And for that they should be ashamed. There's been a lot of talk recently about ethics and integrity in new media, most of it terribly confused, uninformed and incoherent. Obviously everyone has a right to their opinion, but that's no guarantee that their opinion makes a damn bit of sense. Surely most viewers would have figured that out on their own.