This 2 December 2014 email chain is one of the key early documents in BuzzFeed’s CEN investigation because it shows the planned article being shaped around CEN, viral news, MailOnline, Metro, Mirror and other publishers before the underlying reporting had been completed. Tom Phillips says Alan White and he had spoken with Craig Silverman and were keen to collaborate on a “long-ish piece about CEN”, adding that Silverman “already got lot of research on some of their stories and on the organisation/bloke behind it”, although the supporting material Silverman claimed to have does not appear from this chain to have been produced there. Phillips says BuzzFeed is keen that the article should not look like “a hit piece on our competitors for publishing CEN stories”, so it should focus on “debunking”, CEN itself and the production of viral news, while also acknowledging that BuzzFeed had itself run CEN pieces in the past. Alan White then says they are “treading [a] real tightrope” because, however much they hedge it, the piece would be saying: “Look at the shit Metro Mirror Mail run as truth and that we dont,” before adding that it was not a straight hit job on CEN and the publishers buying the stories — “Well not quite.” Luke Lewis likes the idea of styling CEN as a “viral bullshit factory” or “king of viral hoaxes”, says they should avoid an aggressive or “holier than thou” tone, and adds: “Can’t wait to read it.” Richard James then intervenes to point out that BuzzFeed was not immune from publishing fake news or falling for hoaxes itself, and suggests they are on firmer ground if they focus on the global pick-up of the stories rather than simply screenshotting Mail stories. He also suggests tying the piece to the decline of second or third sourcing and unique quotes in newsrooms. The document is significant for several reasons: it shows BuzzFeed openly recognising the danger that the article would look like an attack on commercial rivals who published CEN material; it confirms that the “bullshit” / “king of viral hoaxes” framing was being discussed from the start; it shows the team expecting to gather the “debunked and debunkable” material over a weekend and even aiming for publication by 19 December; and it places Richard James inside the early discussion, praising the idea while acknowledging BuzzFeed’s own use of similar material. According to Mike Leidig, CEN founder, later evidence makes Richard James especially important because he was aware the BuzzFeed piece would need CEN content while also separately asking CEN to stop sending material to him. The document therefore supports a broader reading of the investigation as a mixture of genuine debunking interest, competitive media positioning, narrative-building and unresolved assumptions about which CEN stories were actually false, exaggerated or merely widely republished.