NewsGuard

hcgajcpgaalgpeholhdooeddllhedegi

NewsGuard's rating shields and labels help users know which news and information websites to trust.

Latest reviews

• (2025-01-22) Annemarie Graham: After researching, the credibility of this company is solid, it was founded by established and trusted journalists and continues to be endorsed by them. They use objective journalistic standards to judge the websites and for the most part they do a great job. It is affordably priced and easy to cancel after your free-trial. However, considering the level of influence they have, there is a lot that is left out and they don't seem to be held accountable by anything other than the pride of accredited journalists and the AP (which is hefty at least). This leaves a worrying amount of room for bias or manipulation which will hopefully be remedied, HOWEVER, thus far the ratings are very accurate and well substantiated and anyone saying otherwise is silly and doesn't know how to read... It's not a definitive good or bad, but it's certainly a very useful starting place considering all the fake news to sift through.
• (2025-01-19) Charlie Rudd: If you needed an indication of the reliability of this service, just look at the negative reviews. Note how extreme they are and the content of their complaints. Thanks to this site's transparency and objective criteria, Its pretty obvious these ham-fisted reviews are nothing but unprincipled, futile attempts to diminish Newsguard's brand.
• (2024-11-19) Dan Kershaw: Absolutely necessary in an era where SM algorithms select for outrage and sensationallism, and the manipulations of foreign governments acting in bad faith have degraded the public forum with bots promoting unsourced garbage. False allegations are routinely and successfully disguised as statements of fact, such that 3 in 10 americans still believe the result of the 2020 election was fraudulent. Recently Newsguard's nutrition guide saved me from wasting days parsing BS from Zerohedge.com. Yeah, it's subscription, something like $5/mo but well worth every penny.
• (2024-10-22) Jesse: I am actually impressed with Newsgaurd. Their reviews are detailed, reasonable, and very well sourced.
• (2024-07-29) Eric Bidstrup: Great resource. DOn't believe the GOP misinformation about this
• (2024-06-23) CommandrX: ZERO STARS, BIAS FAR LEFT LEANING PROPAGANDIST PUSHER WITH A PAYWALL! NO THANK YOU.
• (2024-02-26) BrickNinja 99: Extension is paywalled.
• (2023-11-11) Keith B: Left wing positions cloaked as a neutral party.
• (2023-05-15) Dean Williamson: Excellent. Well done. We all need to develop a critical eye around misinformation and understand the impact.
• (2023-05-15) Dean Williamson: Excellent. Well done. We all need to develop a critical eye around misinformation and understand the impact.
• (2023-02-04) Antonio Betalli: Ho avuto modo di poter provare l'estensione. Molto utile per avere fin da subito un idea su come leggere una notizia. Leggendo le altre recensioni dimostra anche di essere molto cresciuta in questi anni, ampliando il suo database di testate giornalistiche e blog divulgativi, e di aver aumentato i dettagli delle valutazioni fatte. L'unica pecca, facilmente rimediabile, (forse è successo solamente a me) è l'attivazione dell'estensione macchinosa. Avevo difficoltà nell'accedere e successivamente era necessario riavviare il browser per poterla utilizzare.
• (2022-12-06) Mitch: Transparent ratings.
• (2022-12-06) Mitch: Transparent ratings.
• (2022-11-23) Jordan Hicks: Not as unbiased as they claim to be; they willingly turn a blind eye to some right-wing outlets: https://checkmyads.org/branded/how-newsguard-boosts-the-american-disinformation-economy/
• (2022-11-02) Raymond van Toor: ‘To access NewsGuard sign in or start a free trial below. Sign In / Access Code. Free 2-weeks unlimited access to NewsGuard’s Ratings on desktop/mobile.’
• (2022-11-02) Raymond van Toor: ‘To access NewsGuard sign in or start a free trial below. Sign In / Access Code. Free 2-weeks unlimited access to NewsGuard’s Ratings on desktop/mobile.’
• (2022-10-09) Ralph Janke: It is a fraud. Does not tell that is requires subscription until after install. Waste of time.
• (2022-10-09) Ralph Janke: It is a fraud. Does not tell that is requires subscription until after install. Waste of time.
• (2022-08-16) Dave Kretz: Legitimizes dis/misinformation. Worse than useless, it's harmful
• (2022-08-16) Dave Kretz: Legitimizes dis/misinformation. Worse than useless, it's harmful
• (2022-08-15) Schuemer Meister: absolute garbage
• (2022-08-15) Schuemer Meister: absolute garbage
• (2022-07-27) Jay Halderman: Unreliable ratings. Clearly a compromised service/organization.
• (2022-07-27) Jay Halderman: Unreliable ratings. Clearly a compromised service/organization.
• (2022-06-19) Z. Z: Two big issues. --- 1. It has a subscribtion mode with 2 weeks trial. 2. USAToday is still 100/100 after they have fabricated at least 23 news outlets. This is just corporate shilling.
• (2022-06-19) Z. Z: Two big issues. --- 1. It has a subscribtion mode with 2 weeks trial. 2. USAToday is still 100/100 after they have fabricated at least 23 news outlets. This is just corporate shilling.
• (2022-03-17) John Colascione: NewsGuard editors are shills and hacks; they lie, and work towards making publishers look as poorly as possible. They lied about my news company I sold calling it "defunct" just because I am no longer there anymore trying to make me look bad when it remains a living thriving media business. I told them they should correct it twice, two years in a row... They do not care about accuracy, only their agenda. App is worthless. Red should signal what to believe and green should signal sites to avoid. Totally unreliable.
• (2022-03-17) John Colascione: NewsGuard editors are shills and hacks; they lie, and work towards making publishers look as poorly as possible. They lied about my news company I sold calling it "defunct" just because I am no longer there anymore trying to make me look bad when it remains a living thriving media business. I told them they should correct it twice, two years in a row... They do not care about accuracy, only their agenda. App is worthless. Red should signal what to believe and green should signal sites to avoid. Totally unreliable.
• (2022-02-18) Jeremy Anoc: An invaluable resource. To the naysayers: read their detailed "Nutrition Label" for a given website to understand why it has been given its rating before you make blanket statements about "bias."
• (2021-12-30) Thomas Riekel (Fusel): Nur für diejenigen geeignet die sich keine eigene Meinung mehr bilden wollen bzw. können. Letztendlich eine Vorstufe zur Meinungsdiktatur bzw geradlinig zum Wahrheitsministerium von 1984.
• (2021-11-30) John Majchrzak: Garbage, have to pay a subscription.
• (2021-11-30) John Majchrzak: Garbage, have to pay a subscription.
• (2021-11-30) Tournel Henry: At first, I liked this extension. But it turns out, like Facebook's "fact-checkers", they're aligned with Left-leaning news orgs. Hopefully they're not part of the Poynter institute also. But this is not a very neutral news sources monitor
• (2021-11-20) Susie S. aus B.: Blick ich's nicht oder wollen die meine E-Mail und Kohle? Schade, hab viel darüber gelesen und wollte es eigentlich invers verwenden um die interessanten Sites (rot) zu erkennen und Propaganda (grün) zu meiden
• (2021-11-19) Adolfo Grosso: Es de pago, y me decepcionó mucho, no puedo usarla gratis.
• (2021-11-18) A Hofmann: funktioniert nicht stabil auf meinem asus notebook 12gb RAM
• (2021-10-07) John Miller: Seems that this doesn't work without a subscription.
• (2021-10-07) John Miller: Seems that this doesn't work without a subscription.
• (2021-09-21) pushy Rummble: Yeah this is bias, I've seen many stories that ended up being fake news or lies from certain stories and they are rated to no lie in their articles. Yeah this is just a tool to manipulate you into thinking a fake story is true.
• (2021-09-21) pushy Rummble: Yeah this is bias, I've seen many stories that ended up being fake news or lies from certain stories and they are rated to no lie in their articles. Yeah this is just a tool to manipulate you into thinking a fake story is true.
• (2021-09-18) jo jo: Absurdly biased toward the left. Its working but in reverse. I know not to trust the green checks. This app is reported in Breaking The News book as even having red flagged breitbart merch shop; and identical transcripts on right wing sites will flag red while leftwing are green.
• (2021-09-18) jo jo: Absurdly biased toward the left. Its working but in reverse. I know not to trust the green checks. This app is reported in Breaking The News book as even having red flagged breitbart merch shop; and identical transcripts on right wing sites will flag red while leftwing are green.
• (2021-08-18) Tyler Rudie: Garbage Left-Wing company that pretends to be neutral. Currently acting like a Digital Democratic Hit Man.
• (2021-08-18) Tyler Rudie: Garbage Left-Wing company that pretends to be neutral. Currently acting like a Digital Democratic Hit Man.
• (2021-07-29) Fahad Khan: Useless.
• (2021-07-29) Fahad Khan: Useless.
• (2021-07-23) Art: Use this with Microsoft Edge browser if you want to use it completely free. Apart from marking many reputable conservative news as well as well known info leakers like wikileaks, and veritas sources as dangerous or proceed with caution it's a decent app. It still has a strong bias to the left, they ignore the huge amount of misinformation made by CNN, MSNBC and many others left-wing sources. As well as strive to make an unbiased algorithm that scans all if not most of the articles on the website and cross references it with known or the truth of the events and mark them as such. This would be a better approached to using biased humans to rate the channels. This app should also show what is the political leanings using the articles written as well. Some news sites may be missing from the rating system and some may have an obviously false mark like that of CNN, Buzzfeed (really?), and a few others. Once you get the algorithm and fixing the rating bias and rating scores, get rid of your advisory board, practically all of them if not most are extremely biased. Decent for general view of either a news source is overall reliable but the users must take into account the left-leaning slant this extension has and look through the reasons why newsguard deems a news source unreliable, some of the reasons are either petty, seemingly political reasons, or something that science has either failed to address or have yet to address. Many sources that they label as untrustworthy are actually fine, if they fail minimum 2 of the checks in the news category they automatically fail. But all these ratings are subjected to change at any moments notice. So what the app deems unreliable today might be reliable tomorrow, and reason is not simply because they either corrected how they report but more-so on what they report, newsguard must be careful to not push the latter and only check the former.
• (2021-07-23) Art: Use this with Microsoft Edge browser if you want to use it completely free. Apart from marking many reputable conservative news as well as well known info leakers like wikileaks, and veritas sources as dangerous or proceed with caution it's a decent app. It still has a strong bias to the left, they ignore the huge amount of misinformation made by CNN, MSNBC and many others left-wing sources. As well as strive to make an unbiased algorithm that scans all if not most of the articles on the website and cross references it with known or the truth of the events and mark them as such. This would be a better approached to using biased humans to rate the channels. This app should also show what is the political leanings using the articles written as well. Some news sites may be missing from the rating system and some may have an obviously false mark like that of CNN, Buzzfeed (really?), and a few others. Once you get the algorithm and fixing the rating bias and rating scores, get rid of your advisory board, practically all of them if not most are extremely biased. Decent for general view of either a news source is overall reliable but the users must take into account the left-leaning slant this extension has and look through the reasons why newsguard deems a news source unreliable, some of the reasons are either petty, seemingly political reasons, or something that science has either failed to address or have yet to address. Many sources that they label as untrustworthy are actually fine, if they fail minimum 2 of the checks in the news category they automatically fail. But all these ratings are subjected to change at any moments notice. So what the app deems unreliable today might be reliable tomorrow, and reason is not simply because they either corrected how they report but more-so on what they report, newsguard must be careful to not push the latter and only check the former.
• (2021-06-10) Jiří Doubravský: Fake news si zasluhují varovnou nálepku na svůj falešný xicht (samozřejmě i nadále je otázkou nakolik důvěřujete právě NewsGuard, jejich nestrannost je nutné prověřovat). Pro mne ale a pro tuto chvíli je to velmi dobrý a užitečný doplněk.
• (2021-06-05) tzen tzen 丞丞: >mfw people are finding out conservatives cant stop lying about everything. if you're looking to validate your current views of the world maybe don't rely on professional fact checkers