Category: Resources

South Carolina 2026-27 Budget Provision
117.211. (GP: Media Reliability Monitoring) For the current fiscal year, a state agency may not use state funds to contract with an advertising agency or other contractor who acts as or uses the services of media reliability monitors. The term media reliability monitor means any contractor whose primary or principal function is to rate or rank news and information services for the factual accuracy of their content, whether the content is published online, in print, by audio, or digitally, or by broadcasting via radio, television, cable, streaming service, or any other way news is delivered to the public; or to provide ratings or a subjective evaluation of news and information services regarding misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or ethics. The term includes, but is not limited to, organizations that engage in fact checking. The term does not include any contractor that rates media outlets for audience size, viewership, and demographic information; or that monitors media outlets for the purpose of compiling press or video clippings or aggregating news sources for the purpose of public relations and public awareness.

Section 150. In order to implement appropriations for state agencies in the 2026-2027 General Appropriations Act, a state agency may not use state funds to contract with an advertising agency or other contractor who acts as or uses the services of media reliability and bias monitors. The term “media reliability and bias monitor” means any contractor whose primary or principal function is to rate or rank news and information services for the factual accuracy of their content, whether the content is published online, in print, by audio, or digitally, or by broadcasting via radio, television, cable, streaming service, or any other way news is delivered to the public; or to provide ratings or a subjective evaluation of news and  information services regarding misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or ethics. The term includes, but is not limited to, organizations that engage in fact checking. The term does not include any contractor that rates media outlets for audience size, viewership, and demographic information; or that monitors media outlets for the purpose of compiling press or video clippings or aggregating news sources for the purpose of public relations and public awareness. This section expires July 1, 2027.

The Honorable Ted Cruz                                                                                                 June 30, 2026
Chairman
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

The Honorable Ron Wyden
United States Senate

Dear Chairman Cruz and Senator Wyden:

On behalf of the Independent Media Council (IMC), I write to express our strong support for S. 4749, the Justice Against Weaponized Bureaucratic Overreach to Networked Expression (JAWBONE) Act and to thank you for your bipartisan leadership in defending Americans’ First Amendment rights against government-sponsored censorship.

The IMC is a non-profit group of conservative and independent media outlets and aligned organizations that stand for free speech and a free press. Our members regularly reach over 75 million Americans.

The JAWBONE Act arrives at a critical moment. Across the country, policymakers are increasingly recognizing the dangers posed when government agencies work with, fund, or encourage third-party organizations that seek to influence the flow of information by labeling, rating, blacklisting, or demonetizing news outlets based on subjective or ideological criteria.

Many IMC members have experienced the consequences of these practices firsthand. One of the most prominent examples involved the U.S. State Department’s funding of the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which compiled exclusion lists and risk ratings targeting numerous conservative and independent media organizations. Those ratings were then used by advertisers and technology platforms to steer revenue away from targeted publishers.

Importantly, governments at every level are beginning to acknowledge this threat to free speech. The State Department itself recently entered into a settlement committing to cease funding or coordinating with organizations engaged in media censorship activities. For the past two years, Congress has passed a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that prevents the Department of War from contracting with advertising agencies that use media monitor blacklists in military recruitment campaigns. At the state level, Florida and West Virginia have also enacted laws prohibiting state agencies from contracting with advertising firms that use similar ideological rating systems.

These developments reflect a growing consensus that government should not facilitate or incentivize censorship. Yet despite this progress, significant gaps remain. Government officials can still exert pressure behind the scenes, using informal communications, funding relationships, regulatory leverage, or public threats to induce private actors to suppress speech that government could not constitutionally prohibit on its own.

The JAWBONE Act is a positive step toward addressing that problem directly. By creating meaningful legal remedies for those harmed by government coercion and increasing transparency around government communications with social media platforms, advertisers, AI companies, and other intermediaries, the legislation provides important safeguards against future abuses.

The IMC believes the antidote to misinformation and disinformation is more speech, not censorship and works to protect the speech of all media outlets and content creators. The JAWBONE Act is aligned with this core principle by reinforcing that government should not influence lawful speech through indirect pressure or third-party intermediaries.

We applaud your leadership on this issue and urge Congress to advance S. 4749, the JAWBONE Act. Thank you for your commitment to protecting free speech, fostering viewpoint diversity, and preserving a free and independent press.

Sincerely,

Christine Czernejewski
Director, Independent Media Council
christine@imcamerica.com

Misinformation Monitor NDAA Language

SEC. 1555. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT REGARDING CONTRACTING FOR MILITARY RECRUITING.
(a) CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Prior to the Secretary of Defense entering into any contract or other agreement (or extending, renewing, or otherwise modifying an existing contract or other agreement) with an entity for the purpose of that entity placing military recruitment advertisements on behalf of the Department
of Defense, the Secretary shall require, as a condition of such contract or agreement, that the entity certify to the Secretary that the entity does not—
(1) rate or rank news or information sources for the factual accuracy of their content;
(2) provide ratings or opinions on news or in formation sources regarding misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or ethics; or
(3) acquire or use any service that provides any ratings, rankings, or opinions described in paragraph (1) or (2) from any other person for military recruiting contracts.
(b) SUNSET.—The requirement under this section shall terminate on December 31, 2030.

1 A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding a new section,

2 designated §5A-3-64, relating to establishment of the First Amendment Preservation Act;
3 providing definitions; prohibiting state contracts with media reliability and bias monitor;

4 requiring written certifications from companies submitting bids that state purchasing
5 contracts are in compliance with the act; clarifying the applicability of the act to state

6 contracts; and providing effective date.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
ARTICLE 3. PURCHASING DIVISION.

§5A-3-64. First Amendment Preservation Act.

1 (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the First Amendment Preservation

2 Act and is hereby established by the Legislature for the purpose of preventing the state and its
3 agencies from contracting with advertising agencies that use the services of misinformation or

4 disinformation media reliability and bias monitors to ensure that state moneys do not fund
5 viewpoint discrimination and that state funding advertising reaches the broadest possible

6 audience without regard for political ideology or viewpoint.

7 (b) For the purposes of this section:
8 “Agency” means any state department, division, board, commission, institution, or other

9 administrative agency of state government, institutions of higher education using state funds, or
10 any political subdivisions of the state.

11 “Company” means any sole proprietorship, organization, association, corporation,

12 partnership, joint venture, limited partnership, limited liability partnership, limited liability company,

13 or other entity or business association, including all wholly owned subsidiaries, majority owned

14 subsidiaries, or parent companies that exist for the purpose of making a profit or that are nonprofit
15 entities.

16 “Media reliability and bias monitor” means a company whose primary or principal function
17 is rating or ranking news and information sources for the factual accuracy of their content, whether

18 published online, in print, by audio, or digitally, or by broadcasting via radio, television, cable,

19 streaming service, or any other ways news is delivered to the public, or that provide ratings or
20 rankings of news sources based on misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or

21 ethics, including, but not limited to, organizations that claim to engage in fact checking or
22 determining overall news accuracy. For purposes of this section, the term “media reliability and

23 bias monitor” does not include a company that only rates media outlets for audience size,

24 viewership, and demographic information, or that monitors media outlets for the purposes of
25 compiling press or video clippings or aggregating news sources.

26 (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this code to the contrary, an agency may not:

27 (1) Enter into any contract or other agreement with any media reliability and bias monitor

28 for purposes of directing the agency’s advertising placements or for use of the agency’s

29 programmatic advertising purchases; or

30 (2) Enter into any contract or agreement with any advertising or marketing agency that

31 uses the services of a media reliability and bias monitor for purposes of directing the agency’s
32 advertising placements or for use of the agency’s programmatic advertising purchases.

33 (d) Any agency seeking to contract for advertising or marketing services shall require all

34 companies submitting a bid or proposal to provide written certification that the company is neither

35 a media reliability and bias monitor nor planning to use the services of a media reliability and bias
36 monitor for the purposes of the contract or agreement with the agency. Prior to extending,

37 renewing, or otherwise changing or modifying an agreement or contract for advertising or

38 marketing services in effect prior to the effective date of this section, an agency shall obtain written

39 certification from the contractor it is neither a media reliability and bias monitor nor planning to

40 use the services of a media reliability and bias monitor for the purposes of the contract or

41 agreement with the agency.

42 (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent an agency from contracting for
43 services which aggregate news articles and information relevant to the agency or its constituents

44 or to prevent a company from providing analytical or statistical information on the performance of

45 advertisements placed by an agency.
46 (f) The provisions of this section enacted apply to all policies, contracts, plans, or

47 agreements subject to this section that are delivered, executed, amended, adjusted, or renewed
48 on or after July 1, 2026.

Florida Senate – 2025 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT Bill No. SB 2502 Ì743606

Section 121. In order to implement appropriations for state agencies in the 2025-2026 General Appropriations Act, a state agency may not use state funds to contract with an advertising agency or other contractor who acts as or uses the services of media reliability and bias monitors. The term “media reliability and bias monitor” means any contractor whose primary or principal function is to rate or rank news and information services for the factual accuracy of their content, whether the content is published online, in print, by audio, or digitally, or by broadcasting via radio, television, cable, streaming service, or any other way news is delivered to the public; or to provide ratings or a subjective evaluation of news and information services regarding misinformation, bias, adherence to journalistic standards, or ethics. The term includes, but is not limited to, organizations that engage in fact checking. The term does not include any contractor that rates media outlets for audience size, viewership, and demographic information; or that monitors media outlets for the purpose of compiling press or video clippings or aggregating news sources for the purpose of public relations and public awareness. This section expires July 1, 2026.

In an op-ed for Lootpress, the IMC’s Christine Czernejewski argues that West Virginia’s taxpayer-funded advertising should not be directed through media-monitoring firms that blacklist certain outlets based on ideological bias. She points out that these rating systems limit viewpoint diversity, harm local media businesses, and reduce the effectiveness of public advertising campaigns. The piece calls on state policymakers to pass legislation that prevents state advertising contracts from being filtered through partisan media monitors. Read the piece here.

In an op-ed for the Parkersburg News and Gazette, WV State Sen. Mike Azinger argues that media-monitoring firms such as NewsGuard unfairly steer taxpayer-funded advertising away from conservative and independent outlets, effectively creating viewpoint discrimination

He contends that this practice harms West Virginia’s outdoor economy, weakens local media, and limits viewpoint diversity, and he urges the state to pass legislation preventing government agencies from contracting with firms that rely on partisan media ratings. Read it here.

 

A new analysis reveals the extraordinary left-wing bias of website ratings firm NewsGuard, which should concern every American given that it is expanding its reach into cable and broadcast TV news. Liberal outlets were rated 27 points higher on average than news organizations on the right.

MRC Free Speech America analyzed the NewsGuard ratings of media outlets based on a list compiled by AllSides classified by their “bias” on a left-to-right scale. The average NewsGuard score for the “left” and “lean left” outlets — which included leftist outlets like Jacobin and The Nation — was 93/100. While the average…