fake

California built its tradition of open government — including for citizen boards that set the rules for such functions as automotive repair and security guard licensing — precisely to keep well-funded corporate interests in check. Lobbyists and special interests are constantly scheming to defeat the will of the majority. Now they are able to do more damage using artificial intelligence to simulate fake grassroots opposition to clean air measures, and they are surreptitiously using the identities of real people to deceive regulators.

Last June, the South Coast Air Quality Management District received more than 20,000 comments opposing a pair of clean air rules that would have prevented 2,500 premature deaths and 10,000 new cases of asthma. A February investigation by the Los Angeles Times revealed that those comments were submitted through CiviClick, a Washington-based AI-powered comment generation platform, orchestrated by a local political consultant with ties to the natural gas industry. When the district’s cybersecurity team reached out to a small sample of commenters to verify their identities, a majority of respondents said that they had not submitted the comments in their names.

Even so, the flood of fake comments seemingly worked. These rules, vehemently opposed by the natural gas industry, already watered down by the district to near-toothlessness, were ultimately rejected by the board — apparently overwhelmed by the flood of fake opposition to even the mildest effort to limit pollution from gas-burning appliances.

This Southern California campaign was not an isolated incident. A recent investigation by the San Francisco Chronicle also revealed that an industry front group used Speak4, a platform that advertises its use of AI, to submit dozens of comments regurgitating talking points from the fossil fuel industry in an attempt to weaken and delay clean air rules in the Bay Area. The scheme was exposed when 10 residents whose identities were used on these emails said they absolutely did not send them, calling the messages “forged.”

In both cases, organizations submitted emails and comments to regulators using real people’s identities without their knowledge or consent. This playbook has been employed in other states: CiviClick was used by fossil fuel companies to support a gas-pipeline-expansion project in North Carolina last year. When elected officials reached out to a few respondents to verify the messages, some constituents stated they had no knowledge of the emails sent under their names.

The opposition campaign to South Coast’s clean air rules was run by one of the state’s most powerful lobbying firms. Its client list includes Sempra, the parent company of SoCalGas, which opposed the clean air standards, which would have encouraged the sale of pollution-free heat pumps and threatened the utility’s business.

The industry front group using AI to undermine clean air rules in the Bay Area, Common Sense Coalition, also has ties to fossil fuel companies. Common Sense Coalition is a project of the Bay Area Council, a local business group that features members such as the Western States Petroleum Assn., Chevron, Martinez Refining Co. and Phillips 66.

The question of whether fossil fuel interests financed astroturf AI campaigns to defeat clean air rules should be answered through full investigations, which also ought to address whether the campaigns committed fraud and identity theft.

Californians deserve to know what is going on — how AI was used, where the lobbyists got the names and addresses they attached to the robo-messages and who paid for the deceptive campaigns. What’s most concerning is the use of actual residents’ identities — without their knowledge or consent — to oppose life-saving clean air standards.

Top law enforcement officials should be investigating — including Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, Los Angeles Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman and San Francisco Dist. Atty. Brooke Jenkins.
If the law on using a person’s name in a scheme to thwart action by a public agency is not clear enough to support prosecutions, then the law needs to be tightened up — and there is legislation, Senate Bill 1159, aiming to do that.

If this seems like a niche issue, I can assure you it is not. I spent 17 years at the helm of the California Air Resources Board, and I am deeply disturbed by the potential co-opting of public input processes using forgery through automated tools. Gathering public input is fundamental to the legitimacy of regulatory agencies.

We frequently heard from individuals or business associations concerned about the cost or burden of proposed regulation, and we worked hard to understand and tailor our rules to make them as streamlined and cost-effective as we could, while still making progress toward reducing the air and climate harms of a wide array of equipment and activities.

The destruction of meaningful public input through deceit isn’t just an environmental issue; it’s a democracy issue — and it demands urgent attention and accountability. California should draw the line to protect our democratic institutions.

Mary Nichols was chair of the California Air Resources Board, where she occupied the attorney seat. She is distinguished counsel to the Emmett Institute on Climate and Sustainability at UCLA Law School.

Behind a network of fake YouTube newscasts spreading propaganda in favor of Venezuela’s acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, lies a hidden digital structure made up of dozens of websites and social media accounts. It is a much larger and still-active operation than initially believed, designed to distribute content as if it came from independent regional outlets.

In two previous reports, Cazadores de Fake News named this influence operation “Hispan Online.” The first revealed part of the network of YouTube channels whose videos appeared as ads on Venezuelan screens, pushing narratives favorable to the Rodríguez administration. The second report confirmed that the “anchors” were not journalists, but more than 20 actors living in Argentina who were hired through an intermediary agency. The videos racked up millions of views.

The channels mimic Spanish-language news outlets, presenting their content as if it were multiple spontaneous local coverages. So far, Cazadores has identified: Hispan Online (the most prolific producer and the network’s central amplification node), Nación Argentina, Colombia Actual, Panorama Colombiano, La Perspectiva Global, México en Datos, Informe Mexicano, United Data News, Continental Report, Nación Digital MX, Chile en Datos, Argentina en Perspectiva, EC En Análisis, and El Informe Europeo. All of them are part of the network identified so far as the YouTube arm of the operation.

But Venezuelans exposed to those videos are largely unaware that the operation extends far beyond YouTube. At least 30 websites were created as part of it, publishing more than 11,000 articles in just one month. Each site links to Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube accounts bearing the same names as the fake newscasts.

Domain records for some of these websites identify QSocial, an Argentine political communications firm, as the registrant of several of them. A separate investigation by La Nación points in the same direction.

YouTube channels as the tip of the iceberg

The propaganda videos promoted through YouTube ads amassed millions of views, but the 14 channels that initially hosted them hardly resembled real news outlets. Most displayed little more than a logo, and their videos were often not publicly listed.

Some channels, however, included short descriptions and, in some cases, a website address—such as colombiaactual.co for “Colombia Actual” and nacionargentina.info for “Nación Argentina.”

Ongoing monitoring of F. G. Medios S.A. (the company that paid for the YouTube ads) through Google’s Ads Transparency Center led to the identification of 30 distinct YouTube channels. Together, they published at least 90 videos and amassed more than 47.5 million views. Following the pattern of the web addresses, additional associated sites were expected: Manual searches confirmed 30 corresponding websites.

At least five of these sites embedded YouTube playlists or windows featuring the same fake “journalists” seen in the ads.

All 30 domains with known registration dates were created within just nine days, between February 17 and 25, 2026. Fourteen were registered on February 20 alone. This pattern mirrors the creation of the YouTube channels, which appeared between February 18 and early March. The clustering of dates is one of several technical indicators of coordination in this influence operation.

The sites also share a common technical architecture. All run on WordPress, use Cloudflare servers, were registered via Dattatec or DonWeb, use themes developed by Ansar, and have the same Jetpack plugin installed. Articles across all sites are published by the same three WordPress users: “administrador,” “periodista 1,” and “periodista 2.”

This is not a network of independently built websites. It is a single model replicated 30 times and operated by the same group. In total, the network includes more than 90 social media accounts: 30 YouTube channels, 32 Instagram accounts, and 29 Facebook pages. As of publication, most have minimal activity and almost no followers—but the infrastructure is in place and regularly updated.

Venezuela content stands out

With 30 active websites identified, the next step was to analyze their content. Reviewing each article manually was not feasible at that scale.

To do so, Cazadores de Fake News developed a tool—with assistance from generative AI—capable of automatically downloading all articles published across the 30 sites, including full text and images. The result was a database of 11,391 articles produced in just one month.

While most articles are not about Venezuela, it is the most frequently referenced country. With 1,912 pieces, Venezuela accounts for 16.79% of all content, ahead of Brazil (14.30%), Colombia (8.83%), Mexico (8.79%), and Argentina (8.12%). The rest covers other countries, helping each site appear as a regional outlet with its own editorial agenda.

Much of the Venezuela-related content mirrors the narratives promoted in the YouTube ads: favorable coverage of Delcy Rodríguez and her brother Jorge Rodríguez (who presides the Venezuelan parliament), reporting on the new amnesty and hydrocarbons laws, and stories highlighting positive economic projections and the oil sector.

The analysis also revealed another pattern: the same article often appeared across multiple sites with different headlines and slight rewrites tailored to each country, but with nearly identical core narratives. It is a form of serial production, where one base story is rewritten and redistributed to simulate independent local coverage.

One example is coverage of joint ventures between PDVSA and US oil companies. Articles published on March 16–17 across republicahoy.do, pulsonacional.mx, and panoramabrasil.info repeat identical figures (250,000 barrels per day, 22% of national output) while adapting their framing. The Dominican version adds references to Caribbean fuel prices. The Mexican version mentions the Dos Bocas refinery and the Energy Ministry. The Brazilian version refers to the Palácio do Planalto and investment opportunities for Brazil.

The texts share repeated transitional phrases—“in this context,” “on the other hand,” “diante deste cenário”—and identical section structures. The Brazilian version also contains errors suggesting automated translation, such as “empresas americana” instead of “americanas” and leaving “barriles” untranslated.

Although headlines and wording vary, these articles share one constant: they use exactly the same featured images. By comparing images across all 11,391 articles, the tool identified hundreds of such clusters. Contents largely consist of one base story, adapted and republished across multiple sites with the same photo.

This is the first time Cazadores de Fake News has documented evidence suggesting the use of automation or generative AI to sustain an influence operation of this scale targeting Venezuelan audiences. Producing more than 11,000 articles in one month, localized by country and language, would have been unfeasible for a small team of human writers.

The websites have so far attracted little traffic. But the infrastructure is active, content continues to be published, and the material already looks credible enough to be mistaken for real journalism.

The trail leads to QSocial

Despite the scale of the operation (30 websites, three social media platforms, and thousands of articles) those who registered the domains left traces. At least five domains lacked privacy protection, exposing registrant names and emails.

Three “.com” domains—brasilemdados24.com, ecuadorenanalisis.com, and panamaestrategico.com—list “QSN Big Data” as the registrant, linked to the email [email protected].

Two Dominican domains—diariocaribedigital.do and republicahoy.do—were registered on February 20 at the exact same second. Their records list “QSocial” as the registrant. These are different names pointing to the same corporate ecosystem.

QSN Big Data and QSocial are names used by the same Argentine political communications firm, which has also operated as QSocialNow. According to a March 23 investigation by La Nación, the company—led by former Chubut governor Martín Buzzi—produced the fake newscast videos. The outlet reported that the videos were recorded at the company’s offices in Buenos Aires, where actors were recruited through a casting process.

The firm also has a documented history within Venezuela’s propaganda ecosystem. After the July 2024 presidential election, it produced a poll under the name QSocialNow backing a decision from Venezuela’s Supreme Tribunal to declare Nicolás Maduro the winner, despite widespread independent evidence of electoral fraud.

All domains in the network were registered through the same Argentine provider, within the same time frame, and using the same servers. However, this investigation could not determine whether QSocial itself entered the domain registration data or whether it was done by a third party.

Cazadores de Fake News and Argentine fact-checking outlet Chequeado contacted QSocial for comment. The company had not responded at the time of publication (March 24).

An unprecedented operation in Venezuela

Although QSocial director Martín Buzzi denied involvement to La Nación, the technical records documented in this investigation and the newspaper’s sources point to the same company. Who commissioned the operation and how it was financed remain unanswered questions.

It is also unclear whether the thousands of articles about Argentina, Mexico, Brazil, and other countries are merely camouflage for the pro-Rodríguez campaign or part of parallel influence operations using the same infrastructure.

There is no recent precedent in Venezuela for an influence operation of this scale deployed in such a short period.

Before Google, Meta, or the operators themselves took down most of the YouTube channels and 15 Instagram accounts, the propaganda videos had already surpassed 47.5 million views. At the time of publication, all Facebook accounts and the 30 websites remain active.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps calls Trump a ‘deceitful American president’, saying his ‘contradictory behaviour will not make us lose sight of the battlefront’.

It’s not the first time the comedian has spoken out about his friendship with Britain’s Got Talent judge Amanda Holden, after fans raised the same question

Amanda Holden‘s co-star and friend Alan Carr has set the record straight about their on-screen chemistry. The duo front a BBC travel series, in which they help renovate properties across Greece, Italy, and Spain. Along with their hard work, viewers have warmed to the pair’s humorous ways and heartfelt conversations – including a recent sad discussion about Amanda’s stillborn son Theo.

Joining Alan on the latest edition of his podcast, Life Is A Beach, Bob Mortimer discussed what it was like working with his co-star Paul Whitehouse on their series Mortimer and Whitehouse: Gone Fishing.

After admitting that they couldn’t present in a traditional way, he said the duo decided to take a more natural approach – one that has worked well over the years. “They just like it when we’re chatting,” he told Alan, to which he agreed.

“Yes, that’s true – it’s the chemistry people want, and you can’t fake that,” he went on to say.

Alan added that he’s often asked whether he genuinely likes Amanda, despite their obvious camaraderie on TV. “I mean, people go, ‘Do you really like Amanda?’ I couldn’t be in 40-degree heat in Greece knocking down a partition wall with someone I hate.

“Why would I sign up for that? You have to actually like the person, more than like, you have to really go, ‘Oh hello Amanda, right let’s have a laugh, what have you been up to?’ And I think you can’t actually fake that,” he clarified.

This isn’t the first time Alan has addressed questions about their friendship. On a previous episode of the show, Amanda was surprised that fans had doubted their chemistry.

Alan joked that viewers often comment on her distinctive laugh and ask how he “puts up” with it, to which she quipped: “This is an outrage!”.

Clarifying any lingering doubts, Alan added: “No, no, no. We couldn’t do this job if we didn’t like each other – it would be hell.” Amanda added: “There’s not a single other person I could do it with,” to which he replied: “No, it would have to be you.”

While the pair have enjoyed a successful run on the BBC show, they recently snubbed the idea of presenting Strictly Come Dancing together.

Amid speculation that they might replace Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman, Amanda confirmed on her Heart Radio Breakfast Show with Jamie Theakston: “I want to say now that me and Alan are 100 per cent not doing Strictly. We’re so flattered to be in that mix, but we both are not doing it.”

Speaking to The Daily Mail, the Britain’s Got Talent judge insisted she also wouldn’t be able to fit the role into her already busy schedule juggling family life and her career.

“You see, I am already part of a big show, and I’ll happily carry on watching Strictly from the comfort of my lounge, but it takes up too many weekends, I’ve got to remember that I have children and a husband,” she revealed.

“But I just hope that they still have two females doing it, that’s my big thing. They need somebody super funny, and somebody that you wouldn’t expect.”

Putting forward who she believes could be good for the positions, she suggested The One Show’s Alex Jones, BBC Radio star Zoe Ball and comedians Katherine Ryan and Daisy May Cooper.

ABSOLUTE Radio DJ Andy Bush has revealed heartless scammers have stolen his elderly parents’ life savings.

In total, the devastated couple, both 78, were swindled out of £16,000 in an elaborate scheme that used Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis‘s trusted name to entice them.

A ‘broker’ going by the name of ‘John’ gained Andy’s dad’s trust after he clicked into an online link promising to maximise his savings. In reality, Good Morning Britain star Martin had no affiliation with the advert at all.

Andy, who hosts Hometime with Bush & Richie, told The Sun: “They’re really humiliated.

“My dad’s an ex-computer programmer, systems analyst. So he feels someone like him, who’s had a job like that, shouldn’t be falling for a scam like this. So they feel very, very humiliated.

“I feel like a lot of their kind of plans and dreams have kind of gone up in smoke a little bit because that little nest egg that they had to go and do nice retirement stuff is now suddenly completely gone.”

BANK FAIL

Banking giants hit by ‘glitch’ with customers seeing other users’ transactions

MART-ASS

Martin Lewis’s weird workplace behaviour that left ITV staff ‘mortified’ revealed

Andy’s dad has memory issues, which his son believes made him more susceptible to the scam. Neither Andy, nor his brother, had any idea his parents were moving around large sums of money, and he believes they were coerced by ‘John’ not to tell anyone.

Once his dad had clicked the dodgy link, a portal opened to ‘John’ who was then on the phone to them “non-stop”.

Andy likened it to a romance scam and said his parents told him they would speak to ‘John’ on the phone two or three times a day.

“Even when it all came to light that it was a scam, my mum still wouldn’t believe that John, lovely John, would do this to them. So, they really bought into him as a person,” said Andy.

‘John’ set up a Revolut account on Andy’s parents behalf and began transferring large chunks of money from their TSB savings account.

He coached them on what to say to TSB agents when they queried the transfers — though Andy is upset that the bank didn’t do more to clamp down on the out of character money movements.

“Every time they transferred a chunk of £5,000, £6,000 or whatever, TSB would phone up and go, ‘just making sure you’re not transferring this to whatever’. And they would say, ‘no, no, it’s for this, that or whatever’,” he said.

‘John’ then instructed them to put an app on each of their phones, which allowed him to have full access to all their details and to see what they were doing on their devices.

He also installed a fake crypto exchange that showed their money rising at an impressive rate when in reality it had all but disappeared.

Eventually, Andy found out something was amiss when his mum asked if she could borrow £4,000 in order to deposit it into her account to pass an ‘anti-money laundering check’.

Alarm bells immediately rang and Andy asked her to show him the email from ‘John’. Upon seeing it, he said he knew “straight away” that it was fraudulent.

In the meantime, ‘John’ had arranged a £4,000 loan with M&S Bank, which led to Andy’s parents having to cancel their cards after multiple payments began to be made on them.

Andy’s intervention didn’t immediately put an end to the scamming.

Two days later, his parents received an email from a fake cryptocurrency loss recovery company that claimed it could recover their stolen money.

The fresh scam asked for forms to be submitted and a £3,000 payment paid. Andy said he believed the original scammers were behind it.

Even though, his parents’ phones have been wiped, he said there are still concerns the scammers have access.

Andy and his parents have now instructed CEL Solicitors who specialise in recouping money lost to fraud and have contacted the police.

CEL told him that they deal with 500 such cases a month and some £500m is stolen from people each year in total.

He said: “I’ve had so many messages from people who have not just had their parents scammed like this, but a woman in her 30s was scammed out of money when her baby was seven days old because she wasn’t concentrating properly and just pressed the button. You know, young people, old people.

“My mum and dad don’t know who to trust now.

“It’s brought up some really horrible conversations. My mum and dad have always been very outgoing and doing different things, and they’ve always got plans and all that kind of stuff. Now they have to run pretty much everything past me and my brother just to double-check that they’re not being scammed again.”