If You’ve not heard of NewsGuard, Lee Fang, writing at RealClear Wire – which (thank you!) shares its content with independent media like the ‘Grok, had some less than flattering observations about the service.
Instead of merely suggesting rebuttals to untrustworthy information, as many other existing anti-misinformation groups provide, NewsGuard has built a business model out of broad labels that classify entire news sites as safe or untrustworthy, using an individual grading system producing what it calls “nutrition labels.” The ratings – which appear next to a website’s name on the Microsoft Edge browser and other systems that deploy the plug-in – use a scale of zero to 100 based on what NewsGuard calls “nine apolitical criteria,” including “gathers and presents information responsibly” (worth 18 points), “avoids deceptive headlines” (10 points), and “does not repeatedly publish false or egregiously misleading content” (22 points), etc.
Critics note that such ratings are entirely subjective – the New York Times, for example, which repeatedly carried false and partisan information from anonymous sources during the Russiagate hoax, gets a 100% rating.
Read the whole piece for more detail, then feel free to guess what they are about, but yesterday, they were about reaching out to me. (Dun, DUN, DUUUNNNNNNNNN!)
Mr. McDonald,
My name is John Gregory, health editor at NewsGuard. We publish written reviews of news and information websites’ credibility and transparency and seek on-the-record comments from the sites that we rate out of fairness and for the benefit of readers.
In rating GraniteGrok.com, I had questions about specific claims made in articles on the site, including claims about the 2020 elections, Nikki Haley’s presidential eligibility, COVID vaccines, Jan. 6, and Sept. 11, as well as questions about the site’s approach to correcting errors, labeling of advertising, and the use of pseudonyms by some of the site’s writers.Would you be available for a phone interview to answer our questions? If you prefer, I can also send my questions via email. Thank you for your time.
Best regards, John Gregory
john.gregory@newsguardtech.com
Office: (312) 489-8676
More about NewsGuard criteria here.
I wasn’t interested in spending time on the phone with another organ of the censorship state who had no intention of treating what we do in any fair or unbiased light, but I did make time to write a quick reply.
Mr. Gregory, thanks for reaching out, but a phone call won’t be necessary. I believe I can clarify all of this in a quick email.
We are a political opinion site focused on limited government and maximized individual liberty. The writers are all citizens and volunteers. They offer their thoughts freely and for free. We do not tell them what to think, write, or say. This means our contributors – including those who cannot use their names for fear of retribution – have a right to get things wrong.
We provide a minimum of editing and formatting but little else than the platform itself and encourage the community of authors, commenters, lurkers, the odd troll, and even would-be fact-checkers to challenge everything if they can – in comments, written rebuttals, and opposing op-eds for publication.
We welcome civil, open debate, edit or delete inappropriate “adult language,” and ban anyone who infers direct physical threat or harm to any individual or group.
Our goal has always been to encourage free speech in all its messy and glorious wonder from anyone and everyone and – per our FAQ – hold no one else responsible for other people’s words.
I’m sure that’s not precisely something NewsGuard’s rating system will chew easily, but we appreciate the outreach and look forward to writing about whatever comes of it.
I’m sure we’re not their cup of tea and, as such, will be branded as untrustworthy or rated poorly, but that’s who we are and what we are about. We accept opinion pieces, share our thoughts about other people’s thoughts, and expect the audience to weigh in whichever way their wind blows. The sum is impossible to calculate unless you accept that the comments are as much part of the experience as the piece itself.
A work in progress started by whatever the author wrote.
If that labels us as anything but a defender of free speech, we’ll be happy to promote whatever rating we get like we did when the SPLC labeled us as anti-government—an absurd notion, given that we’ve always got some number of contributors and commenters … who are in the damn government.
I’ll keep you posted, or better yet, you keep me posted. This is, after all, a team effort, and we wouldn’t want to do it without you.
