Conservative News Sites Aren’t ‘Risky,’ A ‘Disinformation Index’ To Censor Speech Is

“To reduce disinformation, we need to remove the financial incentive to create it,” The Global Disinformation Index declares You can find its mission page. The Washington Examiner Exposed last week, the self-appointed arbiter of truth doesn’t seek to silence the legacy corporate outlets that repeatedly peddled false stories. It demands that conservative websites that have gotten those stories right are censored by naming them the “right-leaning” sites. “riskiest” When it comes down to “disinformation.”

There are many new outlets available that are not conservative. “risky,” however. And it isn’t even “disinformation” that’s risky: Disinformation — whatever that means — can be countered with the truth. What are you waiting for? It is It is risky to believe that experts can either dictate what is misleading or declare that such speech should not be allowed. 

A simple graphic from the GDI’s Summary The following are some of its “Disinformation Risk in the United States Online Media Market,” The implications of the GDI censorship approach are clearly outlined by the assertion that if outlets GDI seeks silenced, the public would continue to be ignorant about key questions such as national security, government malfeasance and corruption, as well as major policy issues. 

For instance, compare the two first media outlets GDI identifies with the “least risky sites” “riskiest sites” — NPR and the New York Post, respectively — and their coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop story. The New York Post broke the story, and also provided an analysis of materials recovered from the MacBook. The material included information that could have implicated Joe Biden in a pay–to-play scheme. 

In contrast, NPR declared It did not cover the Hunter Biden story via Twitter. “we don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.” NPR’s failure to initially cover the story caused the government-funded outlet to remain ignorant of the basic facts, prompting NPR to later falsely Report that the documents recovered from Hunter Biden’s laptop had been “discredited by U.S. intelligence.” NPR issued a correction to that disinformation later.

In general, the outlets on the left — both politically and in GDI’s graphic — either ignored the Biden family scandal or spun the story as representing Russian disinformation, with The Washington Post’s so-called fact-checker even framing the New York Post’s breaking news inaccurately as “hacked or leaked material.” The “riskiest sites,” In contrast, he reported the story and searched deeper for supporting information. 

In addition to the corporate legacy outlets limiting their reporting on the materials contained on the abandoned laptop that suggested Joe Biden profited from Hunter’s foreign business ventures, Twitter censored the story, and Facebook limited visibility of the scandal. Such censorship had serious consequences: Half of the respondents who were surveyed after Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, revealed the details behind the efforts to block the New York Post story said they would have Voted They might have been different if they had known about the Biden family’s true story. 

Since the

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases