Media Bias Charts rank news sources for both accuracy and political bias.  While their definitions of bias and accuracy are subjective, the best of these sites are very transparent about their process, and keep a public database of the articles that were used in the rankings.  These charts are very thought-provoking, but are they useful in countering disinformation?  Well, Yes, and No.

Yes: 

• When you run across information from a source you don't recognize, a Media Bias Chart can help you get a rough idea of what you're looking at and how reliable it is.  
• Viewing your own favorite sources on a Media Bias Chart may surprise you, and can help you consider the bias of your own media diet.

• Using a Media Bias rankings is practically useless in an argument - even less convincing than using a fact-checking site.  

Lateral Reading means using multiple news sources side-by-side to verify information.  It allows you to take advantage of the research done by professional journalists who may have been present at the event, and who are able to interview key players and experts.

Check content using several mainstream sources that do original reporting.

• Seek news sources that have an accountability mechanism like an editorial board, and that publish corrections to their reporting when necessary.
• Use fact-checking sites, and their list of original sources for the topic.
• Follow up with any links to original document sources, such as an event video (with multiple recorders/reporters), transcripts, court documents, police blotters, etc...

Sometimes it makes sense to respond to disinformation when:

• You are able to have a private conversation, online or off
• You have an existing relationship with the person in real life
• You have information that will fill a knowledge gap
  
• You are prepared to be non-confrontational

When in doubt, go with Rule # 1 and Do Not Respond.

• it is already widespread in the community.  At this point, addressing it no longer helps it spread.
• there is a clear information gap that you are able to fill
• the misinformation is preventing you from accomplishing your goals

Efforts to counter disinformation are concentrated on mainstream new sources and social media, and miss the targeted disinformation that spreads in some communities.  Strategies to push back against targeted disinformation include:

• Partnering with these communities to monitor and report disinformation
• Engaging communities in creating and spreading pre-bunking and debunking messaging 
  
• Producing accurate resources in multiple languages
• Delivering adequate resources using the community's preferred media ( WhatsApp, mail, phone)

At the most basic level, the First Amendment protects our speech from interference and punishment from the government. It doesn’t protect our speech from interference, punishment, or censorship from Twitter(X) or from Facebook, or in most cases, from a private employer.  When we’re talking about protected speech, we’re talking about protection from government interference, not protection from anyone else who may disapprove of or want to penalize you for your speech.  For instance, you can be fired, or lose membership in a club, or be expelled from a business for types of speech that are protected by the First Amendment.

There are a few types of speech that the government can regulate without violating the First Amendment:

• Defamation is unprotected speech.  Defamation is knowingly giving false information that harms someone's reputation.  Libel is written defamation.  Slander is spoken defamation.
• Incitement to violence is a type of unprotected speech.  Speech has to meet a very strict and narrow definition to be considered "incitement to violence."  The speaker has to be in a leadership position, and intentionally cause a crowd to use specific and immediate violence against others. It is very difficult to prove that speech fits this narrow definition.
• Harassment is a category of unprotected speech. Harassment is speech that substantially interferes with another person's civil rights or ability to pursue their work, education or daily activities.  It usually takes the form of trying to intimidate or drive away someone based on their gender, ethnic or racial identity.  The intent and degree of the disruption in the target's life are key to the definition of harassment.  Most speech about another person's identity, no matter how offensive, insulting, or false, is protected by the First Amendment. 
  

The First Amendment and Social Media

While the goal of the First Amendment  -- allowing for free and open exchange of ideas and opinions -- is a valid consideration for Social Media companies, ultimately, it is up to these private companies to create and enforce their own speech policies.

• As privately owned businesses, social media companies do not have to allow all forms of speech permitted by the First Amendment, and may make rules to suit their own needs, whether that is maintaining a "family-friendly" environment, promoting information that reflects their beliefs and values, increasing engagement, or attracting advertisers.   These needs are often in conflict.  For instance, controversial content may increase user engagement, but cause advertisers to leave the platform.

• Different private companies enforce different policies, which is why the same controversial message may be allowed on one social media platform but not allowed on another.  These policies are part of the terms of service that users "read" and sign when they join the platform.