Local newspapers have been collapsing for decades. Rocked by the internet’s destruction of their conventional revenue models, these outlets have hemorrhaged tens of thousands of jobs since 2005, and thousands of newspapers have shut down completely. This mass extinction event is terrible for democracy — fewer local journalists inevitably means more local corruption and a less informed public. And now an emerging trend threatens to make the problem even worse: the rise of local news websites that are funded by partisan activists, often covertly.
The misinformation watchdog NewsGuard has recently identified over 1,260 websites that “present themselves as independent local news outlets but are instead funded by partisan groups.” That means, by at least one estimate, that the number of partisan-funded news sites slightly now edges out the number of independent local newspapers that are operating in the U.S. And it turns out that they skew to the right. (More on that later.)
It’s alarming to think that networks of primarily right-wing advocacy platforms, cloaked as standard newspapers, could be shaping the minds of voters without them even knowing it.
There’s also one other concerning data point, highlighted by Axios’s report on NewsGuard’s data: A disproportionate amount of these websites are springing up in battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida. It’s alarming to think that networks of primarily right-wing advocacy platforms, cloaked as standard newspapers, could be shaping the minds of voters without them even knowing it.
NewsGuard recently added to its tally a network of Russian-affiliated websites with AI-generated content. However, most of these problematic websites are backed by domestic organizations — some conservative, some progressive. According to Axios, the “vast majority” of the observed sites are linked to the conservative media network Metric Media, which was started by former TV reporter Brian Timpone.
Timpone’s network backs hundreds of websites with generic-sounding local news sites with names such as “Maine Business Daily” and “Illinois Valley Times,” whose formatting and text makes them look like a conventional news outlet. But a 2020 New York Times investigation found that Timpone’s sites are in fact “propaganda ordered up by dozens of conservative think tanks, political operatives, corporate executives and public-relations professionals.” (Some of his sites have since gone defunct.) These sites can be sophisticated because they not only mimic the aesthetic of conventional newspaper websites, but involve quasi-journalistic newsgathering and don’t usually post information that is blatantly false. For example, as the Times reported, a Republican operative commissioned a freelance writer to report a piece for the “Maine Business Daily” in which the writer quoted a spokesperson for Maine GOP Sen. Susan Collins criticizing a Democratic politician — but didn’t include a comment from the person Collins’ aide was criticizing.
Many people lack the digital literacy skills to interrogate their news sources and might trust information from such sites unthinkingly. But even someone skeptical about the legitimacy of the partisan news websites they’re reading will run into trouble most of the time. Most of the Timpone network websites, which include little information about their management or funding, claim to be neutral newsrooms. (Some of the sites that NewsGuard has identified, such as Courier Newsroom, which liberal philanthropist George Soros has supported, are transparent about their funding and values.) It is unrealistic to expect anyone but the most dogged of readers to chase down the financial source of every unfamiliar outlet. Most will shrug, and decide whether to trust it or not based on instincts that are not necessarily well-honed.
A caveat: Not all of the websites highlighted by NewsGuard are alike. Most of its partisan news sites are linked to GOP propaganda operations. But at least some of them appear to be organizations run by veteran journalists and engaged in conventional news-gathering, which nevertheless have been included because they have, for example, taken funding from nonprofits with known political leanings. The reality is that lots of widely read national media outlets that aren't on NewsGuard's list could be similarly considered biased due to ownership structures. Patronage and independence in this sector is always messy business, and there is a lot of gray area across the board.
It isn’t inherently bad for organizations with political agendas to create platforms for gathering or sharing information, including information that approximates what's conventionally understood as "news." The issue is when organizations use the aesthetics of classic newspapers to mislead the public into thinking they’re something they’re not, or obscure the nature of their funding and organizational links and how that could shape the way they present information. The big picture problem remains: the economic model for funding independent local newspapers is fundamentally broken, and all of us are poorer because of it.
