Exclusive Report
A key executive at The Times of London, owned by Rupert Murdoch, has expressed deep regret over the tarnishing of the newspaper’s image following an incident where a journalist was tricked by an individual impersonating Bill de Blasio.
Ian Brunskill, the associate editor of The Times, sent an email to his colleagues expressing the embarrassment caused by the faux interview with the former mayor of New York City. The subject of the email was marked: “Fake (Times) news/must read.”
In his correspondence, Brunskill pointed out that the deceptive interview with de Blasio, coupled with another false report concerning an “AI-generated case study” about a non-existent royal staff member, inflicted “serious damage to our reputation” and emphasized that these could have been prevented with proper verification and responsible journalism practices.
“We should have been more vigilant. We needed to make greater efforts to verify the identities of the people involved,” he mentioned in the email, which was reviewed by Deadline. Brunskill added that there were “no excuses” for these oversights.
The deceptive article published earlier in the week by The Times included statements allegedly from de Blasio, criticizing the political campaign of Democrat Zohran Mamdani. However, as reported by Semafor, the newspaper had contacted a Bill De Blasio who turned out to be a wine importer from Long Island. This individual admitted to playing along with the reporter’s queries, even using ChatGPT to draft responses disparaging Mamdani’s fiscal strategies.
The impersonator critiqued the financial feasibility of the campaign, saying, “While the ambition is admirable, the cost estimates – reportedly exceeding $7bn annually – are based on overly optimistic assumptions about waste reduction and new tax revenues,” and further noted that the plans might not withstand thorough scrutiny and could face significant political obstacles.
The real de Blasio denounced the quotes as “entirely false and fabricated” and slammed the Murdoch-owned publication for what he called an “absolute violation of journalistic ethics.”
In response to the debacle, The Times withdrew the story and issued an apology stating: “The Times has apologized to Bill de Blasio and immediately removed the article after realizing that our journalist had been deceived by someone falsely claiming to be the former mayor of New York.”
This journalistic faux pas has sparked a series of media reactions on both sides of the Atlantic, with coverage in publications including The New York Post, also under Murdoch’s ownership. De Blasio confirmed his support for Mamdani, affirming his belief in the necessity and feasibility of Mamdani’s vision.
Below is the full email from Brunskill to the editorial team:
In recent weeks, we have been misled twice by fraudulent interviews. One was a fake AI-generated case study from a questionable PR firm, and the other was a deceptive email claiming to be from a prominent U.S. political figure.
The first incident, which also fooled others, not only led to ridicule but also to demands for a press regulator to conduct a thorough examination of our standards. The second, unfortunately our own ‘exclusive’, required a widely publicized retraction and apology.
Both these embarrassing events severely damaged our reputation. They could have been avoided with proper journalistic diligence and practices.
There were clear warning signs. An obscure PR agency without a contact number offering an interview with an unknown ‘expert’ only reachable via email was a red flag. Another was a well-known public figure making statements completely contrary to his known views from a personal Gmail account.
We needed to be more cautious. We should have made more effort to verify the identities of the individuals involved. If that’s not feasible, we must ask why not. We – both reporters and editors – must constantly question: Who is providing this information and for what reason? How can we confirm they are who they claim to be? How credible is the information? What verification steps can we take?
These queries are fundamental. Asking them should come naturally to anyone working for a publication with a long-standing reputation for reliable reporting. There are no excuses. As part of our job, we are bound by the Editors’ Code, which mandates accuracy. Should there be a complaint, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) will scrutinize how thoroughly we vetted our sources. We cannot afford to be deceived.
Daniel Hayes is a business journalist with a focus on market trends, startups, and corporate strategies.
His sharp analysis and investigative reports make complex financial topics accessible to all readers.
