Newsguard is a technology meant to control what people see, read, and ultimately think. If you don’t immediately see the dangers of that type of technology then I’m not sure what will convince you otherwise.
NewsGuar doesn't block any content. It provides ratings of news sites. How does that control what people see, read, and ultimately think? It doesn't even verify or refute specific stories, just overall publication credibility.
It's also not really technology. It's a bunch of journalists doing ratings. Technology is just how they disseminate the ratings, but a lot different (and more accountable) than some kind of AI that tries to do this.
> Newsguard is a technology meant to control what people see, read, and ultimately think. If you don’t immediately see the dangers of that type of technology then I’m not sure what will convince you otherwise.
The problems aren't all one one side. There are problems with having technology like Newsguard, and there are problem with not having technology like it. Just today, I came across the phenomenon of partisan propaganda masquerading as local journalism (https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/03/04/activists-setup-local...).
I've never used Newsguard, but I really hope it flags stuff like "The Tennessee Star." It'd be a clue to question the source more, and God knows we need more clues to get through our hurried, overloaded lives.
That is exactly what antivax people say about vaccination campaigns.
I'm not saying you should trust NewsGuard. I don't know much about them! But the categorical alarm you take to the entire concept of independent news vetting is problematic.
