Aron D’Souza, who helped lead the lawsuit that bankrupted Gawker, launched a new startup Wednesday that lets users pay $2,000 to challenge factual claims in published journalism.
The company, Objection, said it raised “multiple millions” in seed funding from Peter Thiel, Balaji Srinivasan, Social Impact Capital, and Off Piste Capital. D’Souza said the platform aimed to restore trust in journalism by using artificial intelligence to evaluate disputed claims.
D’Souza said Objection could review any published content, including podcasts and social media, but that its focus was largely on legacy and written outlets. “Each objection is limited to a single factual allegation,” he said in an email. Multiple objections to one article would proceed separately.
Objection said it used large language models from OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, Mistral, and Google, prompted to act as average readers and assess evidence claim by claim. The company said its system also relied on freelancers, including former law enforcement agents and investigative journalists, and produced an “Honor Index” score meant to reflect a reporter’s integrity, accuracy, and track record.
D’Souza said anonymous sourcing would generally receive less weight than primary records such as regulatory filings and official emails. “Protecting a source’s information is a vital way of telling an important story, but there’s an important power asymmetry there,” he told TechCrunch. “The subject gets reported upon, but then there’s no way to critique the source.” He said the platform was “an attempt to fact-check; it’s the same as [X’s] Community Notes.”
Critics said the system could discourage reporting that depends on confidential sources and could favor wealthy users or corporations over ordinary people. Jane Kirtley, a University of Minnesota media law and ethics professor, said Objection fit “into a long pattern of attacks that erode public trust in the press.” She said the $2,000 fee suggested the company was “much more concerned with giving the already powerful a means to basically browbeat their journalistic opponents.”
First Amendment lawyer Chris Mattei said the platform “seems like a high-tech protection racket for the rich and powerful.” Eugene Volokh, a First Amendment scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the service would likely be protected as criticism of journalism and said he did not expect it to chill whistleblowers.