This paper presents the author's critique to Paul E. Newton's article titled "Clarifying the consensus definition of validity." In his article, Newton not only clarifies but also redefines the consensus definition of validity. In this redefinition he omits the term "construct" and introduces the term "measurement." Both omission and introduction are fortuitous, but for entirely different reasons than Newton puts forward. The omission of the term construct is notable since Newton relies heavily on this concept in his argumentation. At the same time however he proposes to reintroduce empirical attributes and measurement back into the definition of validity, which seems to point to a conflicted view on philosophy of measurement. In this paper, the author aims to present a pragmatic, common sense analysis of the current, classic, and proposed new definition of measurement, from a representational measurement theory perspective. (Contains 2 footnotes.)