Johnson testified to the efficacy of Covenant Eyes by noting that Jack has “a clean slate” and does not appear to regularly view internet porn, something that can’t be said for 73 percent of his son’s teenage peers.

The speaker’s attempt to protect himself and his son from content that negatively affects sexual and mental development is admirable parenting and often hailed as best practice in evangelical circles around the country.

Rolling Stone, however, led its article by dishonestly accusing Johnson and his son of “monitor[ing] each other’s porn intake,” of which Johnson already indicated there was none. The publication then framed Johnson’s vigilance as “creepy Big Brother-ness” that matched his track record as a “faith-obsessed, election-denying, far-right Christian nationalist” with a staunch belief in traditional marriage and in the sanctity of life in the womb.

[Lots and lots of blowback on Rolling Stone on social media over this smear, too, and apparently well-deserved. Anyone expecting honesty and integrity from Rolling Stone’s reporting clearly hasn’t spent much time reading the magazine. Ask the University of Virginia about their journalistic credibility. — Ed]