BuzzFeed Considers Craig Silverman To Validate “Question Mark” Framing Of CEN Stories

This 1 December 2014 BuzzFeed email chain shows Tom Phillips, Luke Lewis, Alan White and Rossalyn Warren beginning to shape what became the CEN “viral bullshit factory” investigation by asking colleagues for examples of internet stories from 2014 “that the internet thought were true but actually weren’t true”. The document is significant because it records the investigation forming around a pattern-building exercise rather than a completed evidence file: Phillips says the story is about “establishing pattern of dubiousness” and that BuzzFeed would need only a “few definitive fakes plus load of dodgy-sounding ones”, while also claiming that CEN would file stories from foreign tabloids supposedly known locally as Sunday Sport or National Enquirer-type outlets. That claim is important because it gave BuzzFeed a way to frame CEN’s source base as inherently suspect, while later evidence shows BuzzFeed was never able to identify or prove those supposed local tabloid sources. The chain also shows Alan White recognising the difficulty of proving stories false, saying they would need to contact local reporters near the places where the stories allegedly happened but that even then he did not see how they could reach the point of saying: “This is definitely fake.” Luke Lewis’s reply is especially important because he suggests BuzzFeed might not need to reach that point, and could instead interview a verification expert such as Craig Silverman to say there was “enough of question mark over the stories”. The document therefore helps show the early methodological shape of the article: not proving each allegation directly, but building a one-sided pattern of dubiousness around a small number of supposed fakes, many “dodgy-sounding” examples, and external validation from a verification expert. The chain also contains Rossalyn Warren’s suggestion that BuzzFeed could “plant a story” so that CEN would pick it up and then watch how other sites used it, which is significant because it shows BuzzFeed considering the creation of a false or artificial news item as a way to expose alleged fake news. It should be read alongside later sample-selection, KFC, Chinese backpacker, “easy bit”, Silverman-budget and final headline documents, because this is one of the clearest early records of the investigation’s framing: the “Inside the viral bullshit factory” concept was already being endorsed by Luke Lewis before BuzzFeed had assembled the evidence needed to support it, and several early examples, including the KFC story and other “total bollocks” suggestions, later proved more complicated or were not used in the final published case.

Source

Part of Central European News & Mike Leidig v BuzzFeed (US Second Circuit Libel Case) – BF Case Documents

Europe Media Published 1 May 2026 at 21:09 Source: 1 November 2016