Recently, as the political battle over congressional redistricting brought California into the national spotlight, Facebook users were shown a curious series of ads.<\/p>\n
The ads, from a straightforward-looking news site called the California Courier, often felt a lot like campaign commercials, linking to articles hammering Democrats in the state, including Gov. Gavin Newsom. Few punched in the other direction, toward Republicans. One said, \u201cCalifornia Democrats just rewrote their gerrymandering plan so voters will see their partisan map on the ballot this November.\u201d Another called Proposition 50, which passed in November<\/a>, \u201ca scheme critics say is meant to undermine voter-approved protections and entrench one party rule in California.\u201d<\/p>\n A reader who clicked through to the Courier\u2019s website would find stories that largely align with a conservative view of the news, like a video<\/a> of a child \u201criding a scooter through San Fran\u2019s drug-ravaged streets,\u201d or an anonymous piece<\/a> that cites \u201cconfidential sources\u201d cautioning against a \u201cleft-wing educator\u201d running for a position with an Orange County school district.<\/p>\n What a reader would not find is any disclosure of the Courier\u2019s ownership or funding, including what appear to be ties to a network of conservative organizations in California that, according to one researcher, scaled up a series of right-leaning news sites in three other states just ahead of the 2024 election.<\/p>\n The Courier has money to spend. According to a review of the ad library maintained by Facebook\u2019s owner, Meta, the outlet has spent more than $80,000 since 2021 promoting its stories on social issues and politics, potentially reaching tens of thousands of users on the platform each week.<\/p>\n Critics say the California outlet is part of a growing, nationwide ecosystem of innocuous-looking, cheaply produced news publications that publish and advertise biased articles in an attempt to surreptitiously influence elections. They worry the practice could mislead voters and corrode trust in nonpartisan news providers.<\/p>\n \u201cI think we are in an era where people are consuming so much content online without knowing the source of it,\u201d said Max Read, who has studied the network apparently behind the Courier at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a nonprofit that works to counter political polarization. \u201cAnd for well-funded organizations to contribute to that by disguising what they\u2019re doing online just helps exacerbate that problem of people not trusting what they come across.\u201d<\/p>\n At a glance, the Courier does not necessarily look right-leaning. A handful of stories seem like straight news echoing press releases, such as one announcing new affordable housing units<\/a>. But even those that seem relatively neutral may have a right-leaning spin, like one describing speeding fines<\/a> tied to income as a potential \u201cwoke penalty loophole.\u201d<\/p>\n The outlet also shares a name with a 67-year-old California-based publication serving the Armenian diaspora. One of that Courier\u2019s founders won acclaim from his peers<\/a> for his tenure as dean<\/a> of the University of Maryland\u2019s journalism school.<\/p>\n When the Markup and CalMatters contacted the publisher of the Armenian Courier, he said he was unaware of the other site. He told a reporter he was opening it for the first time.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m definitely not conservative,\u201d said Harut Sassounian, who owns the Courier, where his regular editorials appear online and formerly in print. \u201cThe two publications have nothing in common. Neither politically nor ethnically nor anything like that.\u201d<\/p>\n Although it lacks the pedigree of the Armenian publication, the right-leaning Courier has shown it is well-immersed in today\u2019s social media. A video it made<\/a> suggesting Newsom flip-flopped in his view of President Biden\u2019s mental acuity generated thousands of reactions.<\/p>\n The publication also shares some of the murky citation practices of contemporary social media. Almost all of the stories on the site are unattributed, or simply attributed to \u201cthe California Courier.\u201d<\/p>\n A few, however, include author names. One of the named writers describes himself on social media as a \u201ccontent creator\u201d for the Lincoln Media Foundation, a conservative group, and links to Courier articles. Another shares a name with a Republican strategist based in Orange County, and a third lists a resume with conservative organizations in a short bio.<\/p>\n The Lincoln Media Foundation<\/a> is tied to the Lincoln Club, a group based in Orange County that bills itself as \u201cthe oldest and largest conservative major donor organization in the state of California.\u201d The club funnels anonymously donated money to conservative candidates and causes<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Lincoln Media Foundation\u2019s Facebook page<\/a> recently said it was \u201cproud to present\u201d a new documentary purporting to reveal \u201cthe untold truth about the Pacific Palisades fire,\u201d the natural disaster that tore through the state last year and increased political pressure on Newsom.<\/p>\n One hour later, the Courier\u2019s Facebook page<\/a> promoted it as well, not mentioning the Lincoln Media Foundation but describing the documentary as \u201cmuch anticipated.\u201d<\/p>\n Neither the Lincoln Club, Lincoln Media, the California Courier or the Courier writers responded to multiple requests for comment about the origins of the site, either through email phone, or social media messages.<\/p>\n That silence, and the lack of information about ownership on the Courier\u2019s website, come despite the outlet\u2019s chief goal, as outlined on its Facebook page.<\/p>\n \u201cCalifornia Courier offers statewide and local news,\u201d the page\u2019s description reads. \u201cOur mission is transparency.\u201d<\/p>\n The Lincoln Club has previously been linked to \u201clocal\u201d websites around the country, spreading stories with a distinctly conservative tint.<\/p>\n In 2024, Read\u2019s Institute for Strategic Dialogue, which tracks disinformation and extremism online, found a handful of such sites <\/a>that noted deep in their privacy policies that they were projects from Lincoln Media. Those outlets had names like the Angeleno and the Keystone Courier, and stretched from California to Pennsylvania, although a resulting report didn\u2019t name the Courier.<\/p>\n Many of the sites used Facebook and other social media tools to press a conservative agenda, the report found. Meta has rules against \u201ccoordinated inauthentic behavior\u201d but it\u2019s not clear whether Lincoln Media\u2019s websites would cross that line.<\/p>\n \u2018Pink slime\u2019 news<\/p>\n Researchers have taken to calling sites like those operated by Lincoln Media \u201cpink slime\u201d news, a name coined<\/a> after a meat-industry additive. These sites don\u2019t produce outright false news, like others, but they do not meet basic journalistic standards. That often means low-quality content and failing to disclose associations with outside organizations.<\/p>\n The sites generally aren\u2019t designed to generate revenue, but to sway public opinion. The majority, according to researchers, lean toward a conservative agenda, and if the site\u2019s stories gain traction on social media, they can travel widely. \u201cIf they place an ad well or if they just get the right pickup from the right influencer, these things don\u2019t really have a limit on how far they can go,\u201d Read said.<\/p>\n While it\u2019s not clear how many sites the Lincoln Club might fund, it isn\u2019t the only group that has used the strategy.<\/p>\n