Posted on 09/20/2024 6:02:32 AM PDT by marktwain
NewsGuard, a service that rates adherence to basic principles of good journalism, gives this website its highest possible score. Yet the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a British organization that aims to steer advertisers away from disreputable websites, claims Reason is one of the 10 "riskiest" online news sources in the United States.
The stark contrast between those two assessments illustrates the challenge of defining "disinformation," an increasingly nebulous concept that invites subjective judgments driven by political allegiances and policy preferences. That problem is especially acute when the government demands that websites take steps to curtail "disinformation," portraying it as a grave threat to public health, democracy, and national security.
The GDI, which receives financial support from the National Endowment for Democracy, purports to offer "neutral" estimates of the likelihood that a website will promote disinformation. Counterintuitively, its "risk" ratings do not require any actual examples of inaccurate reporting, let alone deliberate misrepresentations.
The GDI ratings are instead based on 16 "indicators" under two "pillars": "content" and "operations." The organization says Reason's "high" risk rating was due to a lack of explicitly stated policies regarding "authorship attribution," fact checking, corrections, and moderation of reader comments.
The GDI emphasizes that its "content" judgments are based on a sample of articles that reviewers analyze without knowing the source or author, which it says helps "maintain nuance and neutrality." But several of the "indicators" require judgments that are bound to be influenced by the reviewers' personal opinions.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Essentially, it comes down to: We like what these guys say, and we don't like what these other guys say.
Trust us! We are experts!
Yep.
I don’t care if it’s well defined, you don’t censor.
No different than the Nazis banning Germans from listening to foreign radio broadcasts.
What is “disinformation to the RATS is the truth to everyone else on the planet.
NewsGuard is an extremely bad group and Communist based...
Whoever is in power determines what is and what isn’t disinformation.
Although,there would likely be only one party.
Perhaps disguised as 2 parties.
You know what some call a uni-party.
Oherwise,the real purpose of a “anti” disinformation campaign (a long with the left’s sham democracy) is to CONTROL the masses.
‘experts’? There’s that word again!
Car dealers have more credibility
Exactly. Control the information people can access, and you control the people.
DEFINED BY WHOM???
IF I HAVE A BRAIN-—I CAN DEFINE FOR MYSELF.
“curtailing disinformation” is itself disinformation.
The word is censorship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.