The Fake News Pipeline

Summary

Boiling Point: The Fake News Pipeline – A Comprehensive Summary

Episode Release Date: April 10, 2025

In the April 10th episode of Boiling Point, hosted by Sammy Roth from L.A. Times Studios, the focus centers on the insidious relationship between fossil fuel companies and the propagation of biased media outlets designed to influence public opinion and legal proceedings. Titled "The Fake News Pipeline," the episode delves deep into how corporate interests manipulate information to serve their agendas, particularly in the context of climate change and energy policies.

---

1. Introduction to the Episode

Sammy Roth opens the episode by revisiting the contentious Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) protests that erupted in 2016 near the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's lands in North Dakota. These protests, led by environmental groups like Greenpeace, ultimately did not prevent the pipeline's construction. However, the conflict escalated legally when Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline, filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace in 2019, accusing the organization of trespass, nuisance, and defamation, among other charges.

Quote:
"The sad thing is, the intimidation might work." – Sammy Roth [03:08]

2. Background: Dakota Access Pipeline and Greenpeace Lawsuit

The lawsuit culminated in a monumental verdict where a North Dakota jury ordered Greenpeace to pay over $666 million in damages to Energy Transfer Partners. Greenpeace intended to appeal the decision, but the staggering award raised concerns among free speech experts about its potential to deter future environmental protests.

Quote:
"Greenpeace argued that the lawsuit was basically a giant intimidation tactic designed to deter future protests and silence free speech." – Sammy Roth [02:45]

3. The Emergence of Metric Media and Central Indie News

Enter Miranda Greene, an investigative climate reporter with a decade-long track record covering climate and energy in California and the American West. Greene unearthed alarming information about a mysterious publication, Central Indie News, that began circulating in Mandan, North Dakota—a town central to the DAPL trial.

She identified Metric Media, a right-leaning organization owning approximately 1,100 news sites nationwide, as the orchestrator behind Central Indie News. Run by former TV reporter Brian Timpone, Metric Media produces "pink slime" news outlets that masquerade as legitimate newspapers but serve specific political and corporate agendas.

Quote:
"Metric Media...owns about 1100 news sites across the country." – Miranda Greene [09:06]

4. Investigations into Metric Media’s Influence Tactics

Miranda Greene detailed how Central Indie News appeared in Mandan, a predominantly conservative town deeply connected to the oil and gas industry. The newspaper featured articles revisiting the 2016 DAPL protests with a decidedly negative slant towards the protesters, subtly swaying public sentiment against Greenpeace just as the pivotal trial loomed.

Quote:
"When you look closely within the paper, you notice that there was a specific seat series...about protesters against the Dakota Access pipeline...and really had a negative slant on how these protests impacted the town." – Miranda Greene [04:35]

Further investigation revealed financial ties between Energy Transfer's then-CEO, Kelsey Warren, who donated $5 million to a super PAC, and Metric Media, which received payments for “media services” shortly before Central Indie News began distribution in Mandan. This connection suggests a strategic maneuver to influence the trial's outcome in favor of Energy Transfer.

Quote:
"There's a link between money flowing from the person who's in charge of Energy Transfer...and the guy who runs this Metric Media company." – Miranda Greene [12:30]

5. Case Study: Mount Vernon News in Ohio

Greene expanded her investigation to Ohio, where Metric Media purchased the Mount Vernon News, a historic local paper. Post-acquisition, the newspaper shifted from comprehensive local reporting to aggressively opposing a proposed solar farm, Fraser Solar. This change aligned with the interests of key local stakeholders, including Ariel Corporation, the town’s largest employer in the gas manufacturing sector.

Quote:
"This was the first time that I believe it's been documented that Metric Media bought a paper." – Miranda Greene [14:12]

The targeted media campaign contributed to the unseating of supportive county commissioners, demonstrating Metric Media's influence on local elections through biased reporting.

6. The Richmond Standard and Corporate-Owned Media

Another alarming example is the Richmond Standard in Richmond, California, owned by Chevron. Unlike Metric Media’s opaque operations, the Richmond Standard transparently associates itself with Chevron. However, this transparency is superficial. The publication predominantly features positive stories about Chevron and the community while neglecting critical reports on environmental incidents like spills or pollution-related fines.

Quote:
"It's really easy to skip over some of the major issues...but at the end of the day, this is a PR tool." – Miranda Greene [19:39]

Greene highlighted how the Richmond Standard misrepresented Chevron’s environmental mishaps as community benefits, thereby glossing over the negative impacts of Chevron’s operations.

7. Alabama Power’s Similar Tactics

Miranda Greene also examined Alabama Power’s endeavors to control local narratives. Alabama Power launched the Alabama News Center in 2015, mirroring Chevron’s approach with the Richmond Standard. This platform selectively reports favorable news about the company and the community, deliberately omitting significant environmental and regulatory issues.

Moreover, Alabama Power covertly acquired the Birmingham Times, a historic Black newspaper, which subsequently failed to address critical issues like rising electricity rates and pollution in Black neighborhoods, focusing instead on benign community stories.

Quote:
"They are transparent to a degree... but it's when you look at the reporting cumulatively, you see that there really is a slant there." – Miranda Greene [19:34]

8. The Larger Pattern and Implications

The episode illustrates a broader pattern where fossil fuel companies and their allies exploit declining local journalism to create a network of biased media outlets. These "news mirages" serve as public relations tools, pushing narratives that align with corporate interests while undermining dissenting voices and environmental activism.

Quote:
"These are public relations tools... they are a public relations tool." – Miranda Greene [25:01]

Greene underscores the exploitation of "news deserts"—communities lacking robust local journalism—as fertile ground for these biased publications. By flooding these areas with one-sided information, corporations can shape public opinion, influence legal outcomes, and stifle opposition.

9. Effectiveness and Impact of Media Manipulation

Assessing the effectiveness of such media manipulation remains challenging. However, Miranda Greene posits that the pervasive presence of these biased newspapers likely swayed public perception and juror sentiments, contributing to favorable legal outcomes for corporations like Energy Transfer Partners.

Quote:
"One of the things that is very clear...these papers operate to create a consensus on these issues that are key to whoever is funding these papers." – Miranda Greene [33:48]

The notable $666 million verdict against Greenpeace exemplifies the potential consequences of such targeted media campaigns, not just for organizations but also for the broader movement advocating for environmental justice.

10. Conclusion and the Importance of Genuine Journalism

The episode concludes with a compelling argument for the necessity of authentic, fact-based journalism. Miranda Greene laments the rise of corporate-controlled media outlets that undermine public trust and diminish the role of unbiased reporting in democratic societies.

Quote:
"Fact-based reporting is ultimately the most reliable and it shines a light on why it's important to trust the institutions that you're reading." – Miranda Greene [34:55]

Sammy Roth echoes this sentiment, emphasizing the critical role of genuine journalism in safeguarding free speech and ensuring informed public discourse. The episode serves as a clarion call to support legitimate news entities and remain vigilant against the manipulation of information by powerful corporate interests.

---

Key Takeaways:

• Metric Media and similar organizations are leveraging biased media outlets to influence public opinion and legal outcomes in favor of fossil fuel interests.

• These tactics exploit news deserts, communities with diminished local journalism, allowing corporations to shape narratives with minimal scrutiny.

• The $666 million verdict against Greenpeace underscores the profound impact of such media manipulation on environmental activism and free speech.

• The proliferation of "news mirages" like the Richmond Standard and Alabama News Center highlights a worrying trend of corporate-controlled media outlets masquerading as legitimate news sources.

• Authentic, fact-based journalism remains essential in countering these efforts and maintaining a well-informed public.

---

Final Thoughts:

"The Fake News Pipeline" episode of Boiling Point meticulously exposes the covert operations of fossil fuel companies in manipulating media to further their agendas. Through Miranda Greene's investigative prowess, listeners gain a sobering insight into the lengths corporations will go to silence opposition and control narratives. The episode reinforces the indispensable value of trustworthy journalism in combating misinformation and upholding democratic principles.

Transcript

[Sami Roth]

This is an LA Times Studios podcast.

[Miranda Greene]

My name is Sami Roth, and I'm the climate columnist for the Los Angeles Times. This is boiling point. In 2016, at the end of the Obama administration, there, there were huge protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota. The oil pipeline was being built by a company called Energy Transfer Partners across lands sacred to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. Ultimately, the protesters lost and the pipeline was built. But the story doesn't end there. In 2019, the pipeline developer, Energy Transfer, filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace, one of the environmental groups involved in the protests. The company accused Greenpeace of trespass, nuisance, defamation, and more, claiming the group had coordinated a unlawful and violent scheme to cause financial harm. Greenpeace defended itself. The group said it had played a small, peaceful role in the protests, which I should note also resulted in violence by law enforcement officers and private security contractors against the protesters. Greenpeace argued that the lawsuit was basically a giant intimidation tactic designed to deter future protests and silence free speech. And the sad thing is, the intimidation might work. Last month, a jury of North Dakota residents ordered Greenpeace to pay damages totaling more than $666 million to Energy Transfer Partners. Greenpeace plans to appeal, but whatever ends up happening, free speech experts say the massive damage award could have a chilling effect on future protests. There's another angle to the Greenpeace story, though, that's been flying under the radar, which is that fossil fuel companies and their allies aren't just trying to intimidate protesters. Some of those companies are trying to shape the way that people think about protesters, and they're doing it through fake news. Our guest today on Boiling Point is Miranda Greene. She's an investigative climate reporter based in Los Angeles, and she's written for a whole bunch of excellent publications, including ProPublica, NPR, the Guardian, and Floodlight. She had a story last month that really caught my attention about a mysterious newspaper that started showing up in the small North Dakota town where the Greenpeace trial was taking place. Dakota Access Pipeline protests, years and years after the fact. And these stories seemed like they were designed to make people dislike the protesters. And this wasn't the first time Miranda found a weird news organization that seemed determined to help out a fossil fuel company. But let's not spoil the ending. Here's my conversation with Miranda. Miranda, thank you very much for being with us on the Boiling Point podcast.

Thanks for having me, Zammy.

So there have been a lot of stories about this verdict against Greenpeace. This nearly $670 million verdict huge, huge number. There's been less focus on this aspect of the story that you've been covering. This news source, supposed news source, central nd news that maybe was influencing jurors in Morton County, North Dakota. I'm so curious how and why you started covering this story. Tell us a little bit about how you got into this and about this quote unquote newspaper, the Central Indie news.

Yeah. So I was first flagged to this newspaper and some people are calling it a political mailer, some people are calling it junk, but it looks like a newspaper. It's broadsheet. Last fall, I was alerted to this paper by locals. Some people were tweeting about it. And I immediately recognized it as an entity coming from a right leaning political group that makes these papers called Metric Media. And so last fall I decided to dive into why these papers were showing up in people's homes in Morton County, North Dakota, very specifically in a very small town called Mandan.

So, and this is where these protests took place over the Dakota Access pipeline back in 2016. 17.

Exactly. But at the time that these papers showed up, it was really unclear why this area was being targeted. You know, on its surface, this looks like a normal paper. It had kind of articles across the gambit. It's in this very red community. And it was before the election. So people thought that maybe it had something to do with the political election. But if you looked closely within the paper, you notice that there was a specific seat series within the paper that said on this day in October 2016 seems like a really random date to be almost a decade earlier. And all those articles specifically were about protesters against the Dakota Access pipeline back in 2016, and really had a negative slant on how these protests impacted the town. And as I started digging into this, I realized that there was a most likely, a very big reason why these papers were happening is the way they were. It wasn't tied to the election. It was tied to a very large trial that was set to take place some. We're calling it the trial of the century in North Dakota early next year against Greenpeace.

We'll be back after a quick.

[Sami Roth]

It's sort of very similar as to being a foster parent. You go in it not for the length of time, but to know that even two months or 10 years can still create a big impact in a child's life. So CASA is a nonprofit organization that stands for Court Appointed Special Advocate. And they specialize in making sure that the child's needs are met, whether it's medical, health, educational, and ensuring that the child is receiving the most ability they can.

[Miranda Greene]

So this trial has now taken place. This huge verdict was awarded by jurors in Morton county against Greenpeace, nearly $670 million. So you're saying that what you learned in your reporting or what you think you figured out here was that whoever was putting out this, this newspaper, you think they were trying to influence the outcome of. Of this trial?

That's what it felt like. I mean, it definitely felt like the. The specific messaging within this paper was targeted. It was targeted at reminding the community of what it was like during that period of time when the Dakota Access pipeline was being protested and what kind of. How frustrating it was for locals, how it, you know, it cost a lot of money in the county to clean up the trash that came from them, how people were arrested, how that took money out of the coffers for law enforcement. And one of the reasons why it seemed targeted was because there was a trial happening and they needed to specifically find a jury. And actually, after my reporting on this, specifically highlighting this, that this paper was happening, Greenpeace flogged this as potential jury tampering and actually tried to get the judge to offer them an extension to look into where this paper was coming from, to look into who was paying for it. And they tried to argue that this was likely trying to tamper with the jury because it's such a small pool in Mandan. And.

Yeah, Mandon's not a big place, right? 25,000 people. Am I remembering correctly?

Super tiny rural community. You know, it's. It's largely. Most of the people that work there do have connections to the oil and gas industry, are pro the fossil fuel industry because of that. But it's also, you know, a lot of, you know, farmers, a lot of everyday folk, and a lot of them hadn't really been thinking about this. I talked to someone who specifically told me, you know, a lot has happened since then. We have had Covid. We've had multiple elections, we've moved on until something kind of sparked us to remember, and that is kind of what the argument was and a lot of people believed was happening with this paper.

There's a huge context here with the Dakota Access pipeline and the protest and the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which was at the center of protesting this oil pipeline. But before we get into that context, I mean, I gotta ask you, this company, Metric Media, which you've reported on before, tell us who they are and what you've learned about them and why it's important that this company specifically was behind this quote unquote newspaper.

So Metric Media is a right leaning organization that owns about 1100 news sites across the country. It's run by a former TV news reporter named Brian Timpone. He runs about eight different companies that all are within what we call this Metric Media Network. And what they put together are these websites that some people call pink slime news sites. So pink slime is kind of what a great term.

Pink slime.

I know, I always feel a little disgusting when I say it.

Where does that even come from?

It's a term that originally comes from the meat industry. So it's kind of like when you think of the filler meat in foods like hamburgers. You know, it's originally meat, but it's filled with a lot of stuff. It says it's one thing, but if you look closely, it's not really what it seems. And that is how they describe these papers. They look like news on the outside. They have columns, they have articles, they have headlines. But if you look closely, they're one sided. They might not have bylines. Some of the articles all say one thing. They seem to really push a narrative. They're not what we think of as traditional ethical news.

Okay, so Metric Media, so go on, who are they and tell us what you learned about their funding. What were they really doing here and what have they been doing in other cases where you've seen their work?

So Metric Media has for years been tied to kind of a pay to play philosophy where many different reporters have found that they oftentimes take payments from different candidates or different PACs or different backers in the lead up to major elections. You will find some of these newspapers showing up at people's doorsteps before major elections or as those areas are, really looking at specific culture news topics. So this happened earlier last year when it came to cultural wars over the future of abortion rights. A paper that really started pushing Catholic news ideals showed up on people's doorsteps. We saw this happening actually recently with the Supreme Court in Wisconsin. Another Metric Media newspaper showed up at people's doorsteps really pushing the Republican candidate. And so they have been tied to taking money to spend specifically push these initiatives. So when we saw this happening in Mora, you know, my eyebrows went up and actually ended up finding that there was a money link here. So back to the Greenpeace trial. Energy Transfer is the pipeline company that is suing Greenpeace and they were suing Green's Peace, specifically saying that the protests were organized by Greenpeace and that Greenpeace was specifically responsible for defaming the company and, and responsible for millions of dollars in damages. And what we found is actually looking at financial documents. Energy Transfer's then CEO, now chairman Kelsey Warren, had donated $5 million to a super PAC. And then, and this was days before this paper showed up on people's doorsteps. And then shortly thereafter, that super PAC paid money to a media company owned by Brian Timpone in the Metric Media Network for quote, unquote, media services. And then these papers showed up.

Okay, so there's a link between money flowing from the person who's in charge of Energy Transfer, this Texas company that built the Dakota Access pipeline and operates it today, and the guy who runs this Metric Media company that is suddenly distributing newspapers in Mandan, North Dakota, where they're selecting the jurors for the trial, where Energy Transfers suing Greenpeace for defamation and then WINS A nearly $670 million verdict.

Exactly.

That's weird to say the least.

I think weird is definitely a good word for that. I think it would be hard to argue that this was just a coincidence.

Yeah. And you've, I mean, you did another really fascinating story about the work they've done in Ohio where they were not promoting fossil fuels per se, but that was an anti renewable energy product they were putting out. Right where they were go. Helping people go after solar development.

Exactly. So there was a Metric Media paper in this small community called Mount Vernon, called the Mount Vernon News in Knox County, Ohio, and reported on this with ProPublica last year. And in a similar sense, this paper started attacking a local proposed solar farm. The solar farm was called Fraser Solar. It had recently been proposed in the town, hadn't gotten a lot of opposition. And then out of the blue, this local paper started kind of really going after it and criticizing it and questioning whether it was right for the community. There were only about nine farmers in the town at the time that had signed up to lease their lands, but they would have made a significant amount of money out of it. This is a period of time where farming has become less lucrative and solar offers a big alternative to people who want to keep their land. But the paper really kind of went at it, and when we started digging deeper, noticing that, it really started highlighting the talking points and really pushing the perspective of a key number of individuals in town that were really pro gas, including the town's biggest employer, the Ariel Corporation, which manufactures gas parts.

And as I recall, in Ohio, the solar project is still awaiting a vote, but there were politicians who were supportive of it, who got booted out of office after this newspaper started attacking them.

That's exactly right. There were county commissioners who were up for reelection who all of a sudden were facing pushback from locals and specifically articles targeting them for their perspective on solar. And you know, we interview one of these county commissioners and he was not anti solar. He, he was not ants. He was not pro solar either. He was pro people's ability to use their land for what they want, which is a conservative ideals, a very conservative community. And all of a sudden he started seeing articles attacking him in the papers saying that he was this, you know, pro solar maverick, something that he said he wasn't. And yet he still lost his election. And I will say, you know, Sammy, what was really interesting about that paper specifically is this is the first time that I believe it's been documented that Metric Media bought a paper. So this, you know, Mount Vernon news was actually not one of their, you know, typical pink slime papers that just exist online and then every once in a while they print out an issue and send it to people's stores. This was actually a historic paper that existed in that town since the turn of the century. This paper was run by real reporters that had a hard newsroom, brick and mortar newsroom, and the community knew it. It's where they turned to for obituaries. And in 2020, it was purchased by Metric Media for about a million dollars. And right away changes began. Most of the reporters were laid off or turned to contract rolls. The coverage completely spiraled down and then it started becoming this really anti solar paper. Right when this solar project came in town, actually one of the local politicians I spoke to said that people kind of behind closed doors call it the Solar Times.

I mean, I think one of the things that to me is so disturbing about all of this is you hear politicians, especially folks the right and especially President Trump, railing all the time about fake news, talking about what you and I do, which is actual journalism. But I mean, this is real fake news, isn't it? I mean, this is people who have a clear economic agenda trying to promote their own profits who are putting out fake news.

Yeah, I think what I really, what really stood out to me is that this is different from right leaning news. Right, right leaning news has a perspective. It's, it's maybe pushing an agenda, but it's at least transparent. You know, they try to be transparent with where they're coming from. You have real bylines, you have real reporters. The names are the names of real reporters that's not what we're seeing in this metric media network. Oftentimes if there are byline names, those people don't exist. We haven't found any sort of, you know, reference of them online. A lot of times as articles are shared across the network, across multiple sites, they are pushing talking points of Koch Network linked think tanks, the State Policy Network think tanks, something, you know, think tanks like the Heritage foundation, the Manhattan Institute, groups that we know are climate denier groups or climate skeptic groups that don't believe that climate change and getting.

All sorts of money from not just the Koch brothers who are fossil fuel billionaires, but other fossil fuel linked companies and groups and institutes.

Exactly. So not only are they pushing a narrative, but they're obviously taking money from these, these organizations that really want push that narrative. And those are the names and experts that are quoted over and over again in this network. And it's all one sided. You know that. You and I both know this. But when you write an article, you always give the other side a chance to comment. You always at least try to show what their perspective is, to have a balanced perspective on news. You don't see that in the metric media stories.

One place that's gotten quite a bit of coverage is this publication called the Richmond Standard. You've written about them, the LA Times has covered them as well. This is a publication in Richmond, California, in the Bay Area, in the East Bay. It's a town that is best known outside of the Bay Area for being home to a Chevron oil refinery, the first oil refinery on the West Coast. The Richmond Standard is the only, you know, sort of the big major local publication in Richmond. It's owned and operated by Chevron, which owns the oil refinery. And I'm curious because when you did your story about it, you pointed out that they basically don't do critical coverage of the refinery. When there are spills or explosions or leaks. They'll occasionally refer to it, but they're not going to give you the full story of all of the fallout and danger from the pollution. They're mostly writing nice stories about the town or nice stories about Chevron. One thing I'm curious about is they are putting names on stories. It seems like they are admitting that they're Chevron. Is that any better to you or is this equally bad is what Metric Media is doing?

You're right, Sami. I think what's different about what the Richmond Standard is doing is that they are transparent that it is a Chevron entity, but transparent to a degree. They are run by a PR company. Sam Singer owns the PR company in the Bay Area and on the website it says Chevron. But if you click into any of the articles, so let's say someone shares it to you via Twitter or someone texts it to you. Nowhere on the individual pages does it say owned and operated by Chevron. And oftentimes the site actually does a wire service where it works with other local newsrooms across the Bay Area. When those are reprinted in their papers, nowhere does it say a Chevron entity. And so one that is a bit disingenuous in the sense that people don't know what they're reading unless they really go looking for it, which most people don't have the time to do. But secondly, as you mentioned, it's when you look at the reporting cumulatively, you see that there really is a slant there. The articles oftentimes don't report on Chevron itself. They do great community profiles. They oftentimes dive into reports of theft or issues with crime in the area or what's happening at the local schools. But what they don't report on are bad air days or flaring incidents that happen unless they really can't avoid it. So, for example, just before I came into town last year to report that story, Chevron had actually been doled out a major fine. It was one of the largest fines that had been given to an oil and gas company in California's history. We're talking millions and millions of dollars. And the other publications that covered this talked about this as a significant win for the state, that it was a big dent on Chevron and really a conversation about how the state has really been pushing harder to kind of reel in these oil gas companies and these major polluters. Chevron instead wrote in the Richmond Standard that this was a major win for the community because Chevron had agreed to reinvest in the community. Made it seem like it was something that they had come to on their own to benefit the greater Richmond area, which just simply wasn't the case.

And I think one thread that I've picked up in your coverage, and that isn't especially surprising to me, is it a reporters that, especially when there's so much information kind of just being pushed at people now from so many different sources, I mean, far beyond traditional news outlets from social media and from YouTube and from just every, you know, streaming every means available, it's just hard for most people to really know what to trust, what not to trust, what to believe, what to take with a grain of salt. Like, my guess is to a lot of people, if they see the Richmond Standard pop up, there's just not the, I would say not the sophistication because I don't want to sound like I'm insulting anyone, but it's just, how are you supposed to know that that's Chevron and that you shouldn't trust it? Maybe you haven't heard of it, but I'm guessing that most people don't realize that that's something that they should be skeptical of.

I think that it also goes the other way. I think that there has been a move towards people trusting local news sites and alternative sites more than mainstream media. And so when you're local in this area and you see an article that's specifically about your area, you know, you might not feel like there's a reason for why you should be skeptical. You know, why would there be a local newspaper that you know is disingenuous? That seems odd, you know, maybe msnbc, but not, you know, the Richmond Standard. And so I think you are more likely to believe that. And these, these papers are doing that on purpose. They know that people are distrusting of mainstream media but still interested in news. And they're filling a void. And especially in a community like Richmond, which does not an alternative daily paper, it's a bit of a news desert. And so not only is it tapping into people's baser inclinations to be skeptical of national news, there's no alternative that's kind of criticizing or challenging the way that they're writing the articles they're writing.

Well, and that's, you know, and I think that's something that these companies are clearly exploiting. And I should say that, you know, you've reported that Chevron is doing the same thing in the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico, and they've done something similar in South America. And we should talk about your Alabama Power utility. Alabama Powers is up to all sorts of shenanigans as well, and there are plenty of examples of this. But I mean, it seems like a lot of these companies are taking advantage of the fact that the news industry, our industry, has been suffering these really dramatic declines for, for all sorts of reasons. The decline of print advertising and the struggles to adapt to a web based business model through some of our own faults and people not wanting to pay for subscriptions online, which is just a problem that is really difficult to solve. I mean, it creates these news deserts, that term you use, where there are local communities that are not served by that many, if any real journalists. And so in that information vacuum, I think it just probably becomes easier for companies say, ooh, we can swoop in here and turn the narrative to our advantage.

Yeah. What we called it in the piece was a bit of a news mirage. Chevron has been operating that paper for a decade now. So they were actually one of the first to really get on this bandwagon and have really set the ground as this kind of playbook that a lot of other publications have looked to. And, you know, you have to think, Sammy, at the end of the day, maybe this is a great resource to the community, but Chevron is a business, and I imagine that they make these decisions strategically. So if they're putting money into this enterprise, they're paying a PR company to run this consistently, they're expanding their this kind of playbook themselves across the Permian Basin or in the Amazon and key areas that are strategic to them. They must believe they're getting something out of it from a PR perspective. And that is what these papers are. At the end of the day, they are a public relations tool. And other oil and gas industries and utility companies as well, have actually pointed to the Richmond Standard as kind of this gold star standard on doing that.

Well, who's copying Chevron? Where else have you seen this? Where are they using this as the standard?

Yeah. So the Alabama Power, which is the largest utility company in Alabama, specifically mentions that the Richmond Standard was the first, you know, the first group to do this. Right. When they decided to establish the Alabama News Center. So Alabama Power established the Alabama News center in 2015, and it is a site that they actually call a source for good news. And so they only write about the good news of Alabama, which means that they only write about good news related to themselves. And in a podcast interview, a former reporter who's now a communications lead at Alabama Power, his name is Ike Pigott, he gave an interview specifically talking about why they started this news site and basically said that in, you know, as news organizations have started talking about climate change in terms of a fact, a scientific reality rather than an opinion, it has become harder for organizations to get their messaging out there clearly. And so instead of pitching news reporters like you and me stories and hoping that they land and hoping that they're written correctly, they have decided it makes more sense to create sites where they can directly push their messaging to readers. And that is what the Richmond Standard was doing, and that is what Alabama Power sought to do with the Alabama News Center.

Right. And as I recall from your reporting, they're trying pretty hard over there to avoid people learning about a lot of the pollution from the coal and gas plants that Alabama Power operates.

Yeah, it's really strategic. I mean, when you think about it, pollution's not a positive news story. Uh, when you think about it, fines are not positive news. So it's really easy to skip over some of the major issues that are tied to that news operation by simply pushing yourself as we just want to prop up the community, but not talk about any of the underlying issues that are really important to this community. And in addition to that reporting, I also reported on how Alabama Powers nonprofit arm had secretly bought a historic black newspaper in Alabama called the Birmingham Times. And that newspaper also failed to cover key issues that you would imagine would be really important to a black community, like rising electricity rates in the town, like pollution in historic black neighborhoods. And just really paved over those issues and focused on, you know, community protection profiles.

We'll be back after a quick break.

[Sami Roth]

It's sort of very similar as to being a foster parent. You go in it not for the length of time, but to know that even two months or 10 years can still create a big impact in a child's life. So CASA is a non profit organization that stands for Court Appointed Special Advocate. And they specialize in making sure that the child's needs are met, whether it's medical, health, educational, and ensuring that the child is receiving the most ability they can.

[Miranda Greene]

Mirindra, I'm so curious. I mean, you've covered so many specific examples of this news mirage or pink slime phenomenon having to do with fossil fuel companies or related entities. Do you have a sense of how common it is or has anyone studied just, you know, is this just happening in these handful of places that you've covered, or do you think it's much more common and we just don't have a good way of measuring it yet? What do you, what do you think about that?

You know, it's, it's an area that really hasn't been studied that much. And it's one of those areas that I kind of came into through one story and then interviewed people and they said, oh, you think this is interesting? You should check out what Alabama Power is doing. So I wrote on Alabama Power and then as I was reporting on them, they mentioned in the interview we really took our ideas from the Richmond Standard. And so then I jumped over to report on the Richmond Standard. It has been a bit of a rabbit hole. I realized only as I was reporting each story how big this network is, how they're pulling from each other, how much money is here, how they're interlinked. And I really do think that it's continuing to grow. I have people who reach out to me and say, this is happening in my community. Can you take a look? I've had sources who used to work at Metric Media who've talked to me and said I know exactly what they're building. So it really is a pretty big network. And I think with the advent of the Internet, we have infinite possibilities with what they will do with us.

I liked it better when we had fewer than infinite possibilities. A lot of possibility is good, but infinite is maybe too many.

It's overwhelming. It's overwhelming. And that's what makes it so hard to know what's reliable and what's not. We have reporters who are being cut from really important jobs that are starting substacks. And so, you know, now we have real reporters on these news sites, and then we have fake reporters that don't actually exist that are run by PR sites. And I will admit that it's, it's. It's really hard. I think that it means that the public just has to be really thoughtful and really pointed with where they get their news. You know, they need to go to the homepages and look and see who. Who pays for that company, who it's supposedly backed from. They need to be critical of what the articles that they're being shared, but it's not something that the everyday person does, and that's by design.

One big picture question I have here, and maybe we can return to Mandan, North Dakota for this one, is just how effective this all is. And I know this is a pretty hard question to answer, but I'm curious, your sense. Do you think this central nd news product from Metric Media, I mean, do you. Do you think it. It did help, you know, sway the, you know, the jurors? Is there any way to gauge that?

I think it's really hard to gauge the impact at the end of the day. I do know that many, many people saw these papers. I do know that, you know, I spoke to many individuals who said that they hadn't really thought about these issues until they saw these newspapers. So in terms of giving an impression to readers that they might not have had, I do think that it's very successful. You know, one of the things that is very clear with the way that a lot of these papers operate, and, you know, we just talked about a newspaper in Alabama. We talked about a newspaper in Ohio. We talked about a newspaper in North Dakota. These are red states and these issues that they're pushing are conservative issues. So they're not necessarily trying to change people's opinions. They're trying to make sure that people have the same perspective on key culture war issues. They're essentially making sure that there is a major group of individuals that create a consensus on these issues that are key to whoever is funding these papers.

And it's so ironic then that you hear so much from the right, I mean, I think about free speech and preserving the ability to everyone can share their point of view. When I think the reality here is that when it seems there's this really concerted effort here to drown out dissenting opinions and enforce this rigid orthodoxy, which is, I mean, it speaks to why we need journalism. I mean, what need you need actual reporters to represent all legitimate, thoughtful, fact based sides. And it's unfortunate that there are fewer and fewer of us. So I'm glad you're out there telling these stories and bringing truth to light. So please, if you can keep doing that.

Thanks Sami. I agree with you. I think that at the end of the day, this kind of really shines a light on why real journalism is important, that you might not understand where these papers are coming from and you might be confused by what you're reading. But fact based reporting is ultimately the most reliable and it shines a light on why it's important to trust the institutions that you're reading and know where they're getting your money.

And I will say that as you've noted here in all of Miranda's stories, she has reached out to the parties involved and offered them the chance to comment. And where they have responded to her, she's included their comments, including where their comments have criticized her personally. And that is how journalism is done. So Miranda, thank you very much for being with us on the Boiling Point podcast.

Thanks, Liam.

Check out the show notes for a link to Miranda's story on Metric Media and the Central Indie News. It was published a few days before the Greenpeace verdict came out. So some of the information is a little bit out of date. For one thing, Greenpeace thought that Energy Transfer was only looking for damages of a about $300 million. Still a ton of money, but the jury awarded more than double that. If you're a fan of this show and want to support it, please be sure to follow us on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. It would help us tremendously. Thank you. Thank you for listening to Boiling Water Point I'm your host, Sammy Roth. My producers are Mary Knoff and Jonathan Shiflett. Sound design and original music by Jonathan Shiflett. Elijah Wolfson is our editor. Denise Callahan is our Studio manager. Ben Church is our Production manager. Nick Norton is our engineer. Special thanks to LA Times Studio President Anna Magzanian, President and Chief Operating Officer of the Los Angeles Times, Chris Argentieri and Executive Editor of the Los Angeles Times, Terry Tang. Boiling Point is executive produced by Darius Derekshon and created by me, Sami roth.

[Sami Roth]

Who'S abducting 100,000 children in China each year. And how was a cult where paedophilia, murder and torture were commonplace allowed to operate in Chile for nearly four decades? At True Crime Reports, a new video podcast from Al Jazeera, we'll investigate these stories from the global south and beyond. True crimes that often haven't reached the headlines in the West. I'm Halim oh Yudin. In each episode, we'll take you to a different country. You'll hear from experts and first hand accounts from those right at the heart of these stories. True Crime Reports. Find us under Al Jazeera's YouTube channel podcast tab and wherever you get your podcasts.