I think you raise an interesting point. There are actually TWO problems here. One is that there is possibly a bias based on the content submitter/creator.
But the other is that, people who are followed will naturally get more votes, just because they get more views. Is that a bad thing? I dunno. But what if it got to a point where there were enough different people being followed that the only way onto the first page is by being one of them. That kindof sounds like a problem too.
I understand that some of Digg's changes relate to this second concern. Their issues (I'll admit to limited understanding, so feel free to correct me somebody) relate to their rating algorithm being linked to how 'popular' a contributer is. This naturally weights power users more and pushes their contributions to the front, where they get more views, more votes, and therefore more power.
My (similarly limited) understanding of the HN ranking system is that it's more a factor of time and votes - ie, the question of who contributed is not relevant to the ranking system, only to all of us users who decide which articles to read and vote on, which brings us back to the original question.
But the other is that, people who are followed will naturally get more votes, just because they get more views. Is that a bad thing? I dunno. But what if it got to a point where there were enough different people being followed that the only way onto the first page is by being one of them. That kindof sounds like a problem too.