There is no reference to organisations, writers or editors anywhere on this site if I'm not missing anything.
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.