But none of them seem to have LinkedIn profiles, they're quite possibly pen names.
The contact page lists a UK country code Signal number, so they're probably based there.
Some of the names appear on other sites with the same nav structure.
It is definitely a signal, but not an automatic indicator of something nefarious. There could be a whole host of good reasons why they're doing that. For example, the site could be launched as an experiment by a non-profit whose core work should not be associated with a risky message (this is my current favourite idea), or might piss off their funders.
FWIW there is a ton of newswriting on the Internet occurring under pen names for one reason or other. A lot of writers in the middle east will not or cannot use their real names.
A lot of the articles are also... misleading at best.
I dunno, this site just feels pretty strongly like a misinformation campaign.
Looks like they've gone by @AlphMedia and @PLRExpress in the past.
How so?
> and the entire article is biased
As are most articles on the topic, from either side.
More importantly: is what they say not essentially true?
What matters more: who's "side" someone is on, or what is true?
Which is a shame, because this conversation does need to happen—we need a figure to argue against tech giants being unilaterally influential in how we use our phones and the internet from a place of good faith.
There is no reference to organisations, writers or editors anywhere on this site if I'm not missing anything.