from the found-the-censorship-industrial-complex dept

We’ve written a few times now about how the GOP’s “free speech warriors” have been waging an absolutely absurd campaign against NewsGuard, a company whose entire business model is… expressing opinions about the reliability of news sources. You know, speech. The kind of thing that’s supposed to be protected by that First Amendment thing the GOP pretends to care so much about.

As we noted back in 2024, the entire complaint about NewsGuard boils down to: some conservative news sites got poor ratings, and that made people who relied on those ratings less likely to advertise on those sites. It’s funny how MAGA seems to get so upset about the “marketplace of ideas” when their own ideas get rejected. NewsGuard says “we think this source is unreliable,” advertisers say “okay, we’d rather not be associated with unreliable sources,” and the rated sites get mad about it.

But now the Trump administration’s FTC, led by Chairman Andrew Ferguson, has decided to transform that complaint into an actual government censorship campaign. And NewsGuard, represented by FIRE’s lawyers, is suing to stop it, as first reported in the Washington Post.

The complaint lays out a fairly astonishing abuse of government power. Let’s start with the Civil Investigative Demand (fancy term for a subpoena) the FTC sent to NewsGuard last May. It’s basically a demand for every document the company has ever created or received since its founding in 2018:

The CID requires production of “all documents relating to NewsGuard’s News Reliability Ratings and any other rating[s];” identification of all NewsGuard customers; and essentially all communications from or to NewsGuard.

And it gets worse:

The Specifications go further, demanding all materials about NewsGuard’s work product and methodology, including data sets; all documents about websites and news sources rated; all ratings and reviews issued; all communications regarding ratings; any and all analyses of the effects of NewsGuard’s ratings on advertisers and publishers; and any studies relating to social media or digital advertising

Among its all-inclusive document demands, the CID also requires production of information, materials, and communications relating to NewsGuard’s journalism and reporting, including reporters’ notes and sources.

The FTC is demanding reporters’ notes. From a journalism organization. Because it doesn’t like the opinions that organization expresses. That should be a First Amendment five-alarm fire. I mean, imagine the years of screaming we’d all be subjected to if the Biden admin had demanded reporters’ notes from Fox News.

Oh, and what was the stated basis for this investigation? According to NewsGuard’s complaint, the FTC wouldn’t even tell them, despite it being required by law.

Under the FTC Act, the agency was required to state the specific conduct constituting an alleged violation that is the subject of investigation and the provision of law applicable to such violation. 15 U.S.C. § 57b-1(c)(2). The FTC did not do that in the NewsGuard CID, leaving the company to guess about what the agency alleged was at issue or how it could have anything to do with legitimate enforcement of antitrust or competition laws.

In other words: “we’re investigating you, but we won’t tell you why or what law you allegedly violated.”

Right about here I’ll remind you that when FTC chair Andrew Ferguson applied for the job he promised to “protect freedom of speech” and “end… politically motivated investigations.” Of course, the full quote was “end Lina Khan’s politically motivated investigations”—leaving his own politically motivated investigations as fair game.

NewsGuard tried to work with the FTC for seven months, participating in ten meet-and-confer discussions and producing over 40,000 pages of documents. And what did the FTC do? Kept demanding more, including those customer lists and communications, while refusing to explain what any of this had to do with antitrust law.

Remember, NewsGuard’s share of the “brand safety” market is, according to the complaint, less than 0.1%. The idea that this tiny company is somehow engaged in anticompetitive behavior that requires the FTC to demand every document it’s ever created is absurd on its face.

Then, while NewsGuard was trying to cooperate with the investigation, the FTC was also using its merger review authority to create what amounts to a government blacklist of NewsGuard.

When advertising giants Omnicom and IPG wanted to merge, the FTC conditioned approval on the companies agreeing not to use any service that “reflects viewpoints as to the veracity of news reporting and adherence to journalistic standards or ethics.”

That’s not particularly subtle. That’s a condition specifically designed to prevent Omnicom from doing business with NewsGuard. The complaint notes that the original draft order didn’t quite capture NewsGuard, so Newsmax—yes, the same Newsmax that’s been mad about its poor NewsGuard rating—filed comments urging the FTC to expand the language. And the FTC did exactly that.

Newsmax was not subtle about its aim. Its fourteen-page letter mentioned NewsGuard more than a dozen times. Newsmax echoed Chairman Ferguson’s repeated statements that NewsGuard’s reviews and ratings of news sources based on journalistic standards were “biased” because some conservativeleaning websites and publications scored poorly.

Not content to rely on the official FTC comment process, Newsmax took to the internet to lobby Chairman Ferguson, members of Congress, and the President. In posts on X directed to Chairman Ferguson, Newsmax asserted the FTC’s proposed order was inadequate because it “makes no mention of ‘censorship’ or ‘targeting conservatives’ and ‘[f]ully allows Omnicom to use left-wing NewsGuard.” Newsmax admitted its comments and advocacy to the FTC were specifically targeted at NewsGuard.

Advertisement

[….]

The FTC subsequently issued a revised order removing terms about using third-party services with “political or ideological bias.” Instead, the FTC revised the Consent Order to prohibit the merged Omnicom entity or its ad agencies from using third-party services that evaluate “viewpoints as to the veracity of news reporting” and “adherence to journalistic standards or ethics.”

In its press release announcing the final Consent Order, the FTC stated that it revised the order “in response to public comments.” But the only public comments advocating such censure came from Newsmax and groups it funds…

The complaint notes, somewhat dryly, that First Amendment scholars and free speech organizations had also submitted comments pointing out how the proposed order was unconstitutional. But somehow, Ferguson and the FTC ignored those. The only change they made seemed to be the one Newsmax and friends demanded: the punishment of NewsGuard for its First Amendment-protected speech.

So let’s be clear about what happened here: A news organization that gives ratings to other news organizations gave a bad rating to Newsmax based on its own criteria. (Shocking, I know, given Newsmax’s sterling commitment to journalistic standards.) Newsmax complained to the government. The government then used its regulatory power to (1) launch a burdensome fishing expedition designed to bleed NewsGuard financially, and (2) literally prohibit a major potential customer from doing business with NewsGuard.

This is textbook First Amendment retaliation. The government is using its regulatory power to punish a private company for expressing opinions it disagrees with.

And Chairman Ferguson hasn’t exactly been coy about his intentions. Even before becoming FTC chair, he was publicly stating that the FTC should use its “tremendous array of investigative tools” and “coercive power” to get companies to “Do what we say.” As the complaint notes:

In an April 2025 interview, Chairman Ferguson explained how the FTC could use its “tremendous array of investigative tools” and “coercive power—formal and informal” to demand compliance to its views about supposed online “censorship.” Ferguson laid out a roadmap of the tactics his FTC would ultimately use against NewsGuard: “The regulators can show up, they can audit, they can investigate, they can cost you a lot of money, and the path of least resistance is: ‘Do what we say’.”

And:

Ferguson’s comments are similar to not-so-veiled threats by FCC Chairman Carr about Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night comedy monologue mentioning Charlie Kirk, which the administration found objectionable. Carr stated that ABC and its affiliates had to “find ways to change conduct and take action … on Kimmel or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead,” and “we can do this the easy way or the hard way.”

This is the “free speech” party. This is what they mean by free speech: the freedom to agree with them, or face the consequences, brought to you mob-style.

The legal case here seems pretty straightforward. The DC Circuit already ruled last year, in the somewhat similar Media Matters case, that the FTC’s similar investigation of that organization was “a government campaign of retaliation” that was “infringing exercise of their First Amendment rights.” The district court in DC has already granted a preliminary injunction halting the FTC’s investigation of Media Matters.

NewsGuard’s case involves basically the same playbook. Government officials publicly expressed hostility to NewsGuard’s speech. Then they launched an investigation with demands far beyond any legitimate regulatory purpose. Then they used their merger review authority to directly prohibit companies from doing business with NewsGuard.

The Supreme Court was unanimous in the Vullo case in 2024 that government officials can’t “coerce a private party to punish or suppress disfavored speech on her behalf.” Using merger conditions to blacklist a company because you don’t like its journalism is exactly that.

It’s genuinely good to see NewsGuard fight back here. I’ve been somewhat critical of NewsGuard’s methodology in the past, but their right to express their opinions about news sources is protected speech, full stop. The government doesn’t get to punish them because some of those opinions hurt the feelings of conservative media outlets. (Also, as I always point out, NewsGuard was founded by the former publisher of the Wall Street Journal, the idea that he’s some “woke leftist” trying to suppress “conservative” news orgs is silly on its face).

And, honestly, this case reveals just how absurd the whole “censorship industrial complex” narrative has always been. The actual censorship happening here isn’t NewsGuard expressing opinions about news quality. It’s the government using its regulatory power to punish NewsGuard for expressing those opinions.

As the complaint aptly notes:

By accusing NewsGuard of providing “biased” evaluations of news sites, Chairman Ferguson has inverted the relationship between the government and the First Amendment. NewsGuard is a private business that offers assessments of the quality of news sites based on disclosed journalistic criteria. As a matter of law, NewsGuard cannot be a censor. But by asserting FTC control over the market for NewsGuard’s services, Chairman Ferguson has embraced the censor’s role

That’s exactly right. The government using its power to punish private companies for expressing opinions is censorship. Private companies expressing opinions is not.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, andrew ferguson, antitrust, censorship, ftc, investigation, news ratings, opinions

Companies: newsguard, newsmax, omnicom

Apple’s AirTag is designed to help people keep track of personal belongings like keys, bags and luggage. But because AirTags and other Bluetooth trackers are small and discreet, concerns about unwanted tracking are understandable. Apple has spent years building safeguards into the AirTag and the Find My network to reduce the risk of misuse and to alert people if a tracker they don’t own appears to be moving with them.

If you’re worried about whether an AirTag or similar tracker might be following you, here’s how Apple’s unwanted tracking alerts work, what notifications to look for and what you can do on both iPhone and Android.

How AirTag tracking alerts work

AirTags, compatible Find My network accessories and certain AirPods models use Apple’s Find My network, which relies on Bluetooth signals and nearby devices to update their location. To prevent misuse, Apple designed these products with features that are meant to alert someone if a tracker that isn’t linked to their Apple Account appears to be traveling with them.

If an AirTag or another compatible tracker is separated from its owner and detected near you over time, your device may display a notification or the tracker itself may emit a sound. These alerts are intended to discourage someone from secretly tracking another person without their knowledge. Apple has also worked with Google on a cross-platform industry standard, so alerts can appear on both iOS and Android devices, not just iPhones.

How to make sure tracking alerts are enabled on your iPhone

If you use an iPhone or iPad, tracking notifications are on by default, but it’s worth confirming your settings.

To receive unwanted tracking alerts, make sure that:

• Your device is running iOS 17.5 or later (or iPadOS 17.5 or later). Earlier versions back to iOS 14.5 support basic AirTag alerts, but newer versions add broader compatibility with other trackers.

• Location Services are enabled.

• Notifications for Tracking Alerts are allowed.

• Airplane Mode is turned off.

You can check these by opening Settings, then navigating to Privacy & Security, Location Services and Notifications. Apple also recommends turning on Significant Locations in the System Services menu, which helps your device determine when an unknown tracker has traveled with you to places like your home.

1. Go to Settings, tap Privacy & Security, then select Location Services.

2. Toggle Location Services on.

3. Scroll down and tap System Services, then toggle Significant Locations on.

If these settings are disabled, your iPhone may not be able to alert you when an AirTag or similar device is nearby.

What tracking alerts look like

If your iPhone detects a tracker that doesn’t belong to you moving with you, you may see a notification such as:

• AirTag Found Moving With You

• “Product Name” Found Moving With You

• Unknown Accessory Detected

Tapping the alert opens the Find My app, which shows a map of where the item was detected near you. The map uses dots to indicate locations where your device noticed the tracker nearby. This doesn’t mean the owner was actively watching your location at those times, only that the tracker was detected in close proximity.

In some cases, the alert may have an innocent explanation. For example, you might be borrowing someone else’s keys, bag or AirPods. If the item belongs to someone in your Family Sharing group, you can temporarily pause alerts for that item by tapping the notification and opting to turn off alerts for that item either for one day or indefinitely.

What to do if you hear an AirTag making a sound

If an AirTag or compatible tracker has been separated from its owner for a period of time and is moved, it may emit a sound on its own. This is another built-in safety feature meant to draw attention to the device.

If you hear an unfamiliar chirping or beeping sound, especially from a bag, jacket pocket or vehicle, it’s worth checking your belongings to see if there’s an AirTag or similar tracker inside.

How to find an unknown AirTag or tracker

If you receive an alert and believe the tracker is still with you, the Find My app offers tools to help locate it.

From the alert, you can choose to play a sound on the device to help pinpoint where it’s hidden.

2. Tap Continue and then tap Play Sound.

3. Listen for the sound or play it again to give yourself more time to find the item.

If the tracker is an AirTag and you have a compatible iPhone with ultra wideband connectivity, you may also see a Find Nearby option, which uses Precision Finding to guide you toward it with distance and direction indicators.

2. Tap Continue and then tap Find Nearby.

3. Follow the onscreen instructions. You may need to move around the space until your iPhone connects to the unknown AirTag.

Your iPhone will display the distance and direction of the unknown AirTag, so you can use that information to identify where the unknown AirTag is. When the AirTag is within Bluetooth range of your iPhone, you can tap the Play Sound button to listen for it. You can also tap the Turn Flashlight On button to provide more light if it’s needed.

If neither option is available, or if the tracker can’t be located electronically, manually check your belongings. Look through bags, pockets, jackets and vehicles. If you feel unsafe and can’t find the device, Apple recommends going to a safe public place and contacting local law enforcement.

How to get information about an AirTag

If you find an unknown AirTag, you can learn more about it without needing to unlock it or log in.

1. Hold the top of your iPhone, or any NFC-capable smartphone, near the white side of the AirTag. A notification should appear.

2. Tap the notification to open a webpage with details about the AirTag. This page includes the serial number and the last four digits of the phone number associated with the owner’s Apple Account.

If the AirTag was marked as lost, the page may also include a message from the owner explaining how to contact them. This can help determine whether the situation is accidental or intentional.

How to disable an AirTag that isn’t yours

If you confirm that an AirTag is tracking you and it doesn’t belong to you, you can disable it so it stops sharing its location.

From the Find My alert or information page, select Instructions to Disable and follow the steps provided. For an AirTag, this usually involves removing the battery, which immediately stops location updates. Disabling Bluetooth or turning off Location Services on your phone does not stop the AirTag from reporting its location. The device itself must be disabled.

If you believe the tracker was used for malicious purposes, keep the AirTag and document its details before contacting law enforcement. Apple states that it can provide information to authorities when legally required.

What Android users should know

Android devices running Android 6.0 or later can also receive alerts if a compatible Bluetooth tracker, including an AirTag, appears to be moving with you. These alerts are enabled automatically on supported versions of Android.

Android users can also manually scan for unknown trackers at any time. Additionally, Apple offers a free Tracker Detect app on the Google Play Store. The app allows Android users to scan for AirTags and Find My network accessories within Bluetooth range that are separated from their owner. If Tracker Detect finds a nearby AirTag that’s been with you for at least 10 minutes, you can play a sound to help locate it.

Wrap-up

While no system is perfect, Apple has built multiple layers of protection into AirTag and the Find My network to reduce the risk of unwanted tracking. With alerts, audible warnings and cross-platform detection on both iOS and Android, most people will be notified if a tracker they don’t own is moving with them. Knowing what these alerts look like and how to respond can help you stay informed, avoid unnecessary panic and take appropriate action if something feels off.

When it comes to serious outdoor pursuits and long, multi-day journeys that require performance tracking, the Garmin epix Pro (Gen 2) Sapphire Edition, priced at $449.99 (was $999.99), outperforms the Apple Watch Ultra. For starters, it’s definitely no slouch in the battery life department, as it lasts 16 days in smartwatch mode and 30 hours of straight GPS tracking.

The battery life is only one aspect of the watch’s dependability; the way Garmin manages power management allows you to rely on it without fear of being caught off guard by a dead battery. The AMOLED display is very visible in bright sunshine while using less power than other watches with bright panels. Meanwhile, Apple promotes seamless connection with its own ecosystem, which is fantastic if you’re already a part of it, but for anyone who enjoys a little unpredictability in their life, daily charging habits just don’t cut it.

Sale

Garmin epix Pro (Gen 2) Sapphire Edition, 47mm, High Performance Smartwatch, Advanced Training…

• Ultimate high-performance smartwatch features a 1.3” always-on, stunning AMOLED display and a scratch-resistant sapphire lens with a titanium bezel
• Built-in LED flashlight with variable intensities and strobe modes gives you greater awareness while you train at night and provides convenient…
• New hill score feature measures your running strength and endurance during ascents and gauges your progress over time

Garmin now offers a plethora of advanced training tools, giving them a significant competitive advantage. We’re talking about detailed measurements that cover everything from training load to recuperation time, and even your readiness score, as well as some quite important insights into your physiology. Then there are features like built-in topographic maps and NextFork route guiding to keep you on track even when you’re deep in the bush. The Epix Pro supports a wide range of sports profiles and allows you to configure the data fields to meet your specific demands. It also connects to ANT+ sensors such as heart rate straps and power meters.

Of course, the Apple Watch Ultra excels at essential activities, but for anything more serious, Garmin’s depth of analytics and mapping is just unparalleled. I mean, these are the kinds of elements that will get you through training regimens and even help you discover problems before they become major issues.

The Epix Pro’s build quality is also seriously impressive, as its Sapphire crystal display is essentially scratch-proof, and the titanium bezel provides much-needed robustness without adding excessive weight. It also has 10 ATM water resistance, making it ideal for swimming and diving, and the built-in LED lighting is a handy feature for those early morning or late evening trail runs.

However, the Garmin Epix Pro’s compatibility will be quite appealing to some users, as it works perfectly with both iOS and Android devices. You get all of the typical bells and whistles, such as real-time notifications as well as offline music playback, and Garmin Connect is always available to provide a full analysis of your progress. Apple Watch has merits in phone contact, but Garmin prioritizes standalone freedom and flexibility, making it ideal for those who wish to disconnect completely from their phone.

Finally, it’s no surprise that many athletes who are used to pushing themselves during training, whether for marathons, triathlons, or trail races, choose the Epix Pro Sapphire Edition as their go-to watch. GPS accuracy is superb, even in difficult metropolitan settings or dense forests, and the package delivers consistent performance week after week. If you want longevity, a range of sport-specific features, and the freedom to go for a run without worrying about your battery dying, the Garmin Epix Pro Sapphire Edition is the obvious choice.

Looking for the most recent regular Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle and Strands puzzles.

Today’s Connections: Sports Edition is bidding farewell to the Winter Olympics. If you’re struggling with today’s puzzle but still want to solve it, read on for hints and the answers.

Connections: Sports Edition is published by The Athletic, the subscription-based sports journalism site owned by The Times. It doesn’t appear in the NYT Games app, but it does in The Athletic’s own app. Or you can play it free online.

Read more: NYT Connections: Sports Edition Puzzle Comes Out of Beta

Hints for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Where the athletes will gather.

Green group hint: She shoots, she scores!

Blue group hint: Go for the gold!

Purple group hint: Draw a straight ____.

Answers for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Yellow group: Future Olympic hosts.

Green group: US women’s hockey players.

Blue group: Part of an Olympic medal celebration.

Purple group: ____ line.

Read more: Wordle Cheat Sheet: Here Are the Most Popular Letters Used in English Words

What are today’s Connections: Sports Edition answers?

The yellow words in today’s Connections

The theme is future Olympic hosts. The four answers are Brisbane, French Alps, Los Angeles and Utah.

The green words in today’s Connections

The theme is US women’s hockey players. The four answers are Carpenter, Keller, Knight and Winn.

The blue words in today’s Connections

The theme is part of an Olympic medal celebration. The four answers are anthem, medal, podium and stuffed animal.

The purple words in today’s Connections

The theme is ____ line. The four answers are blue, fall, finish and hog.

Red light therapy has come a long way since then. Rahman explained that red light wavelengths activate the mitochondria in skin cells and increase blood flow to hair follicles. This uptick in stimulation encourages mitochondria to increase their production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which promotes new growth.

When it comes to efficacy, we noted that iRestore Elite is FDA-cleared. This is a designation bestowed on moderate-risk tools that are sufficiently similar to other cleared devices already on the market. There are specific pathways that devices must follow to obtain FDA clearance, and the iRestore Elite was cleared through the FDA’s 510(k) premarket evaluation.

There are three hair-growth devices in iRestore’s lineup: the entry-level Essential ($499), the mid-tier Professional ($899), and the Elite ($1,899). Each contains iRestore’s “Lumitech” technology, which combines LED lights and medical-grade lasers. These laser diodes are proprietary to iRestore and are called Vixo lasers, operating in the 655- to 680-nanometer (nm) range. (Preliminary studies with mice have shown that using red light in the 600- to 660-nm range, and infrared wavelengths in the 800- to 850-nm range, can promote everything from cell regeneration to pain relief.)

The idea is that this dynamic duo can penetrate deeper into the skin than ordinary red light with lasers, while the LEDs ensure light is distributed across the scalp for maximum efficacy. Together, they reach a maximum of 2,500 milliwatts (mW), compared to the Professional’s 1,410 mW and Essential’s 600 mW.

The Elite is iRestore’s top-of-the-line offering and has the most LEDs of the three laser hair-growth systems, with 500 diodes total—that’s 300 lasers and 200 LEDs. The Essential has 51 lasers and 69 LEDs for a total of 120 diodes, while the iRestore Pro has 82 lasers and 200 LEDs for a total of 282 diodes. The Elite was also designed to cover more of the scalp. The Elite requires 12 minutes of daily use, while the Professional and Essential require 25 minutes every other day.

If price is not an object, the Elite is the no-brainer choice for more concentrated light therapy, shorter use time, and potentially faster results.

Rooting for You

Photograph: Julia Forbes

The helmet arrived in hefty red packaging, containing the helmet, portable battery pack, charging cord, and a red-and-black zippered travel case. It feels very fragile, and I wouldn’t throw it around—then again, you probably wouldn’t be shoving an $1,899 helmet in the back of your bathroom vanity.

The government agency that sends its corps members abroad to volunteer in foreign countries launched its latest initiative called Tech Corps. The Peace Corps’ latest proposal will recruit STEM graduates or those with professional experience in the artificial intelligence sector and send them to participating host countries.

According to the press release, volunteers will be placed in Peace Corps countries that are part of the American AI Exports Program, which was created last year from an executive order from President Trump as a way to bolster the US’ grip on the AI market abroad. Tech Corps members will be tasked with using AI to resolve issues related to agriculture, education, health and economic development. The program will offer its members 12- to 27-month in-person assignments or virtual placements, which will include housing, healthcare, a living stipend and a volunteer service award if the corps member is placed overseas.

Richard E. Swarttz, the acting director of the Peace Corps, said in a press release that Tech Corps volunteers will be “building technical capacity, supporting AI adoption across critical use cases and addressing barriers to last-mile AI implementation.” While the Tech Corps program is framed at benefiting host countries, it would also help to secure the US’ position in the rapidly expanding global AI market that includes growing competition from China.

The Stop Killing Games campaign is evolving into more than just a movement. In a YouTube video, the campaign’s creator, Ross Scott, explained that organizers are planning to establish two non-governmental organizations, one for the European Union and another for the US. According to Scott, these NGOs would allow for “long-term counter lobbying” when publishers end support for certain video games.

“Let me start off by saying I think we’re going to win this, namely the problem of publishers destroying video games that you’ve already paid for,” Scott said in the video. According to Scott, the NGOs will work on getting the original Stop Killing Games petition codified into EU law, while also pursuing more watchdog actions, like setting up a system to report publishers for revoking access to purchased video games.

The Stop Killing Games campaign started as a reaction to Ubisoft’s delisting of The Crew from players’ libraries. The controversial decision stirred up concerns about how publishers have the ultimate say on delisting video games. After crossing a million signatures last year, the movement’s leadership has been busy exploring the next steps.

According to Scott, the campaign leadership will meet with the European Commission soon, but is also working on a 500-page legal paper that reveals some of the industry’s current controversial practices. In the meantime, the ongoing efforts have led to a change of heart from Ubisoft since the publisher updated The Crew 2 with an offline mode.