NewsGuard, the self-appointed arbitrator of internet stability, appears poised to distribute some more of its unique misinformation—this day about George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley.
Turley exposed NewsGuard’s obvious ideas in a Saturday row for The Hill. The headed professor of law went over a new conversation he received from the assessments company in” The Most Chilling Words Now: I’m from NewsGuard and I Am These Rating You.” The for-profit business” came knocking,” according to Turley, about a fortnight after he had written an earlier row for The Hill where he had criticized NewsGuard as having “pro-Democrat and left-wing bias.”
NewGuard had decided to then examine jonathanturley.org%2F2024%2F07%2F15%2Felon-musk-is-right-end-the-online-censorship-racket%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cdallott%40thehill.com%7C46c0c582e2a54ae521ef08dcada958e0%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C1%7C0%7C638576191408603239%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=605IxJuk8fdzC%2B13RElb0%2BWucajRNTneoelR6YV20Nc%3D&reserved=0″ target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>Res Ipsa, the website the law professor visitors at jonathanturley. nonprofit, Turley explained. That alone is interested, because many of the articles posted at jonathanturley.org%2F2024%2F07%2F15%2Felon-musk-is-right-end-the-online-censorship-racket%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cdallott%40thehill.com%7C46c0c582e2a54ae521ef08dcada958e0%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C1%7C0%7C638576191408603239%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=605IxJuk8fdzC%2B13RElb0%2BWucajRNTneoelR6YV20Nc%3D&reserved=0″ target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>Res Ipsa have been published by other NewsGuard-rated sources, such as The Hill and the Wall Street Journal. Beyond that truth and the dubious schedule of NewsGuard’s decision to review the rules professor’s writings, the questions posed were “bizarre”, as Turley explained.
For instance, why would he call his blog” Res Ipsa Liquitur]sic ] – the thing itself speaks”. Had you explain the reason to this non-lawyer?”” Res etiam loquitur is defined in the folder as’ The item itself speaks,’ which I think speaks for itself,” Turley quipped.
While one may grin off that absurd, typo-infused question, NewsGuard’s mentoring to Turley included a much more concerning and, as the law professor stressed”, revealing “inquiry.
As is apparent from your articles,” I don’t find any information on the website that may indicate to readers that the app’s content reflects a conservative or liberal standpoint.” Why is this viewpoint never made public to let visitors know the project’s point of view? Professor Turley was questioned by the NewsGuard critic.
As he noted in his The Hill op-ed on Saturday, Turley has” previously been criticized as a democratic, liberal or a liberal depending on the particular op-eds.”” I truly admit to liberal viewpoints,” Turley continued”, though I hold some conventional liberal views. For instance, I have been vocal for decades in prefer same-sex relationship, environmental protection, free speech and other personal rights. I am a documented Democrat who has frequently defended writers, activists, and scientists on the left for decades in both editorial and legal circles.
Turley added that “his site has thousands of comments that span the intellectual spectrum.” ” He has” criticized Trump in the past,” the George Washington University law professor added, while also refusing to” suspend ]his ] legal judgment when cases touch on the interests of conservatives or Donald Trump. ” It’s another indication NewsGuard deigns itself not only the arbiter of reality, but also of a law writer’s political or policy-oriented opinions.
NewsGuard’s efforts to categorize Turley’s different intellectual views as conventional or libertarian—and therefore to believe him to incorrectly brand himself for his readers—perfectly illustrates a fundamental deficiency in NewsGuard’s business model: NewsGuard relies on employees and a Board of Advisors hailing from the so-called” mainstream media. ” NewsGuard’s Board of Advisors, which serves as subject-matter experts for the for-profit enterprise, is also heavily stacked with former government officials.
Thus, those conducting or assisting in NewsGuard’s reviews of new media outlets bring an establishment perspective and a siloed knowledge base to their work, making them particularly unsuited to assess the reliability of the alternative press. That fundamental flaw replaces any alleged attempt by NewsGuard to operate apolitically and without bias.
There is an even more fundamental problem with NewsGuard’s self-proclaimed unbiased ratings. It comes from the secretive method it employs to choose the articles for review. Here, another recent outreach by NewsGuard illustrates the deficiency—and this one appears purposeful.
Last week, NewsGuard contacted The Federalist’s CEO Sean Davis to inquire about Davis’s post on X that followed President Joe Biden’s sight-unseen announcement on the social media platform that he would not run for re-election”. Do we have any proof that Biden is still alive right now? ” Davis queried.
” I just wanted to ask on what basis he made the aforementioned comment,” a News Verification Reporter for NewsGuard noted, seeking” clarity/context” for the post.
Why, then, did NewsGuard choose Davis ‘ position from the millions of dollars made daily on X? Did NewsGuard conduct similar inquiries for publications that promoted Democratic talking points about former president Donald Trump rather than posing questions about the then-still-unknown president?
For instance, did NewsGuard ask Reuters about its Sunday post on X of an out-of-context comment Trump made during a rally that” in four years, you do n’t have to vote again”? While saying that Donald Trump’s remarks were n’t” clear what he meant by them,” Reuters still defended the statement as supporting Democrats ‘ claim that Trump was” a threat to democracy.”
Did NewsGuard question Reuters about what it meant by its article? Is NewsGuard examining all the outlets that falsely portray Trump’s statements as evidence of dictatorial tendencies as opposed to an inclination for low-propensity voters to drag themselves to the polls this time? What about outlets like Newsweek, which reported” Donald Trump might not have been shot after all”? Were they on the receiving end of NewsGuard’s inquisitorial emails? If not, why not?
Despite its claims of transparency, NewsGuard has refrained from explaining how it chooses how many articles to evaluate per outlet and how it chooses its content review process. NewsGuard can manipulate its ratings because there is n’t a random and proportionate media survey.
Want to make sure The Washington Post and The New York Times receive positive reviews? Avoid reading any of their articles about the Covid-19 or the Russia collusion hoax. By ignoring the false and misleading coverage of Trump’s assignment attempt, which was initially seen by many outlets as a fall, NewsGuard can continue to guarantee favored outlets ‘ top reliability ratings.
Without any transparency regarding how and why NewsGuard chooses posts or articles for review, as well as information about the relative number of materials that are evaluated by outlets, NewsGuard’s ratings lack all credibility and are best described as GIGO—garbage in, garbage out.
Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. Margot’s work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge. Cleveland was a full-time faculty member before switching to a teaching adjunct position. Additionally, Cleveland serves as a lawyer for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. You can follow Cleveland on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland to learn more about her most cherished accomplishments, including her husband and son. Cleveland’s views are those expressed here in her personal capacity.
