稳定信号未识别高风险权限组合
NewsGuard icon

NewsGuard

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

用户数20K当前公开安装规模
评分3.6商店平均评分
评论数519公开评论体量
Manifest 版本V3插件平台版本
7日增长0近 7 天净增用户
7日增长率0%相对周增长速度
视觉预览

NewsGuard 媒体预览

4 项素材
趋势

用户增长趋势

按已采集快照查看用户数变化。

用户增长趋势

20K20K20K20K20K2026年7月15日2026年7月18日2026年7月21日最新值: 20K
评分趋势

近 7 日评分趋势

展示最近 7 日窗口内已采集的评分快照,辅助判断近期评分是否稳定。

7 日评分变化

起始值
3.59
最新值
3.59
7 日评分变化
0.00
3.493.543.593.643.692026年7月15日2026年7月18日2026年7月21日最新值: 3.59
2026年7月15日2026年7月21日
增长概览

日/周/月增长表现

同口径展示 1 天、7 天、30 天的绝对增长与增长率。

1日增长持平
00%
7日增长持平
00%
30日增长减少
-10K-33.3%
技术摘要

版本、语言与抓取信息

查看发布时间、版本、支持语言、最近更新和抓取时间。

版本5.9.9
ManifestV3
大小1.57MiB
语言数1English
发布时间
最近更新
最近抓取
English
简介

插件简介

查看插件说明、主要功能和适用场景。

NewsGuard's reliability ratings for news and information sources help users make decisions about which news sources to trust—and avoid misinformation and disinformation.

Our ratings, scores, and Nutrition Labels for websites are displayed next to links on search engines and social media platforms and cover all the news websites accounting for 95% of online engagement.

Ratings are conducted by a team of experienced journalists using nine basic, apolitical journalistic criteria. Each site receives a trust score of 0-100, an overall rating level ranging from “High Credibility” to “Proceed with Caution,” and a thorough Nutrition Label report detailing the site’s ownership and financing, content, credibility practices, transparency practices, and history.

NewsGuard is for personal use only. Any commercial, research, or other non-personal use of NewsGuard is strictly prohibited by our Terms of Service: https://www.newsguardtech.com/terms-of-service/

评价

最新评论快照

查看最近评论和评分分布。

商店综合星级3.6Chrome 商店给出的聚合评分,包含只有打分但没有同步评论正文的情况
已同步评论均分3.3仅基于下方已同步评论正文计算
有内容评论346已同步的评论正文数量
总评分/评论数519Chrome 商店公开评分/评论计数

商店综合星级:3.6。下方星级分布只统计已同步评论正文;如果某个插件只有公开分数、没有真实评论正文,这里可能为空。

5
161
4
36
3
13
2
21
1
115
Loris Modena2019年5月14日
1

Provata e a prima vista molto deludente, non basta che sia un quotidiano famoso e registrato per rendere le notizie: vere. Poi SI e NO è limitativo, sulla voce "Non pubblica ripetutamente notizie false" sarebbe bene avere una scala logaritmica da 1 a 10 per valutare quante notizie non verificate sono pubblicate. Non ripetutamente può anche essere una notizia falsa e non verificata alla settimana. Manca poi una voce sull'indipendenza politica, che è la vera piaga di molti quotidiani Italiani. soprattutto per le notizie che omettono di dare. Non prenderà piede, senza aprire a qualche funzione social come votazioni da parte degli utenti / lettori sulle testate stesse. È basato sulla sola valutazione di altri giornalisti. Come fanno a sapere se un quotidiano racconta balle, sulla cronaca locale? Chi le valuta e su che base? Puoi poi fidarti di una commistione di giornalisti che comunque dipende dall'ordine stesso? Attualmente mancano alcune testate nazionali, come il Tempo, ma sicuramente in base alla logica delle etichette utilizzate e l'assenza di un punteggio su base logaritmica, sarà un'alzata di scudi verdi.

语言 it
12 有用 · 9 无用
Sam2019年4月28日
1

Biased trash.

语言 en
1 有用 · 3 无用
Paul W2019年4月26日
4

Interesting to see people getting upset that their favourite news sites are not cutting the mustard when analysed for reliability, it must bite hard to realise that your curated worldview is based on information garnered using sites that perpetuate rubbish. For me, it's a bit too trusting of some notoriously poor UK news sites. It has no problem whatsoever with either thesun or the dailymail, both of whom have been slammed repeatedly for inaccuracy from a variety of other sources.

语言 en
4 有用 · 0 无用
Andrew Wright2019年4月25日
5

I love how detailed the reviews are! I was a little skeptical of the red and green binary system, but the actual reviews have really detailed information and criteria that allow me to make my own judgments, not just listen to NewsGuard's. I also like how transparent they are. Definitely worth an install.

语言 en
2 有用 · 1 无用
Carson H2019年4月22日
5

I'm sure there are plenty of ways this can be better (I bet the creators are constantly trying to improve), but we as citizens need tools like this to sift through some of the common news sources so that we can be a better informed people. The claims that this is 1984 is unwarranted. Why? This isn't a governmental organization, it doesn't tell you whats true and false (only what sources are more or less reputable), and it doesn't control any of your access. This is simply a tool to make you stop and think before you consume news that is written in a way that will misinform or present misinterpreted versions of the truth. As citizens we have a duty to remain informed while it is the goal of foreign countries to subvert our free flow of information and push our people to the extremes. This tool, in effect is a shortcut, the final responsibility of our news consumption behavior falls on each of us, but this tool helps make our job easier. It should by no means be used as a crutch for free thinking. That being said, I love the concept and will update this review as I use the extension more and more.

语言 en
2 有用 · 1 无用
匿名用户2019年3月27日
5

I LOVE this extension, I no longer get mad at headlines. I generally fact check stuff before sharing/posting content, but to see the green check-mark in my news-feeds is really comforting. Seeing a big red "X" on a headline that I would have spent 5-10 minutes angerly looking up information on in the past, well this just saves me time. Is it perfect? No, but it is doing a great job and can only get better.

语言 en
2 有用 · 2 无用
匿名用户2019年3月21日
5

Russian Intelligence is writing poor reviews for this application because this tool undermines their massive and ongoing operation that is underway in the United States and other countries around the world. Please take a critical look at the negative reviews. Democracy depends on you doing so. For example: "NPC #52700000389" (https://plus.google.com/100016172842861446212). A quick search for this user on DuckDuckGo reveals they are a Russian operative. This is possibly the most important piece of software (and the organization behind it) for the future functioning of democracy.

语言 en
2 有用 · 2 无用
Collective Evolution2019年3月21日
1

Idea might be useful to some extent in our current times. But their bias is strikingly obvious. If you follow their advisory board and funding you see very quickly they are owned and controlled by pharma companies, have ties to CFR and The Atlantic Council. There's nothing to trust about NewsGuard.

语言 en
4 有用 · 8 无用
匿名用户2019年3月13日
1

Good piece of software with TOO MUCH left-leaning bias! WP, CNN, NY Times, etc. are reliable news sources? What a joke!

语言 en
2 有用 · 3 无用
Alex Marsh2019年3月3日
4

Would love to see a yellow for those sites which do fail one of the categories. But nice assessment of sites. People claim bias but it seems more like people don't like hearing the place they get their news might fall down somewhat as a lot of the sites these reviewers suggest are known to be untrustworthy or independents.

语言 en
2 有用 · 2 无用