Jonathan Turley is a professor of constitutional law. His most recent book is titled: “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in the Age of Rage”. Full disclosure, the publisher sent me a copy of his book to review. I will review his book later this week. However, I wanted to touch on a subject that Professor Turley’s book likely discusses – that being censorship of speech, and the various modes of suppression.
Speech can be suppressed in several ways. The left’s favorite and most often used suppression method is to cast conservatives as “unworthy” of speaking. They shout us down. Campus thugs often shout down guest lecturers like Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Douglas Murray, Heather Mac Donald, or Ann Coulter.
Those are but a few conservative voices greeted with screams of derision by campus goons. It’s a hard-to-beat tactic. One voice has little chance to be heard when a hundred goons are wailing epithets at a guest speaker. The voice of reason has little chance of finishing a point. Each of the above celebrity speakers has been called a “Nazi” by the left. “Shapiro is a “Nazi” is particularly rich.
Another suppression tactic for online speech is to organize boycotts of the speaker’s sponsors. By way of example, there have been several attempts to demonetize “The Dan Bongino Show,” with limited to no success. Bongino’s reach seems to have grown. There isn’t a conservative podcaster that hasn’t been subject to sponsor intimidation, with the intent of taking away a podcaster’s or website’s source of income.
Another is to use “nonpartisan” watchdog groups to rate an online show, or a website like RedState, as “unreliable” or purveyors of false information. One such “watchdog” is NewsGuard. Another is PolitiFact, and AP has its own “fact-checkers”. My colleague Jeff Charles wrote about this a few weeks ago.
The “fact-checking” tactics are well-known in the industry. It’s a “when did you stop beating your wife” technique. A “fact-checker” will write to the managing editor seeking information. One such “fact-checker” fact-checked a satirical article by Jeff Charles. Jeff’s satire about Facebook “banning” the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” had ignited a fact-checking blowtorch at AP. The AP was apparently loaded with humorless cat-ladies who can’t tell the difference between parody and reality. (I’ll be fact-checked on that, with a denial that AP’s ladies own an inordinate number of cats).
AP wanted answers from RedState. RedState’s managing editor, Jennifer Van Laar provided the answers.
Lighten up, Francis, “It was a joke.” A little pre-fact checking for the AP fact-checkers – Van Laar didn’t tell “Francis” to “Lighten Up.” That is my parody of AP’s inability to read the room or understand parody.
Fact-check: True.
Three years ago, Van Laar was forced to respond to the numbskulls at PolitiFact on a COVID origins article. She responded, writing:
“These instances are just samples of what we, and every conservative news outlet, face every day. The only way we can ensure that we retain our journalistic freedom – and that we can keep the lights on – in the long term is to build our own playground, so to speak. That is the main reason the RedState VIP program was launched two years ago.”
How does this relate to Jonathan Turley? Prof. Turley is about as “fact-based” as any personality on or in media. Besides being a distinguished professor of law, and a “go-to” First Amendment expert, he also has a self-publishing blog called “Res ipsa loquitur.”
NewsGuard contacted Turley in what seems to be a naked attempt to suppress a speech expert and professor of law. Two weeks ago, Turley wrote an article titled: “Elon Musk is Right: End the Online Censorship Racket.” Broadly, it concerns the efforts of yapping junkyard dogs like NewsGuard to suppress speech. But not all speech, just speech they don’t like. In short order, the dogs were at Turley’s ‘door.’
NewsGuard’s name is much like “Antifa,” in that neither name isn’t remotely related to what they actually do. What NewsGuard does is flog for the left. In the leadup to the 2024 election, it’s flogging hard – as in, they are in overdrive and afterburners.
Within a week, NewsGuard came calling. “Show me your papers” was the general theme from the NewsGuard hack. NewsGuard wanted to know who financially supports Turley’s blog. His response is hilarious:
But I pay not to have advertising, and the closest I come to financial support would be my wife, since we live in a community property state. If NewsGuard wants to blacklist me with my wife, it is a bit late. Trust me, she knows.
Ouch.
…Apparently from where NewsGuard reviewers sit, I am a de facto conservative or libertarian who needs to wear a digital bell to warn others…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) July 28, 2024
True to form, the cockroaches came out from under rocks
If you had ethics, you would. But you are a fraudster.
— larry israel (@larryisrael2) July 28, 2024
NewsGuard was just getting warmed up in the stepping-on-rakes department, it wanted to know why there was no “correction” section. In fact, there is a comment section for readers to “correct” Professor Turley. Oops. That’s 0 for 2, NewsGuardian of the Galaxy.
Turley then slammed the door on the NewsGuardian’s nose, with this:
NewsGuard also made bizarre inquiries, including about why I called my blog “Res Ipsa Liquitur [sic] – the thing itself speaks. Could you explain the reason to this non-lawyer?” Res ipsa loquitur is defined in the header as “The thing itself speaks,” which I think speaks for itself.
Just a guess, but I wonder, is NewsGuard employing 12-year-olds?
One of the Guardians’ concerns was particularly illuminating:
“I cannot find any information on the site that would signal to readers that the site’s content reflects a conservative or libertarian perspective, as is evident in your articles. Why is this perspective not disclosed to give readers a sense of the site’s point of view?”
Will the hacks at NewsGuard recoil? Of course not. Two things are important to remember:
- This is an election year and NewsGuard will redouble its efforts to label even libertarians like Turley as right of Mussolini.
- NewsGuard isn’t interested in fact-checking; it is primarily interested in thought suppression. It’s the online version of college campus goons, yelling at conservatives.
NewsGaudians are the new brownshirts. It is well-funded and relentless. What to do about fact-checkers who cannot spell Res ipsa loquitur, let alone understand its meaning, when the meaning is defined for them?
I will follow Professor Turley’s lead:
This is why my book calls for a number of reforms, including barring federal funds for groups engaged in censoring, rating or blacklisting sites.
What do I expect? In about 2 weeks, some guardian goon from NewsGuard will show up at my “online” door:
“Show me your papers. Please tell me why the ‘H’ in Thompson is silent. What are you trying to hide, sir?”
