Journalism – Dembot

November 15, 2025August 7, 2026

CCPA 2025CV11

For this media accountability action, after years of investigation, I filed a consumer protection complaint under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) against Alden Global Capital and its two controlling partners, Randall Smith and Heath Freeman individually, in Colorado District Court. I filed the case pro se, with the assistance of artificial intelligence.

It’s not as if I decided to use ChatGPT to represent myself in a murder trial, I took hold of the tools available to me to stand up as a consumer and individual citizen on behalf of all people in Colorado, with a message for all states, to say enough is enough with the Alden Global Capital mass media deception. These two men, Smith and Freeman, unwilling to show themselves in public or come to the table to be held accountable, are ruining journalism in America on a large scale and thus effecting democracy in a massive way. Having consolidated local news companies into the second largest newspaper conglomerate in the country, they are harming the world by misrepresenting their personal interferences into the world of American journalism, including forcing editorial and operational decisions that they promise the world they are not doing.

Legally, via the CCPA, I’m asking the court to recognize that Smith and Freeman are knowingly engaged in what the courts aptly call “deceptive business trade practices”. Their product as a news service is falsely represented to consumers as being independent and governed by published journalistic standards which they know are not followed. Here in Colorado, the evidence shows that Smith and Freeman, acting as Alden board members, have taken formal board member votes to micro-manage the Denver Post’s editorial and policy decisions, even as the newspaper’s own Terms of Service claim that ownership plays no role in editorial control. The evidence in the case includes once private letters between Freeman and members of the Senate, documented interferences by Alden’s hidden editorial demands, and documentation from Denver Post representatives who admitted that they are no longer capable of following their own journalistic promises. The facts detail how Smith and Freeman’s board rejected the Denver Posts requests to update their editorial promises to the public. If the Denver Post updated their terms to reflect their true, diminished capabilities and true ownership control over operations and editorial, it would rightfully cause the general public to lose trust in their products and services and thus, harm the revenue Alden makes from subscription and advertising sales. A company can not have a terms of service and sell a product based on their promises to uphold those terms while knowing that they do not actually abide by those terms. In consumer law, this is known as “deception”, a form of business fraud.

Why should I personally have a standing to bring this claim? I had already been investigating Alden and understood that they engage in consumer fraud through the editor’s alignment with Alden’s mission, but I did not know this same deceptive practice applied to my own situation. I assumed the chief editor had at least formed an editorial opinion about the Osher series, even if it was a bad one. In mid-2024, new email correspondence revealed for the first time that she had never reviewed the series at all and therefore had never formed any editorial judgment. She initially claimed she had reviewed the articles and found nothing to change, but when pressed, she inadvertently admitted she had never edited or even evaluated them; and when I then asked her to conduct a review, she refused. This was the first moment I could have known that my harm did not result from an editorial opinion but from a deceptive practice: knowingly not following the newspaper’s promised standards while attempting to conceal that fact. That discovery is what gives me standing under the CCPA.

By applying the CCPA, I’m seeking injunctive relief, asking the court to require Smith and Freeman to either remove or revise the Denver Post’s Terms of Service which I show Alden controls, so that the terms accurately reflect the company’s actual operations. The current terms promise a high caliber of ethical journalism with promises their news companies will comply with specific, laid-out editorial and ethical standards that, in practice, are knowingly no longer followed, as I also show in detail with facts throughout my complaint.

Having explicated and poured over other complaints filed under the CCPA, I believe it’s the correct path to hold Alden Global Capital accountable for their deceptive business practices, and in particular, though rare, holding the actual individuals in control to account, which the CCPA allows for. When executives engage in consumer fraud on behalf of their companies, they expose themselves to personal, civil liabilities under this act and can be held personally liable. Just as a business cannot put up a terms of service to pretend they follow those terms while knowing they do not, a trusted journalistic institution serving democracy by reporting on public matters cannot be structured so that it knowingly abandons its own journalistic standards while intentionally withholding this fact from the public in order to preserve consumer trust and financial value.

HOW I’VE USED AI

The District Court in Boulder has so far been accepting of my use of A.I. At a hearing, I explained that I felt out of place in such a forum, wished I had the wherewithal to afford experienced representation for such a large case, and voluntarily offered to go into detail about my use of A.I. The judge was interested to hear about it so I elaborated. As far as I know, I am the first person to file a case in the district court in Colorado pro se using AI tools while openly disclosing my use and method.

To provide an explanation to the judge for how I’ve been using Chat GPT, I asked it to provide an overview of my use which I included in my filings (ChatGPT Archive Link):

You have to use flattery these days as a warning to double-check your work. I was already familiar with ChatGPT and had been using it extensively to code, working within the codebases I already know well, particularly PHP which is good for building on the internet, and how I’ve built most of my works. When writing or debugging code, there’s a point where the boundaries of a codebase become clear; there are only so many valid functions, parameters, and logical paths available. That realization helped me understand why ChatGPT performs so effectively with programming: code is structured, finite, and rule-based.

When I began studying the CCPA, the rules of civil procedure for the court Im in, and began reading through other CCPA pleadings from complaint to case end, I noticed that law functions much like a codeset. It consists of defined inputs and outputs including statutory provisions, case precedents, procedural rules, and outcomes that depend on how the pieces can interact most effectively to get to the desired end. Seeing law through that lens made it natural to use ChatGPT not only for research but as an analytical tool. The system can integrate the full text of statutes, rules, and judicial history, then translate that structure into plain language, legal argumentation, or narrative form. In the same way that it can act as a capable co-developer within a software environment, ChatGPT can also function as a kind of legal interpreter, able to parse a complex procedural framework and render it accessible to different audiences, whether lay readers, or lawyers.

CONTEXT FOR MY USE OF AI

A couple of months ago, I attended a talk on AI, Law and Entrepreneurship hosted by the Rocky Mountain AI Interest Group (RMAIIG) at the University of Colorado Boulder. The event struck a deep chord with me because it helped me see my own work in this case through a broader frame, less as an uncharted endeavor I’ve taken on myself, and more as part of a larger shift in how artificial intelligence is beginning to bridge the gap between law and accessibility.

The first lecture featured Harry Surden, Professor of Law at the University of Colorado, Faculty Director of the Silicon Flatirons Center AI Initiative, and Associate Director of Stanford University’s CodeX Center for Legal Informatics.

Surden, who has been studying AI in law for nearly two decades, went through justifying AI’s recent breakthroughs by benchmarks for the various LLM models and broke the question down neatly into what he called simple versus hard cases. In simple cases where the law is clear, precedent consistent, and outcomes predictable (e.g. a general tennant/landlord lease might regularly fall into this category), AI is “really good” now according to Surden. But in hard cases, those with conflicting precedents, factual ambiguity, or high error cost, human legal judgment is still essential. For now.

The second lecture was by Jason Lynch, General Counsel and COO at Foundry Group, Boulderite Brad Feld’s venture-capital firm. Feld, together with David Cohen and now-Governor Jared Polis, co-founded Techstars. Lynch’s presentation took the AI-can-do-law logic to its edge. In his talk provocatively titled “AI Lawyers Should Be Admitted to the Bar,” he argued that AI can already perform nearly all the core functions of an attorney counseling, advising, drafting pleadings, and preparing filings. He noted that AI passes the bar and might in some cases outperform a newly minted lawyer who has just passed the bar.

Both Surden and Lynch appeared driven by the positive effects A.I. may have on what they both consider to be an access to justice crisis in America: 80 percent of civil legal needs in the U.S. go unmet. 40 percent of counties in the US have fewer than one lawyer per 1,000 residents, and where lawyers are available, they are often cost prohibitive.

Despite my own confidence in my claims which is not a confidence I obtained from AI but from access and time to understand the CCPA and other cases that have been tried under the act, the odds are completely against me. According to general studies of civil litigation, when a plaintiff proceeds pro se against well-resourced defendants with experienced representation, the chances of the plaintiff succeeding are in the range of 2-3%. While AI may help to change that rate in the future, my case in particular is especially difficult and complex, and the defendants have already proven to not play fair. My case would sit on the far edge of the ”hard cases” chart for a pro se litigant attempting to use AI. It’s practically a miracle that I’ve remained standing this long. While I may not win the war due to my lack of experience in this forum, I have won many battles already that act as stepping stones for the next person who becomes caught in the crosshairs of Alden’s bad faith business practices and is willing to stand up to such a large and ruthless, unaccountable power.

Accomplishments so far:

Demonstrated that Alden’s attorneys, Steven Zansberg and Mike Beylkin, who represent Alden Global Capital, Heath Freeman and Randall Smith personally, are not litigating in good faith. They have employed what’s called judicial estoppel, which is a serious issue, asserting one set of facts as true when convenient and then later asserting the opposite set of facts as true when strategically useful. This conduct matters beyond my case: these same attorneys represent The Denver Post, so these tactics reflect how the newspaper itself attempts to win disputes in the community without ever engaging honestly. Their pattern includes, along with the editor, refusing to articulate an editorial position, refusing to participate in the editing process, falsely asserting that editing occurred and then inadvertently revealing that it never did, later asserting that it never would, refusing to confer unless compelled by the court, refusing all discovery, and using avoidance and estoppel as a strategy to win through a gross disregard for truth and honesty.
Established that Freeman and Smith, in their own defensive pleadings became parties to the case individually by voluntarily adopting and incorporating the arguments of their corporate entities, thereby placing themselves within the litigation in their personal capacities, de facto. If there was ever uncertainty about their individual liability, their own pleadings resolved it: they have become rightful defendants to the claims for business fraud in this case. Combined with the documented facts showing Alden’s direct control over newsroom editorial and operations, this provides a template for other plaintiffs in Colorado and other states whose local Alden-owned newspapers engage in consumer deception, to consider suing Smith and Freeman individually, for having personally admitted the same facts and promises that their corporate entries admitted to.
Shortly after my complaint was filed, Lee Ann Colacioppo, the chief editor of The Denver Post, who has been accommodating Smith and Freeman since Gregory Moore resigned over Alden’s interference, announced she is winding down her career. Throughout her tenure, she chose loyalty to Alden over service to the community by helping to conceal Alden’s role and by abandoning basic journalistic standards. Her own disregard for truth and her deceptive attempt to conceal that she never edited was an important contributor to the very conditions that now expose Freeman and Smith to claims of consumer fraud.
Clarified in the pleadings that Alden’s attorneys have deliberately avoided the truth as a litigation strategy. In a notice to the court reserving my right to seek sanctions, I filed the complete correspondence between myself and Alden’s lawyers, which shows a pattern of bullying, refusal to engage in or permit discovery, and a willingness to obscure facts through bad-faith tactics. This behavior mirrors Alden’s broader institutional pattern toward its newspapers and the public. Any future claimant against an Alden-controlled entity should consider reading the full set of filings to see how they treat people. Be aware that these attorneys threaten filings without justification, but just because they can, even before reviewing what they would be opposing. The record speaks for itself: The Denver Post and Alden’s lawyers, who sometimes champion First Amendment causes in Colorado when it suits them, are playing both sides of the coin, using estoppel, factual avoidance, intimidation and threats to defend Smith and Freeman’s deceptive business practices.

I. Filing and Initial Proceedings (January – April 2025)

January 2025:

I filed the original complaint in Boulder County District Court (Case No. 2025-CV-11) against Alden Global Capital, Heath Freeman, and Randall Smith as the only three defendants.
My claims were brought primarily under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, with related theories including fraudulent concealment, misrepresentation, and injunctive relief.
The case emphasized that the deceptive conduct was related to the terms of service and thus commercial, not editorial.

February–March 2025:

The defendants filed an anti-SLAPP motion under C.R.S. § 13-20-1101, arguing that my claims arose from protected journalistic speech.
I responded that (1) the claims target commercial misrepresentation, not speech; (2) the motion was untimely; and (3) even if the statute applied, I could meet Step Two with extensive factual evidence of falsity and deception.
Before the hearing, I filed an amended complaint, which procedurally mooted the first anti-SLAPP motion.

Originally, I sued only the three individuals — Alden, Freeman, and Smith. The defense then argued that the entities actually responsible would be MediaNews Group, The Denver Post, and Prairie Mountain Media. I amended the complaint to include those parties, and the owners subsequently adopted the defenses of those entities, effectively making themselves de facto parties. This is a rare occurrence in corporate litigation, as it placed the principals themselves directly on the hook….which it should do.

II. Renewed Anti-SLAPP and Consolidated Opposition (April – June 2025)

April 2025:

The defendants filed a renewed anti-SLAPP motion, recycling the same arguments.
I filed a motion to strike the renewed filing as untimely under § 13-20-1101(5) and as procedurally abusive, while also submitting a full Step Two opposition on the merits.
There was a missed opportunity on my part to help establish the correct precedent in Colorado on the fair timing for the use of an Anti-SLAPP, which is extremely dangerous for a plaintiff because it practically demands a mini-trial to get past it. I quickly learned through this process that the anti-SLAPP, while positive for companies that practice journalism sincerely, can be abused by companies like Alden where they use it to defend themselves against claims that are unrelated to defamation or first amendment speech, for example this commercial claim about following their terms of service. Under the rules, a plaintiff may file one amended complaint as a matter of right so long as the defendants have not yet filed an answer, and an anti-SLAPP motion is not considered an answer for this purpose. By the time the defendants filed their second anti-SLAPP motion, the deadline for doing so had already expired. The judge had the authority to decide the issue, but no Colorado court has ever ruled on this precise question of timing, and the judge in my case did not reach it either. I missed an opportunity to be more forceful in showing that if the defendants wanted to prevent my amended complaint from mooting their first anti-SLAPP motion, which prevents the risk of needing to file a second one too late, they needed to file an answer rather than relying solely on successive anti-SLAPP motions.
My consolidated brief relied on Rhino Fund, Harte-Hanks, Newport Harbor Ventures, and complaints filed by the state of Colorado to illustrate the distinction between commercial deception and protected speech, and to show how, so long as the defendants misrepresent their product to consumers, every day is another day that they continue to engage in bad business practices.
I attached extensive evidentiary exhibits, including:
- documented factual inaccuracies; ethical breaches, and an extended set of examples of ongoing breaches;
- the 2024 Colacioppo email which revealed the fraudulent concealment;
- correspondence showing institutional refusal to review corrections; and
- examples of misleading “corrections policy” and “Trust Project” representations.

During this stage, the defense invoked judicial estoppel and other procedural tactics while refusing to produce any discovery. In response, I filed all correspondence between myself, and the defendants lawyers into the public record to ensure full transparency. The record now includes a complete set of communications showing repeated avoidance of factual engagement.

To be clear, the defense has not only refused to provide any discovery, they have refused to accept any discovery. After asking them to let me know what discovery they would like to see, they went as far as to warn me not to send them any discovery.

III. District Court Order (June 20 – August 13, 2025)

June 20, 2025:

The District Court dismissed the business entities including those Smith and Freeman alleged would be responsible instead of them, holding only that my claims were time-barred, while, importantly, dismissing Smith and Freeman without prejudice. Without prejudice means I’m free to try again, which I will do if needed after the ruling on appeal.

VI. Rule 59(e) Motion and Arguments (July 2025)

My Rule 59(e) motion argued that the court had misapplied the statute of limitations by disregarding:
1. The 2024 Colacioppo email as a new deceptive act restarting the limitations period under § 6-1-115.
2. Continuing fraudulent concealment by Alden and its representatives.
3. The ongoing pattern of deceptive trade practices distinct from defamation.
The motion consolidated the CCPA claims into two parts:
1. Part I: New and independent deceptive acts — the 2024 email and a 2025 defense-counsel statement that further misrepresented the facts.
2. Part II: Ongoing institutional deception based on the false representation of correction and ethical-review policies.
August 13, 2025: The court issued its final order, denying my Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment.
The ruling triggered the appellate deadlines and now serves as the anchor date for all appeal-related filings.

V. Appeal and Next Steps (September – November 2025)

October 1, 2025:

I filed a Notice of Appeal to the Colorado Court of Appeals in Denver.
Transcripts from the hearing were ordered, and I began preparing my arguments for the appeal. I’m not appealing just because I can, I do believe that fraudulent concealment was argued for correctly. If the appeal court finds I did not argue it correctly or that it was too late to be elaborated on from within the 59e rule then I will be sure and use that knowledge when adapting my new complaint which I will file.

The appeal was filed, answer and reply have been completed, and so next the Colorado Court of Appeals will issue a decision.

Links (*Im still filling out links to filings. These can be accessed by searching the case number, 2025CV11 in the Colorado Court’s E-filing system for lawyers, or via Lexis Nexis for others at https://cocourts.com ). If you are engaged in research and would like a copy of a particular filing, please reach out.

Links to information, prior to filings:

On Humanwire (March, 2022) – Facts on the organization, misreporting and what occurred as a result of the misreporting. https://dembot.net/on-humanwire/
Personal entry related to the lack of accountability by The Denver Post (January, 2023) https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1A9yiptkuS/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Full investigation into The Denver Post and The Daily Camera’s operations under Alden (January, 2025) https://dembot.net/colorado-journalism-culture-shift/

Links to filings:

+ The First Complaint: Best to understand how Smith and Freeman operate Alden and their subsidiaries including MediaNew Group and The Denver Post, and how I claim they are engaged in ongoing consumer fraud. https://dembot.net/baron-v-alden-global-capital-randall-smith-and-heath-freeman/

+ The Amended Complaint: Best to understand the facts surrounding Christoper Osher’s extensive, extremely rare journalistic fraud (starts with Paragraph 11 on the PDF). https://dembot.net/amended-complaint/

+ Notice to court on the disregard for truth by defendants and their counsel. This included the full email correspondence between myself Alden’s lawyers [link forthcoming]

+ List of ALL filings prior to appeal: https://dembot.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/2025CV11-list-of-filings.pdf

CURRENT STATUS: The case was dismissed without prejudice as to the individual defendants, Randall Smith and Heath Freeman, meaning I am able to “try again”, which I will do, if needed. First, the case is before the Colorado Court of Appeals regarding the dismissal. If the appeal is unsuccessful with a decision I disagree with, I will use what I have learned to file a new, “better” complaint against Smith and Freeman. To date, the only substantive ruling the district court has made, which was the reason for dismissal, concerns the statute-of-limitations timeline. The District Court held that my CCPA claims expired in 2021, three years after what it viewed as the last deceptive act in a series. I appealed instead of immediately refiling because The Court did not properly address my argument that the statute of limitations was reset in 2024, when The Denver Post’s Editor-in-Chief made a new deceptive representation that constitutes fraudulent concealment under Colorado law. That 2024 act extended the limitations period to mid-2027. I also provided an array of other facts that should justify extending, reseting and starting the clock anew. I believe my January 2025 filing was therefore, timely. Even more simply, I argued a case should not be tossed on a statue-of -imitations grounds, at the pleadings stage, on a motion to dismiss. A decision from the Court of Appeals could come by the late summer or fall of 2026. If the decision is in my favor, the case will resume where it left off, and if the decision is not in my favor, and if I disagree, then I will take what I learned and try again.

April 16, 2025April 16, 2025

Amended Complaint

This version added needed elements to complete the picture, including:

Detailed facts to outline how Christopher Osher caused so many errors, linking his false information to the cause of a false arrest,
Added facts about value of asset damage,
Added facts about underground political activism in Boulder, including full letters from an “activist lawyer”.
Incorporated Randall Smith and Heath Freeman as libel defendants for fraud individually in their personal capacity, de facto,
Detailed the facts for the Statute of Limitations,
Removed the retraction claim (so long as they update their policies it will not matter that the false reports linger).
Etc.

Here is a link to the web version for the updated amended complaint:

https://dembot.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Baron-v-Alden-Web-Amended-Complaint.pdf

This is not an official copy and has material differences from the originals on the docket. This is a non submitted version prepared for the web. See the originals under Colorado District Court Case # 2025CV11

January 25, 2025April 30, 2026

Colorado Journalism: Culture Shift

By the end of the 20th century, The Denver Post came to represent one of the world’s greatest examples of a place where journalistic integrity was practiced. It was a place where journalists could be found working towards the truth of the most urgent matters of the day. The Denver Post has always been mixed with other types of media too, including puzzles, celebrity gossip, opinion columns, sponsored content, horoscopes, and other writings that intentionally do not adhere to journalistic standards, per se, though with regards to journalism specifically, due to the reliable work ethic practiced by relatively large teams of journalists by today’s standards, The Denver Post played an important role in the high objective of managing a trustworthy democratic society.

By the mid-1990s, with the rise of the web, including CraigsList founded in 1995, and Google founded in 1998, The Denver Post entered a new democratized media landscape which posed an imminent threat to their business model, and thus their sustainability to practice journalism.

The Dot Com Boom peaked in 2000 and in the subsequent years, only a small percent of businesses emerged from the rubble, among them CraigsList and Google, which had by then developed stable classifieds and advertising business models with a type of technology and scale that drove down the price to advertise exponentially, while offering advertisers an exponentially more effective service.

The books have already been written long ago, though there is little on the culture shift that ensued. From today’s vantage point, here in Colorado, as a microcosm, it’s easier to identify, since the culture shift has already occurred. While journalism is in many ways a practice that is tried and true, a scientific method of sorts that can be applied to human activity, how it’s practiced, and especially how it’s named, have become taken advantage of, watered down, and regularly mishandled without accountability. Among the many benefits to identifying the culture shift, we can include clarity on why Americans have not lost trust in journalism as a practice, but rather, have lost trust in the way in which journalism is practiced by the new culture.

THE PRIOR PRACTICE

Deep into the 2000s, throughout the circles of journalists, media business executives, academics, and bloggers, there was a consensus that the disruption from the internet was playing out, but no one had a convincing enough answer to save the business of journalism to cause a shift, and nothing for an industry standard was accepted as proven by example.

Despite the swift deterioration of revenue, the work itself – the journalistic work of the 2000s and early 2010s – was still well enough funded and often equally as excellent as ever. Even alongside the growth of citizen journalism and social media, the experienced, professional work from The Denver Post’s journalism wing by example was the sole type of media – the only department – that garnered local and national trust for the newspaper, fulfilling its role in helping to hold the world to account.

For example, a study into late American journalism in Colorado at its best could be found in the aftermath of one of the most tragic events in Colorado’s history in over a century.

On July 20, 2012, in the Town Center at Aurora shopping mall during a midnight screening of “The Dark Knight Rises”, dressed in tactical gear and armed with multiple weapons including a semi-automatic rifle and a shotgun, a man set off several tear gas canisters and open-fired on the movie theater audience. The attack caused panic and chaos, with many attendees initially thinking the sounds and smoke were part of the movie’s special effects.

This overwhelming incident resulted in 12 deaths and 70 injuries, making it one of the deadliest shootings in the United States at the time. The gunman was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, plus 3,318 years.

The Aurora shooting deeply impacted the Colorado community and the nation, leading to a renewed debate over gun control laws and mental health.

The Denver Post won a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage. The incredible work was a collection of articles that provided in-depth reporting on the shooting itself, the investigation, the victims, and the impact on the community. The Pulitzer Prize recognized the newspaper’s commitment to excellence in journalism and its ability to deliver comprehensive coverage of a significant event that affected the entire country.

The Denver Post’s editor Gregory L. Moore’s role in the coverage illustrated his leadership in guiding the newspaper’s journalistic efforts. Under his direction, The Denver Post dedicated extensive resources to provide readers with comprehensive and in-depth coverage, driven by a passion for fulfilling a duty for the social good.

A second example by comparison, among peak highlights in American journalistic integrity, practiced in a supportive organization, in a supportive democratic society, involves the story of journalist Jana Winter, a New York-based Fox News reporter who also covered the 2012 Aurora theater shooting in Colorado.

Winter reported on a notebook sent by the suspect to his psychiatrist which contained confidential, violent descriptions and illustrations, part of an ongoing investigation, and under a gag order by the court.

Winter noted in her story that she received the notebook from anonymous law enforcement sources, having promised anonymity in exchange for obtaining access.

Making the notebook public offers the world critical insight into psychological behavior for mental health research, helping to identify at-risk individuals before tragedy occurs.

The defense attorneys for the shooter subpoenaed Winter to Colorado to reveal her sources arguing that the leak violated the gag order and could prejudice the trial. Winter, based in New York, invoked New York’s strong shield law. Shield laws are important state laws that protect journalists from revealing their sources and additional material from their investigations, a matter of integrity that recognizes the important role journalists play as providers of truth, as well as acknowledgment of the trust that is expected of them to uphold the truth.

From The New York Times:

In one of the first major cases of a reporter facing prison since Judith Miller refused to identify a confidential source, a Fox news reporter is being asked to turn over information from her reporting on the theater shooting in Aurora, Colo., last summer.

Jana Winter, a 32-year-old investigative reporter with FoxNews.com, has said she will not disclose the names of two law enforcement officials she quoted in an article on July 25.

As an investigative journalist, revealing her sources could harm her ability to be trusted with confidential information in the future and thus harm her ability to report on important matters the public can benefit from knowing. At the risk of jail, Winter and her team first published the article anticipating the risk and then fought the subpoena in court arguing that her practice was critical to a functioning democratic society. Through a lengthy battle and finally, on appeal, the courts ruled in Winter’s favor, protecting her sources and upholding the principles of press freedom and confidentiality.

Whereas even by 2012 journalism was in many ways culturally strong across America, and in many ways as trusted and effective as ever in Colorado as demonstrated by the Denver Post’s Pulitzer Prize, it all came crashing down just four years later, in March of 2016, when Moore resigned.

Alden Global Capital had acquired a significant stake in MediaNews Group (Digital First Media), a parent company of The Denver Post, following a pre-packaged bankruptcy deal set up in 2010. The bankruptcy reorganization was said to be a method to restructure the company debt, debt that ultimately resulted in a change in the ownership structure with lenders swapping debt for stock. Alden Global Capital’s Randall Smith and Heath Freeman bought up enough to gain control over The Denver Post and other Colorado newspapers within the same parent group, including The Daily Camera, the newspaper for Boulder where I live.

Beyond the naturally trending decline in advertising and classifieds-based revenue, the massive debt and sell-off appear to be a consequence of William Dean Singleton, having accumulated almost a billion dollars in debt largely from questionably-priced acquisitions, and then going on to cash out from the debt proclaiming the good ‘ol days of revenue would never come back. After the reorganization, Singleton seems to have unwittingly lost his influence with the appointment of new directors to the MediaNews board representing interests led by Alden.

This transition marked the beginning of a new era for Colorado media, with Alden’s significant effects over journalism coming into reality, as well their thumb coming onto the editorial in a manner that significantly affected the capabilities of The Denver Post and Daily Camera nearly overnight.

When a new owner with new intentions gains influential control of a news property such as the Denver Post or The Daily Camera, appointed chief editors are selected with the approval or at least the acquiescence of the owners. This reflects the reality that in most media organizations ownership plays a crucial role in major decisions, including the appointment of key editorial positions, which in turn determines what types of stories will be heard, and what angles will be drawn.

Alden, with a focus on improving short-term financial performance for the extraction of profits to shareholders in their hedge fund, where the majority of the beneficiaries live outside of the United States, is likely to prefer candidates who align with their operational and strategic vision for the newspapers, including approaches to managing costs, driving revenue, and navigating the degradation of journalistic integrity for profits. Such defines the editorial career and era of Lee Ann Colacioppo who was vying for and obtained the editor position following Moore’s resignation.

Alden’s influence was already evident in the extensive changes and layoffs, leading to the choice of evils that caused Moore to let go, no longer able to sincerely practice. With Colacioppo’s ability to appease Alden, the broader editorial and operational strategies have played out with overarching pressures, constraints, and what Colacioppo called her “love for chaos”.

In the spring of 2018, two years after Colacioppo became editor, senior journalists at The Denver Post revolted in a monumental group effort, calling on the world to save journalism. The ten op-ed pieces dominated the front page that day and exposed Alden’s tactics to the world: “Consider this also a signal to our community and civic leaders that they ought to demand better. Denver deserves a newspaper owner who supports its newsroom. If Alden isn’t willing to do good journalism here, it should sell The Post to owners who will.”

This editorial takeover stood on the shoulders of Chuck Plunkett who should have received all of the awards that year as it was at this very moment that mainstream America became aware of the actual real-world threat to democracy that was right in front of us all.

Notably, Gregory Moore had been included with an op-ed that day, front and center, even though he had resigned two years earlier. Colacioppo was not included.

You can probably imagine that Alden did not like that very much. The following week The New York Times reported on Plunkett’s departure:

On Thursday, Mr. Plunkett resigned after he said an executive who oversees the newspaper refused to run another sharp-edged editorial Mr. Plunkett had written for this Sunday’s newspaper. Mr. Plunkett said the editorial included new criticism of Alden Global Capital, the New York hedge fund that runs The Post and other newspapers through a subsidiary called Digital First Media.

“What they were asking was to be quiet,” Mr. Plunkett said in an interview. “For me to just sit quietly by would be hypocritical.

The New York Times noted that Colacioppo did not respond to a request for comment.

Plunket noted that the matter of his second piece which never ran involved mention of Dave Krieger, the editorial page editor at the Daily Camera who had just been fired because he self-published an editorial on his personal blog critical of Alden’s agenda after Alden refused to publish it in the newspaper.

Krieger was attempting to alert the community here in Boulder that The Daily Camera was at risk of losing its ability to be trusted, being too far at odds with journalism. It was the story of his colleagues at The Denver Post that needed to be known as it affected Boulder, too.

One of the more insidious aspects of this process is that these communities are generally left in the dark about what is happening because the newspaper is the community storyteller. When it fails to tell this important story about itself, it breaks trust with its readers.

Krieger’s story never ran.

THE NEW CULTURE

As part of the shake-up that same year in 2018, as journalists cried out about the new agenda, in the wake of their exodus, longtime Daily Camera editor Matt Sebastian stepped right up, taking on a loyal position for Alden at the Denver Post.

A couple of years after I moved to Boulder, in 2015 I invited Sebastian to speak at a conference panel I set up on the future of the news business with Ben Markus (investigative reporter at CPR) and Steve Outing (Former senior editor, Poynter Institute).

Sebastian shines when he can namedrop The Meat Puppets or give you his opinion about Neil Young on his own active news site, Slicing Up Eyeballs, and he has even more opinions to share on his own multi-hour weekly Sirius music talk show, Dark Wave, but when he is not busy with all of his personal business publishing and his work for Sirius XM Holdings Inc., he is the managing editor of The Denver Post.

As #2 in the newsroom to Colacioppo, Sebastian supports determining which stories to run, how to manage budgets, dealing with staff, various administrative tasks, interacting with the public and making sure each news article is complete and production-ready.

Sebastian must also try to make sure the newspaper is operating according to the policies that are put in place, for example, to try his best to ensure that the stories are living up to journalistic standards and ethical promises, especially where he has the role overseeing the editorial of the metro section, which is The Denver Post’s primary news wing.

Though such a demanding role for being in charge of the city’s information center might have taken more time in the past, Sebastian provides the following text for his bio at Sirus XM Holdings:

Veteran journalist and former music critic Matt Sebastian launched SlicingUpEyeballs.com in 2009 to celebrate the legacy of ’80s college modern and indie rock—music that paved the way for the alt-rock revolution. Sebastian—who has a collection of thousands of records, CDs, and cassettes—publishes daily news items about new album releases, reissues, box sets, tours, reunions, and other ’80s college rock band-related activities.

It would be understandable if Sebastian would need to ignore matters at The Denver Post due to the lack of time he has available from all of his work outside of office hours. If he were to work any hours that were not included in his obligation and pay rate, it could cut into his personal pursuits, daily personal business tasks and all of his other business and free time, which is true of many people in the 9-to-5 workforce who like to leave their work behind when the day is done. For even if Sebastian may prefer to spend all of his time at The Denver Post if he could, if no one is willing to pay, it seems rational that Sebastian would look elsewhere for fulfillment in his life. It’s also likely Sebastian, being a legacy newsroom man, has personal insurance and other guild benefits that would be hard to let go for anyone.

Working with a newsroom of under sixty, down from a peak of over three hundred, and thus mitigating a lack of resources in generating a certain number of stories, depth in coverage, time for research, time for writing, time for editorial, and time for the application of self-ethics, while still having time to do his radio show and engage in the sponsorship and partner sales he advertises on his music site, at The Denver Post Sebastian must round off, where the overflow must be deprioritized, or even in some cases, completely ignored.

We can gain some insight into what the new newsroom under Colacioppo and Sebastian looks like, given the limited time and resources.

Department	2016 Staff	2024 Staff	Change
Metro/City	31	19	-12
Business	7	3	-4
Editorial/Opinion	4	1	-3
Living	4	Eliminated	-4
Entertainment	4	Eliminated	-4
Sports	25	11	-14
Photography	20	7	-13
Presentation/Graphics and Art	2	Eliminated	-2
YourHub	11	Eliminated	-11
Management	3	2	-1
News Editing	5	Eliminated	-5
Living/Entertainment/Graphics	2	Eliminated	-2
Library/Research	1	Eliminated	-1
Editorial Assistants	2	Eliminated	-2
Digital/Interactive	11	Eliminated	-11
Features and Entertainment	New	5	+5
News Editing and Design	New	3	+3
Digital	New	6	+6

It’s important to keep in mind that Moore refused to continue on having already experienced too many layoffs, which is the starting point for this chart. Under Colacioppo’s tenure, the staff was reduced from 128 to 59, a total reduction of 75 people, a loss of about 55%. If we consider not just the reduction, however, but also the turnover rate, we find that only 24 people from the original staff remain. Here’s a more detailed breakout:

Denver Post Staff Comparison: 2016 vs. 2025

Department	Title (2016)	Title (2024)	Change
Metro/City	Jefferson County/Arvada (John Aguilar)	Suburbs (John Aguilar)	Changed
Metro/City	Marijuana Editor (Ricardo Baca)		Removed
Metro/City	Night/Breaking News Editor (Jim Bates)		Removed
Metro/City	Investigative Reporter (Jennifer Brown)		Removed
Metro/City	Politics/General Assignment (Joey Bunch)		Removed
Metro/City	Environment (Bruce Finley)	General Assignment Reporter (Bruce Finley)	Changed
Metro/City	Investigations Editor (Greg Griffin)		Removed
Metro/City	Breaking News/Weekend Editor (Sara Hansen)		Removed
Metro/City	General Assignment (Elizabeth Hernandez)	Enterprise Reporter (Elizabeth Hernandez)	Changed
Metro/City	G.A./Monday night City Editor (Carlos Illescas)		Removed
Metro/City	Criminal and civil courts (John Ingold)		Removed
Metro/City	Assistant City Editor (David Krause)		Removed
Metro/City	Washington Bureau (Mark K. Matthews)		Removed
Metro/City	General Assignment (Tom McGhee)		Removed
Metro/City	Federal Courts/Prisons (Kirk Mitchell)		Removed
Metro/City	City Hall Reporter (Jon Murray)	City Hall Reporter (Joe Rubino)	Changed
Metro/City	Suburban Reporter (Kieran Nicholson)		Removed
Metro/City	Investigations (David Migoya)		Removed
Metro/City	Assistant Editor (John Mossman)		Removed
Metro/City	Investigative Reporter (Christopher N. Osher)		Removed
Metro/City	Breaking News Reporter (Jesse Paul)	Breaking News Reporter (Katie Langford, Jacob Factor)	Changed
Metro/City	Police Reporter (Noelle Phillips)	General Assignment Reporter (Noelle Phillips)	Changed
Metro/City	Political Editor (Chuck Plunkett)		Removed
Metro/City	Education (Yesenia Robles)	K-12 Education Reporter (Jessica Seaman)	Changed
Metro/City	Senior Editor/News (Larry Ryckman)		Removed
Metro/City	Education Trends/Takeouts/G.A. (Kevin Simpson)		Removed
Metro/City	State courts (Jordan Steffen)		Removed
Metro/City	Production Manager (George Tanner)	Deputy City Editor, Nights (George Tanner)	Changed
Metro/City	Transportation/G.A. (Monte Whaley)		Removed
Metro/City		Statehouse Reporter (Nick Coltrain, Seth Klamann)	Added
Metro/City		Aurora Reporter (Saja Hindi)	Added
Metro/City		Deputy City Editor (Chris Paul)	Added
Metro/City		Environmental Reporter (Elise Schmelzer)	Added
Metro/City		Neighborhoods Reporter (Megan Ulu-Lani Boyanton)	Added
Business	Business Editor (Dana Coffield)	Senior Editor/Business (Donovan Henderson)	Changed
Business	Deputy Business Editor (Jen Campbell-Hicks)		Removed
Business	Mountains and tourism (Jason Blevins)		Removed
Business	Technology (Tamara Chuang)		Removed
Business	Commercial Real Estate (Emilie Rusch)		Removed
Business	Economy/residential real estate (Aldo Svaldi)	Economy/Residential Real Estate (Aldo Svaldi)	Unchanged
Business	General assignment business (Alicia Wallace)		Removed
Business	Business Reporter (Judith Kohler)	Business Reporter (Judith Kohler)	Unchanged
Editorial/ Opinion	Editorial Page Editor (Vincent Carroll)	Editorial Page Editor (Megan Schrader)	Changed
Editorial/ Opinion	Editorial Assistant (Monica Garcia)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Fashion/Lifestyle Editor (Suzanne S. Brown)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Travel and Fitness Editor (Jenn Fields)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Restaurants/Features (Bill Porter)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Food (Colleen O’Connor)	Food Reporter (Lily O’Neill)	Changed
Features/ Entertainment	Television and Theater (Joanne Ostrow)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Reverb/Music (Dylan Owens)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Fine Arts/Culture Reporter (Ray Rinaldi)		Removed
Features/ Entertainment	Entertainment Reporter (John Wenzel)	Entertainment Reporter (John Wenzel)	Unchanged
Features/ Entertainment		Entertainment Editor (Jonathan Shikes)	Added
Features/ Entertainment		Features Editor (Barbara Ellis)	Added
Features/ Entertainment		Outdoors Reporter (John Meyer)	Added
Features/ Entertainment		Reporter (Tiney Ricciardi)	Added
Sports	AME/Sports (Scott Monserud)	Sports Editor (Matt Schubert)	Changed
Sports	Night Digital Sports Producer (Jeff Bailey)	Digital Sports Strategist (Jeff Bailey, Joe Nguyen)	Changed
Sports	Night Editor/Preps/Outdoors (Torin Berge)		Removed
Sports	Digital Director/Sports (Daniel Boniface)		Removed
Sports	Assistant Editor (Mike Burrows)		Removed
Sports	Avalanche/Motorsports/Colleges (Mike Chambers)	Avs Reporter (Corey Masisak)	Changed
Sports	Nuggets reporter (Christopher Dempsey)	Nuggets Reporter (Bennett Durando)	Changed
Sports	High School/Preps Sports (Neil H. Devlin)		Removed
Sports	Digital Prep Sports Producer (Morgan Dzakowic)		Removed
Sports	CSU reporter (Terry Frei)		Removed
Sports	Colorado Rockies (Nick Groke)	Rockies Reporter (Patrick Saunders)	Changed
Sports	Lead Designer (TJ Hutchinson)	Systems Editor (TJ Hutchinson)	Changed
Sports	Broncos writer (Nicki Jhabvala)	Broncos Reporter (Ryan McFadden, Parker Gabriel)	Changed
Sports	Sports Show/DPTV Producer (Hugh Johnson)		Removed
Sports	Assistant Editor (Michael Judson)		Removed
Sports	Columnist (Mark Kiszla)	Columnist (Sean Keeler, Troy Renck)	Changed
Sports	Editorial Assistant/G.A. reporter (Nick Kosmider)		Removed
Sports	Olympics/Skiing/Rapids reporter (John Meyer)		Removed
Sports	College Sports/G.A. Reporter (Irv Moss)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (Joe Amon)		Removed
Photography	Digital Photo Editor (Glen Barber)		Removed
Photography	Digital Photo/Video Editor (Amy Brothers)		Removed
Photography	Video Producer (Vincent Chandler)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (Hyoung Chang)	Photojournalist (Hyoung Chang)	Changed
Photography	Photographer (Andy Cross)	Photojournalist (Andy Cross)	Changed
Photography	Director of Denver Post TV (Molly Hughes)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (John Leyba)		Removed
Photography	Senior Editor/Photo/Multimedia (Meghan Lyden)		Removed
Photography	Video/Photo Editor (Eric Lutzens)	Multimedia Editor (Eric Lutzens)	Changed
Photography	Senior Photo Editor (Ken Lyons)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (Cyrus McCrimmon)		Removed
Photography	Videographer (Steve Nehf)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (AAron Ontiveroz)	Photojournalist (AAron Ontiveroz)	Changed
Photography	Photographer (Kathryn Scott Osler)		Removed
Photography	Digital Photo Editor/Video Prod. (Don Pavlin)		Removed
Photography	Videographer (Lindsay Pierce)		Removed
Photography	Photographer (Helen Richardson)	Photojournalist (Helen Richardson)	Changed
Photography	Photographer (RJ Sangosti)	Photojournalist (RJ Sangosti)	Changed
Management	Editorial Administrator (Monica Brewer)	Editorial Administrator (Monica Brewer)	Unchanged
Management	Interim Editor (Lee Ann Colacioppo)	Editor (Lee Ann Colacioppo)	Unchanged
Management	Director of Newsroom Ops (Linda Shapley)		Removed
News Editing and Design	Assistant News Editor (Alison Borden)		Removed
News Editing and Design	Designer (Maureen Burnett)	Deputy Editor (Maureen Burnett)	Changed
News Editing and Design	Head of Design (Matt Swaney)		Removed
News Editing and Design	Assistant Editor (Dale Ulland)		Removed
Digital	Director of Audience (Beth Rankin)	Director of Audience (Beth Rankin)	Unchanged
Digital	Deputy Director of Audience (Tynin Fries)	Deputy Director of Audience (Tynin Fries)	Unchanged
Digital	Digital Sports Strategist (Jeff Bailey, Joe Nguyen)	Digital Sports Strategist (Jeff Bailey, Joe Nguyen)	Unchanged
Digital	Digital Strategist (Tamara Dunn)	Digital Strategist (Tamara Dunn, Kevin Hamm, Brooke Eberle)	Changed

*Note: There are a few more recent updates to the chart I’m working on. If you see this message it means there is a margin of error still.

You’ve likely seen or considered an overview of what communities lose when journalism becomes weak or deserted. The reduction in staff and the strategic shifts at The Denver Post from 2016 to 2025 have several ramifications for the greater Denver community in particular (population almost three million) and the region. Here’s what’s happening.

Investigative Journalism

There are no longer any investigative journalism titles at The Denver Post. Though understandably investigative journalism would be a focus for budget cuts due to the extra costs that are required for a more extensive effort, it signals a significant change in direction for the media company regarding the type of role it has in society. It’s the end of an era for the newspaper’s role as a watchdog. Though lost in the middle of a long blog post on the Internet, this point about The Denver Post no longer having an investigative journalism department is worthy of more consideration and awareness.

Business

The Denver Post essentially eliminated its business reporting department, reducing its staff from seven team members covering businesses throughout the region working exclusively with business titles, down to just one, plus one business editor who is also in the position of senior editor of design production. The Denver Post posted an ad for a new business reporter with a pay of just $19.60 in the year 2024 of the Common Era. There is no mention of ethical journalistic concepts for the qualifications, instead:

Denver Post reporters must understand and implement SEO techniques to ensure content reaches the largest online audience, and use all the data tools available to them to inform story choices.

The dramatic decrease in the depth and breadth of business news impacts local businesses, consumers, and investors, and ultimately reduces prestige and funding for the state with less national attention.

National Politics

In contrast to the Pulitzer Prize for reporting on the 2012 shooting in Aurora, in 2024 the press in Colorado lost control of the message in Aurora over the topic of immigration and Venezuelan gangs (and still haven’t pulled it together).

In an editorial by The Denver Post Editorial Board, the condescending article starts off “Is Aurora overrun by a gang of illegal immigrants? Of course not”, but the rationale relied on recent statements from politicians captured by 9News. In concluding the article with a nod to those immigrants and refugees seeking liberty, the article incites a literal cheer to round up and deport the criminal ones and secure the border. This fire-stoking editorial even acts as a political endorsement for the woman identified as having created the gang narrative, a bar owner and city council woman who might be the next Lauren Boebert for being even louder. This editorial would make for an excellent conversation in any school of journalism.

Culture and The Arts

Prior arts and culture reporters had specific titles and beats for Features, Television and Theater, Music, and Fine Arts and Culture, but now Denver Post reporters have just one title, a general “Features/Entertainment” department title where everything has been consolidated. Specialized arts reporting used to help foster a sense of community and cultural identity. The reduction weakens community ties and reduces public engagement.

Sebastian’s music website could be seen as somewhat of a reaction to what happens. His taste is inde and he is in a way filling a gap. He’s also in the perfect position to obtain new exclusive information coming into The Denver Post which could be used for stories on his own website, and for Sirus.

Sports

From twenty-seven staff titles filled for sports coverage down to thirteen, it affects almost all coverage beyond professional athletics, showing more evidence of the general shift to more general reporting, with fewer specialized roles. Coverage of local, high school, college, and niche sports is affected the most. It’s sad for those kids growing up who will never experience the support or recognition among their friends and communities for their excellence. The Denver Post appears to be going more the route of opinion reporting on mainstream sports which is what could be expected for any company that was focused on growth strategies.

The University of Colorado Boulder recently banned a specific Denver Post sports reporter from asking questions to anyone in their entire football league, noting that the reporter constantly attacked them, which is true…since the ban the reporter has become even more repugnant and dispiriting. In an article about this incident, The New York Times noted that:

The Post does not have a reporter assigned to cover Colorado sports full-time.

That’s another sentence that seems to be lost on people but the implications are absolutely worth talking about and thinking through.

Pay Scale

Along with a severe reduction in people and depth in coverage, pay has also been an issue, which affects the type of talent and experience The Denver Post can attract anew, and helps workers justify the need to ignore or leave the work behind when the day is done.

At the end of 2022, an event was created to bring awareness to Alden’s cuts and low pay in Colorado bringing together journalists and supporters from around the state.

According to the event organizers, the last time the newsroom received across-the-board raises was in 2016, presumably just before Colacioppo took over. Since then, they noted, the median price of a single-family home in Denver had risen by 71%. The reporters made an extremely modest request for consideration of a pay increase:

The newsroom unit seeks a 16% increase to its pay scale over two years, meaning a retroactive 8% increase for 2022 and another 8% increase in 2023. Corporate countered with a one-time, $1,000 bonus per person upon ratification of a new contract. Media personnel at The Post and beyond found this offer insulting.

The counteroffer of a one-time $1,000 bonus speaks volumes. It highlights Alden Global’s profound disregard for its employees’ well-being and underscores its lack of investment in the long-term sustainability of its newspapers. Such a dismissive response exemplifies the systemic neglect of the operational and financial health of The Denver Post under Alden’s ownership. My goodness.

This approach is consistent with what appears to be Alden‘s broader strategy when acquiring new media companies. Upon taking ownership, Alden typically offers buyouts to experienced journalists, effectively encouraging long-serving employees to leave voluntarily. This tactic targets unionized workers and those protected by guild agreements, gradually dismantling the collective power of newsroom staff. The ultimate goal appears to be replacing seasoned journalists with low-paid, entry-level workers earning as little as $19 an hour. This not only strips newsrooms of institutional knowledge but transforms newsrooms into content mills optimized for SEO traffic, further degrading the quality of journalism and undermining the trust of the communities they serve.

Attrition

By undermining working conditions and not replacing departing unionized employees with similar hires, Alden may gradually erode union presence through attrition. The remaining employees may become too demoralized and leave voluntarily, which allows Alden to avoid overtly breaking labor laws while achieving their goal of a non-union workforce. If perchance that is the strategy, and if it’s obvious to workers, they may feel even more justified in leaving work the very second the bell rings. They might even have an alarm.

Contractors or entry-level workers may produce lower-quality content, but it fits with an opportunity to pivot toward high-volume, SEO-driven articles that prioritize clicks and ad revenue.

Investigative journalism and deep reporting of the kind that supports democracy thrive through institutional knowledge, experienced journalists, and financial investment—all of which are breaking down.

In turn, public backlash is occurring and trust is in a race to the bottom. If you live in Boulder or Denver you may have heard from some readers who value local journalism that the focus appears to be shifting to clickbait and superficial stories.

However, Alden may not care about readership loyalty if short-term profits can continue to be milked through a slow fade.

You can see that today in January 2025, a third of the traffic is known to be SEO:

If someone or a group wanted to start a new news business and wondered what it would be like to purchase The Denver Post (it’s not for sale), such an investment would probably be based on SEO economics as a large revenue arm where the current revenue would be added into a formula with time and industry metrics to determine what might look like a long term loan and bet for a new owner on 34.5% SEO.

Purchasing the assets of an SEO business instead of starting from scratch could be extremely risky. The SEO industry is under massive disruption by large language models and artificial intelligence, totally transforming search algorithms and user interaction. AI-driven content generation (it will get better), AI personal assistants, sound feedback, and holographic lenses are emerging now that will bypass traditional ad revenue models altogether, disrupting the search market for even the largest platforms. This type of change is undeniably on the horizon.

But if a new owner wanted to simply focus on high-quality ethical journalism, it seems like it would be hard to justify a desire to obtain the archive and a name if that’s all there is to it. Apparently, most of the assets have been sold off, so it’s a different type of proposition. The Denver Post used to be autonomous, but having become part of a conglomerate, the MediaNews Group is their publisher and thus runs the business operations.

The Denver Post has all kinds of different revenue arms around their name and their archive, including an entire business called Denver Post Media which appears to have a large staff selling and generating sponsored content for advertisers. In 2020 they advertised ~6 million average monthly users online but by 2024 they were down to just 3.7 Million average monthly users online.

They produce writings to target consumers with content that looks like news, but isn’t.

Such business might be lucrative along with many of the other revenue streams, but is this really the type of activity that a new journalism group would want to be doing?

It seems as if it would be way easier to start fresh for far less of an investment. That’s been proven to be true in Colorado now in at least two important examples, The Colorado Sun on a state level, and The Boulder Reporting Lab on a local level. These two newsrooms started from scratch with a nearly negligible investment by comparison to fill the needs that The Denver Post and The Daily Camera left behind. These two ethical journalism newsrooms are growing year-over-year now at a proven rate. Both are non-profits. Nonprofit news is a realistic model for the long run that many journalists bizarrely refused to seriously consider throughout the 2000s and 2010s.

Under Gregory Moore, The Denver Post won four Pulitzer Prizes, in 2010, 2011, 2012, and the prestigious 2013 award for the Aurora Theater shooting. Since his departure, the paper has not been considered for Pulitzer recognition again, marking a significant shift in its journalistic achievements.

Overall, The Denver Post has undergone such an enormous change, with broader and shallower coverage, reduced journalistic expertise, and SEO-driven strategies, it’s at least questionable if The Denver Post will be able to continue to compete. It’s worth considering whether or not they are competing.

The Daily Camera

With Alden out of the bag in 2018 and Sebastian working his way up and out of Boulder to Denver, John Vahlenkamp and Julie Vossler-Henderson emerged as the key Alden loyalists who would transform The Daily Camera editorial and reorganization of the staff over the following years.

From June 2018 to June 2020 Vossler-Henderson worked her way up at The Daily Camera from Deputy Editor to Central News Editor, to Senior Editor. Vossler-Henderson describes herself on Linked-In as a:

Professional journalist with more than ten years of experience in editing, social media management, and search engine optimization.

John Vahlenkamp has been running the editorial for The Daily Camera from The Prairie Mountain Media management office under the direction of Al Munzi who retired in 2024. Munzi had owned and consolidated the regional papers now owned and controlled by the MediaNews Group (MNG), which is owned by Alden.

The Daily Camera has seen a much worse set of degradations. Even before the shakeup, changes were already underway. MediaNews Group achieved marching orders over Prairie Mountain around 2009, the building in downtown Boulder was sold in 2010 (bringing into focus the timing of Singleton’s rural newspaper acquisitions and debt saddling), the staff was severely reduced (a staple Singleton activity in common with what Alden likes), and by now, today, it appears that there are no longer any full-time local reporters or editors left at The Daily Camera. This is another item lost in a paragraph right here on an off-the-beaten-path blog somewhere on the internet but it’s such an important point that is worth discussing. They do have reporters and editors on staff who work at many newspapers in the region spending only a part of their time on the city of Boulder. If someone wanted to contact a reporter listed on The Daly Camera website, they would send an email to that reporter at Prairie Mountain Media.

Vossler-Henderson recently moved up to deputy editor of The Denver Post while Vahlenkamp returned his name to The Daily Camera as the senior editor, adding to the long list of publications he works at as senior editor.

The strategy, the group clarified, as it relates to The Daily Camera and their decision to eliminate yet another role by not replacing Vossler-Henderson when she headed up to The Denver Post, was to consolidate the editors and writers of The Daily Camera with four other smaller newspapers in the region into a single group, to cover more with less, they said:

John Vahlenkamp, senior editor of the Longmont Times-Call and the Loveland Reporter-Herald, has taken on Vossler-Henderson’s duties at the Camera. He oversees the daily operations and newsrooms of the three newspapers, plus those of two weekly publications, the Broomfield Enterprise and Colorado Hometown Weekly.

In other words, the senior editor of The Daily Camera only spends a tiny fraction of his day job in Boulder, and The Daily Camera seems to no longer have any dedicated full-time reporters or editors. But the important point here is that writers don’t revolt for being muzzled or understaffed, they don’t revolt because they fit in. They excel with digital reach and more output through general media writing.

The Daily Camera has a system of soliciting students from CU Boulder in the journalism department to come in as unpaid volunteers and some can parlay that into an entry-level paid position.

The new young culture writer stays out of the drama, keeps to themself online, keeps their head down and cranks it out, a dream job for many types of media writers who can expertly work with the news look and the style guide. As for fact-checking, editing, and writing in general, I’ll bet Chat-GTP is their godsend. Some young reporters still are or were aspiring journalists and may see it as a duty or stepping stone.

Crime Reporting

The most popular newsman in Boulder, on twitter, was Mitchell Byars, acting as a center-point for real-time emergencies before things with twitter broke down for journalists after going private. Over the years, he reliably listened to the police and fire scanners for the town of Boulder and had access to obtain updates from the police, so one could often find out what’s going on around town the quickest by following his personal twitter account.

Additionally, Byars became famous for his apathetically toned twitter jokes, including police scanner jokes and self-depreciating takes about his life as a reporter. If you enjoy making fun of desperate and confused people you would likely laugh at his #ScannerFTW tweets where he bashed community members for being troubled. Sometimes his taste goes way overboard in ways that are hard to imagine as being possible for a crime reporter. Byars just left The Daily Camera days ago, but not because he was fired he indicated, he indicated that it was his choice. He did not elaborate beyond that. How much did The Daily Camera pay for their popular newsman and crime reporter? Byars commented about this on an article on minimum wage in mid-2021.

I’ve been at the Daily Camera for about a decade, with increasing duties and responsibilities every year. I’ve never made $45K in a year. Only once have I even made more than $40K.

$40k a year equates to $19.23 per hour. I don’t think it’s fair to presume he worked more than 40hrs a week, but assuming he did, e.g., if he worked a 60hr week at that rate, that would be a total of $12.82 per hour, far less than the statewide minimum wage of $15.57. He might say that he was willing to do it because he loved the work so much, but his persona on twitter has been one that exudes extreme apathy and during the same period Vossler-Henderson worked her way in and up The Daily Camera ladder, Byars applied to work from home. He remained the crime reporter for most of his time at The Daily Camera but later became a deputy editor. The “deputy” part of his title could have had different meanings though typically, in newsroom usage, it indicates that one is in a trial position as an editor, a state he had been in for over two years.

No words

In March of 2021, it was our turn here in Boulder to witness the unthinkable, a mass shooting at the King Soopers on Broadway and Table Mesa. A gunman opened fire, killing 10 people, one by one, including customers, employees, and a police officer.

The attack began in the parking lot before the gunman moved inside the store, where the shooting continued. Law enforcement arrived quickly, and after an exchange of gunfire which ended the life of the first responding officer, the suspect was taken into custody.

At the time motives behind the attack were not immediately clear and it left our town in complete shock and mourning as we came together to learn about and remember the victims, and support each other through the aftermath of the tragedy right here where it could have been any of us.

As national and international journalists and media writers descended onto Boulder in a flash, densely spread out all over town with media cameras, vehicles, and satellites, Byars was completely upstaged. “As a local reporter, I don’t begrudge national media being here.”, Byars tweeted.

In reality, there was simply no competition due to the lack of resources and experience that he had versus the amount of resources and experiences that they had, with media outlets flying in literally from around the globe. His crime stories would become popular stories for The Daily Camera, but they would not become an exclusive or focused source of information or attention across the nation due in part to this lack of support and resources.

If you are an independent journalist, you might be thinking to yourself “I don’t need resources. I can get right in there with just a pad and a pen, and get right to work.” That may be true for some, but that requires a sense of independence, personal motivation, creativity, curiosity, drive, and integrity, the likes of which I have not seen from The Daily Camera since David Krieger was fired for it.

Byars was in a different process in a different kind of organization with a different production model than what was once had.

As Byars was already popular for his monitoring of the scanners, as he was engaged in that role during the shooting, having the center of attention for people in Boulder who knew of his updates, as the town was still in chaos, Byars indicated that he had been alerted to a webpage that doxed him for reporting on the shooting.

As would be expected, this drew in a huge amount of sympathy for himself right in the middle of complete chaos as the community was trying to figure out what was going on with the shooting. Journalists and reporters from around the world replied with shame for anyone who would dox a reporter for merely reporting on a mass shooting, some expressing fear that the same could happen to them.

But it wasn’t true.

That’s just what people read into it since what he wrote was misleading. He’ll be able to say that what he wrote “wasn’t factually untrue”. But the fact is, according to the Wayback Machine, someone had posted it five years prior and there was no association with the mass shooting event. He no longer lived at the address in the doxing and looked completely different from the old photo. But he expressed fear and noted that he had people at The Daily Camera scrambling around right then suddenly to try to figure out how to get it down, having caused the newspaper to shift its efforts away from the community work they were doing that involved the fear of the entire city of Boulder towards a page that was posted years prior and didn’t present any real threat or even a reason, for there was no justification, manifesto or rationale. The doxer didn’t even say why anyone should care.

That’s just the context for what he did. Whether he knew it was old, or was perhaps having a difficult time internally dealing with the shooting as many of us were, before he first posted it, as the crime reporter, during a community crisis, he began frantically messaging different unrelated people in the community privately to ask them if they were the one who doxed him. He didn’t have any evidence, he just assumed it might be true of various people in the community that he didn’t like.

This is such a dangerous action. In a scenario where a reporter – especially a crime reporter – contacts multiple unrelated individuals privately to accuse them all of the same crime without any evidence, the situation involves significant ethical problems, even if the interactions are not made public.

When a crime reporter in a small town selects individuals such as his critics based on personal suspicions without evidence to fish one out that would lead to an arrest is so serious. When unqualified, underpaid employees take on such positions of power within the community with no oversight, it should rise to a new level of concern for the community.

That this event happened when the town was dealing with a mass shooting is even more serious. Such biases cloud judgment and lead to targeting individuals unfairly. Even in the most subtle ways, such prejudices come through in how people are treated in a town undemocratically as a result of the disregard from people who misuse their privileged role. The Daily Camera presents itself to the community as being ethical, and that they use the type of rigor that Vahlenkamp shows off in his retractions.

Falsely accusing people of crimes from such a position should never be tolerated.

Proper investigative techniques involve gathering evidence, verifying information, and presenting findings responsibly. Engaging in practices that are harassing and intimidating obviously contravenes the standards expected of journalists who are entrusted with special privileges and trust in a town. It can be ruinous for those people who are targeted.

Technology

Another reporter at The Daily Camera who remains because he fits in is tech-advice columnist Dave Taylor. I noticed that Taylor was using the newspaper to slip in affiliate links which he personally makes money from. I reached out to two affiliate link providers and confirmed it.

When I confronted Taylor with a single example, at first he pretended that it was an accident but after showing him more examples I found, and pressing him further, he admitted it was on purpose, and also wrote that I “caught” him, though he complained that I took it too seriously, writing “I’m not a reporter and my column is an opinion column, not news reporting.” But his column is listed under ‘Business News’.

When I confronted The Daily Camera about this, they tweeted that it was an accident, but when I pointed out that multiple articles had them and that Taylor admitted to it, The Daily Camera ignored it.

Taylor continues to put out his column under the news category with no distinction between his role and any other writer at the newspaper. I looked through eight of his articles to find multiple affiliate links, as well as multiple uses of his Google Ad campaign tracking ID but have not yet looked through the more than 180 articles which may also have affiliate links and ad trackers mixed in.

American Survivors: The Epic Version

Prior to eliminating dedicated reporters and editors, consider one of The Daily Camera’s most notable efforts, the Survivors of 9/11 story.

In 2021, in honor of the 20th Anniversary of 9/11, Vahlenkamp and Vossler-Henderson had over 20 inaccuracies in a single story, not including:

• The headline’s labeling of the subjects of the story as “survivors of 9/11.” None were present at any of the attack locations.

• The location of the Pentagon.

• The timing of some events on 9/11.

• Danna Hirsch’s name at the time, which was Danna Perry.

• Hirsch’s work arrangement. She was not scheduled to work on 9/11 and had not switched schedules with another flight attendant.

• The year Hirsch graduated from Boulder High School. She graduated in 1985.

• Maynard’s trip to New York, which was on a commercial flight and not on a special flight for the FBI.

• Hirsch’s trip back to Boulder, which was not in a caravan with other flight attendants.

• Where Maynard worked while helping in the aftermath of the attacks and how long he stayed there. He worked for several days at Fresh Kills Landfill but spent most of his time at or near Ground Zero. He spent about a week in the New York City area but did not return to provide further assistance.

Reports are generated at a fraction of the cost.

It brings to question another work from Vahlenkamp, a retraction for the front page for an article that discussed air quality concerns in the region, a retraction that was quite different for quite different reasons.

As tedious as it may be, let’t take the opportunity to dive deep into the fine details of the editing process.

The article was about spikes in harmful chemicals found near the Union Reservoir in Longmont Colorado, news that spans into Boulder County. As the article correctly noted: The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment warns that exposure to benzene at levels higher than 9 parts per billion can cause irritations and respiratory issues and much higher levels can cause drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart rate, headaches, tremors, confusion and unconsciousness. The article was newsworthy because the monitor at the reservoir in Longmont hit a whopping 35 parts per billion.

According to one source, however, Vahlenkamp was under significant pressure from The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA), an extremely powerful pro-fracking, pro-oil-and-gas drilling lobby group in Colorado that would not want anyone to think there might be some kind of association with the spike to their nearby environmentally controversial operations. An explication of the content of the retraction itself supports this claim about Vahlenkamp due to the lack of justification for removing the article. Instead of making a few minor, non-material corrections, he retracted the entire article on a subject matter of significant public concern, providing notes about each of the issues of concern.

Keep in mind that COGA is likely not at all happy that there is a monitoring station pointing at their stuff with its data on a public website. Vahlenkamp notes his first reason in the list for the retraction:

The statement that “benzene, ethane and methane — three gases closely linked to oil and gas operations — have continued to spike” does not provide numbers or context. COGA contends, based on charts found on the air monitoring station website, that “outside of some sort of anomaly on (March) 29, the spikes are smaller, infrequent, and measurements almost appear flat over the previous couple weeks.

Other spikes had been happening in the data from the monitor at the reservoir, and that fact was also mentioned in the article, but COGA did not want anyone to think it might be due to them, so they claimed that because the smaller spikes were merely mentioned to have existed and not explained, it wasn’t fair to even mention that they existed. This logic, which included hiding the spike of 35 parts per billion was a leading factor to scrap the report.

The statement originally made by the reporter was true, for those gases are closely linked to oil and gas operations, and the data showed spikes continued on that were more significant than normal. The article did communicate the concepts of the spikes such that someone could understand the numbers, where around 9 would be worrisome and 35 is bad, that people are looking for spikes with a monitoring station, and what is at stake which is people’s health within proximity to 35. Vahlenkamp decided that the lack of sufficient context and depth was the reason.

In another point, Vahlenkamp wrote:

The statement that “the closest active fracking site to the air monitoring station at Union Reservoir, the Wattenburg (sic) well, is slightly less than one mile to the north” contains errors. The well that is slightly less than one mile north of the station is the Stamp Well, and it sits in the Wattenberg field.

The statement made by the reporter was, once again, ultimately true in this case too. Though it’s true there are many wells in Wattenberg, this was properly identified as the one in Wattenberg almost a mile north of the reservoir, and thus the only actual error is that it’s spelled Wattenberg with an e, not Wattenburg with a u, as Vahlenkamp pointed out with the spelling mistake. But COGA has a more specific name. They call the Wattenburg well a mile north of the reservoir ‘Stamp Well’. Vahlenkamp agreed that this was a contributing factor to why he retracted the article and blamed the reporter. While the article clarified in no uncertain terms that no evidence linked the fracking site to the spikes, it appears the editor went along with COGA since a simple correction could be “The Stamp Well in the Wattenberg field.”.

In another point, as justification for his retraction, Vahlenkamp wrote:

The statement that “(o)n March 29, the air monitoring station at Union Reservoir measured a large spike of benzene with concentrations reaching 6 parts per billion” is not supported by data on the monitoring station website. While the data show a spike, that spike comes short of 6 ppb.

As readers, we do not know what the reading was that Vahlenkamp found. Was it 5.9? Was it 5.5? Whatever it was, the editor agreed that because the story mentioned that the spike was 6 instead of “short of 6”, this difference helps to support why the article should be retracted instead of telling the public what the number of the spike was that he found in the data which was just short of 6.

As another justification for his retraction, Vahlenkamp wrote:

Regarding the statement “The federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s short-term health-based guideline suggests that exposure to benzene levels of 9 parts per billion is unhealthy”: The ATSDR lists 9 ppb as a “minimal risk level” (MRL) for inhaled benzene. The ATSDR defines MRL as “an estimate of the amount of a chemical a person can eat, drink, or breathe each day without a detectable health risk. MRLs are developed for health effects other than cancer. If someone is exposed to an amount above the MRLs, it does not mean that health problems will happen.

He didn’t provide any additional comments about this, suggesting that he merely agreed to post what the lobby group forced him to publish as part of the makeup, but he did use it as a justification bullet point for why he retracted the article.

Are you bored and wondering why I took so much time to go so deep into the details of the retraction? Consider Vahlenkamp’s effort in this story. Wouldn’t it be great if he put this much thought into every report? This is exactly the exercise of ethical journalism that Vahlenkamp is showing off. While I don’t buy into his explanations personally for being cause to retract instead of fix, it shows what readers expect goes on behind the scenes with every information report.

Because Vahlenkamp admitted that it was not until after the story was published that he became aware of all of the problems, the reporter was probably on their own, working in an underpaid, unsupportive environment without an editor. Such is the reality of the expectations for new culture writers to excel within the environment and do it all themselves. The reporter was fired.

Readers should be aware of the different types of propaganda and the different personal motivations that go into today’s news under the refactored Alden Global Capital newsroom. Journalism should be the watchdog of the powerful and not the powerful’s watchdog.

Why Continue?

There are common philosophical justifications for one’s willingness to continue to produce work even while feeling exploited or when producing work that even they would agree is flawed. They see it as a duty that must be done, a lesser of two evils. It would be okay. This does not negate the importance of such work compared to the perceived alternative, which is less to none. Such routine tasks in society support larger systems and contribute to societal functions that we rely on. Doing what must be done, doing the best that they can given the constraints, easily admitting that their deficiencies are in their resources which have become diminished, the new culture continues to reject that their journalistic standards have also become diminished, both affecting and afflicting their ability to uphold truthfulness, accuracy, impartiality, fairness, and especially public accountability.

Generally, when journalistic writers and editors round-off and even ignore the effects they have on the community with their reporting, such that their media does not tend to meet journalistic standards or becomes left in an unfinished or inaccurate state, even if they are trying their best, the mere lack of resources to maintain the integrity of their work combined with the ulterior demands of their media company owners affects the important role journalism as a practice once played for The Denver Post and The Daily Camera.

Understandably, the general public is confused by this distinction, since many people in media today use the term journalist to identify themselves unwittingly or apathetically, and even sometimes opportunistically knowing full well that when they say they are a journalist they are more accurately the media industry as a media writer.

Of course, many people work primarily to meet immediate needs, including financial security and personal responsibilities where extrinsic motivation is driven by external rewards such as salary, recognition, and avoiding punishment. In the current environment, opportunities for journalism are slim, which may lead some people to feel stuck, able to justify a lack of quality as the what-do-you-expect-result of being exploited, feeling justified with their below-par or unfulfilling work because their employer refuses to pay.

Understanding the Distinction

You may recall from the outset a distinction was made between journalism and other forms of media. All journalism is media, but not all media is journalism. Journalism specifically is guided by the principles of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability. These concepts and their thresholds are in constant debate, but they are regularly in mind.

Media on the other hand encompasses a much broader range of content which includes journalism but also extends to all kinds of content. It seems as though the shift in focus of content at The Denver Post and The Daily Camera over the years supports the idea that the change in focus is driven by what sells to meet the objectives set into place by Alden for profits that can be extracted out of the industry, and country, where the majority of stakeholders dwell.

Without the simple yet profoundly powerful distinction between journalism and other forms of media that I found from Jay Rosen, I wouldn’t have been able to understand much of anything.

My suggestion to every reader of the news is to keep this in your pocket to approach every single news report you’ll ever read. This is at the forefront of my mind as I read every single news story:

If you accept this distinction, then there are many places you can go. It doesn’t mean that my interpretation or your interpretation will be endorsed, but I think it’s a good foundation for starting.

This is where this blog post takes a turn. The reason I’ve been looking into these matters was not for fun.

Whoever wrote the 9/11 account referenced above for example was not involved in a journalistic process…or was not involved in an adequate one. The editors of the 9/11 report entered the process too late — it was their fault —but they did the deed of journalism in the end when they acted to complete the process, resolving and ending it through an adequate journalistic method — the corrections process —in that particular report.

In my case, it was worse, for it was not just 20 inaccuracies on one story but 120 inaccuracies across six, and the inaccuracies were way worse, and the damage was way worse. But Instead of explicating it with the care Vahlencamp shows, the editors including Vahlencamp all looked the other way in my case and ignored it all. Instead of taking accountability, they have been unable to face it, causing the personality of each to come through in how they handle what I learned is their institutionalized conundrums.

I’ve had thousands upon thousands of articles written about me and my work by people who were inspired…with mentions in books, journals, and awards, and so I’ve also had plenty of people write full-scale ridiculousness. Almost none ever bothered me because none of those were from ethical journalists, they were just media circus writers.

The single question I kept asking myself was, why? Why do they refuse to look at evidence or hear my claims of abuse even once? And shouldn’t they since there are so many stories, and because the stories are considered to be investigative journalism from The Denver Post no less? Why not take just an hour or two to sit down and hear from the person’s life they are reporting on with six stories? Since I’ve offered to show evidence, why not at least look once? Why does COGA get a front-page retraction for lack of context and what kind of power or money must one have to get that treatment?

In investigating, I started noticing more and more of the types of qualities I’ve written about above but way, way darker. Who at The Daily Camera or The Denver Post cares about anything?

My research into that question of care stands on the shoulders of giants. I am grateful for Corey Hutchins, the only person I know who writes about the Colorado news landscape. Everyone should subscribe to Hutchins’ newsletter. If you are a journalist, I encourage you to consider doing something like what he is doing for your area. Though I lived through the events above, I relied on Hutchins’ body of work to uncover new information, and when piecing events back together.

It’s important to note however that Corey Hutchins’ newsletter which he titles “Inside the News in Colorado” is funded in part by industry underwriting, and he earns revenue by promoting the well-being of the news sector, which limits his ability to function as an independent watchdog. Colorado lacks a clearly established, fully independent journalism watchdog. While Hutchins publishes extensively on the media landscape, his interests and his role are advocacy based, and more aligned with supporting his colleagues, not exposing them (he does expose sometimes). The Colorado Sun classifies his newsletter as opinion rather than straight reporting, reflecting those structural constraints. Each state could benefit from having journalists acting as a true watchdog over the industry, without a conflict of interest.

I am grateful for the years-long service of investigative journalist Julie Reynolds, who has been digging up and documenting Alden’s bad practices for years. It would not have been possible for me to piece together the source of the lack of care. Across these newspapers, I knew that there were too many people within the various businesses to all be bad. I just couldn’t figure out what was going on to the people in charge who didn’t care. Many appear to be in pain, acting in ways that even they would agree is not right or fair but they seem helpless and stuck in a cycle. Alden doesn’t seem to care about people, it seems they are just taking out money and causing pain, but deceptively so. That’s the big problem.

Reynolds’ work is available at https://dfmworkers.org/ This website is a must-read for any consumer who lives or works in a town with an Alden-owned media company.

Based on the information documented by Reynolds, Alden’s bad business practices which interfere with the newspapers’ journalistic operations appear clear. Alden has gone way overboard into a different realm, into a different process with a new operating model, but they proclaim they are still engaged in the practice of the ethical journalism.

This is unlike any other media company I know of. The problem they are causing is not the type of problem that other news businesses cause when they make mistakes, mess ups, or when an owner goes nuts.

Nor is the problem less news or less journalism. Nor is the issue profiting. It’s simply that the companies are too underfunded now to continue to operate above board. It would be the same for a restaurant that tries to keep going but doesn’t have the funds to clean, mind food expiration dates, or buy the same quality ingredients they promise on their menu. Eventually, it gets dangerous, and the worst part about it from a liability standpoint is when they know. The companies know they are not running above board even as they continue to spiral downward.

This is a phenomenon that is unique to Alden-owned businesses due to the lack of overall care.

And that brings me to action.

In 2024, while discussing my claims with a civil rights attorney in Denver, he introduced me to the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA).

The CCPA serves as a powerful mechanism to protect consumers from deceptive and unfair business practices, offering swift and broad remedies for harm caused by such conduct. It provides a framework for people like you or me to hold corporations accountable when their actions undermine trust and integrity.

Last Friday, after months of preparation, I filed a lawsuit against Alden Global Capital, Randall Smith, and Heath Freeman in the Boulder District Court citing consumer fraud to hold these two men personally accountable for what Colorado courts aptly label “Deceptive Business Practices.”

Here are just a few more examples of what’s going on at these companies copy-and-pasted from the legal complaint.

Unqualified Sponsored Content Masquerading as Business News

149. Baron noticed that The Daily Camera presents articles by Bettina Swigger, the CEO of The Downtown Boulder Partnership, an active lobby group that serves the political interests of downtown businesses, as “Business News” without any disclosure of her organizational ties to the paper. Upon information and belief, the column of information reports8 is not “News” or “Business News” content but “Sponsorship” or a kind of undisclosed value exchange between The Daily Camera and The Downtown Boulder Partnership. The column recently took on “Downtown Boulder” as a taxonomic sub-category within the business news section, though the lobbyist, Swigger, is the only one writing information reports for the Downtown Boulder Business section.

Disregard for Federal Labor Laws

150. The Daily Camera reporter, Mitchell Byars, indicated on twitter/X that the company had just lost a photographer but instead of paying for a replacement, The Daily Camera was in search of someone to do it for free under the guise of an internship:

We are also looking at taking on one photo intern in an unpaid, part-time internship…Due to staffing, we’re looking for a student with prior experience who is looking to really fill out their portfolio…For this particular internship, we just won’t be able to offer the type of mentoring and supervision we can with the reporting interns. Plus, it’s a lot harder to edit photos than stories. It’s actually why we typically haven’t done photo internships.

151. Consumers chimed in with concern about the offering because it violated the Federal Labor Law of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSAA).

152. Byars admitted he knew it was wrong but attempted to justify his actions as being above the law, expecting that consumers would rather he break the law than pay for information reports without photographs.

Deceptive Editorial to Influence Consumers with Opinions from Alden Executives Disguised as Those of Local Community Editors

160. In October 2023, The Denver Post introduced a new report titled “Editorial: Hamas attack should be recognized as an act of terrorism.”15 This report, produced outside The Denver Post company, was presented to Colorado consumers as an original piece created from within, by “The Denver Post Editorial Board” under the labels “Editorials” and “Opinion.” However, this report is deceptive because it was not created by The Denver Post Editorial Board. According to Axios, a non-Alden news organization that also trades in information reports,

…a situation occurred last October when dozens of Alden-owned newspapers ran an editorial urging the broader media industry to call Hamas a terrorist group. That decision was made by Alden’s MediaNews Group and Tribune Enterprises leadership, not the editorial boards of individual newspapers. A source confirmed to Axios that corporate ownership was involved in the decision. All Alden papers ran the editorial.16

161. Without proper disclosure, readers cannot discern whether viewpoints in the products represent their local editorial boards or Alden’s corporate executives. Lee Ann Colacioppo would be the person in charge at The Denver Post to put her foot down but she is complicit, for her duty to Alden’s embedded policies supersede her promises to Colorado consumers, knowing she is breaking The Policies and Procedures and willfully so.

Manipulative Editorial Control to Deceive Consumers with Editorial Persuasions, As A Column

162. At The Daily Camera, this deceptive editorial practice has become a near-daily routine. In a recent example, on December 29, 2024, The Daily Camera published an editorial titled “Editorial: Trump should reform financial watchdogs — here’s how”17, which was identical in title and content to a report published the same day by The Boston Herald. While The Boston Herald attributed the copypasta to its own editorial board, The Daily Camera listed it as being produced “By VIEWS FROM THE NATION’S PRESS.” This arbitrary practice underscores Alden’s strategy of disseminating identical editorials across its MediaNews Group and Tribune Publishing newspapers without clearly attributing them to its centralized ownership. Notably, The Daily Camera features an entire column18 devoted to these corporate editorials, yet they lack bylines, leaving it entirely unclear which individuals or groups are writing these columns of information reports referred to by the author “VIEWS FROM THE NATION’S PRESS,” deceptively presented and sold through the support of the editorial ideals and opinions of the local media reporters.

Evidence of Similar Consumer Abuses by Alden Across Industries Not Covered in The Denver Post or The Daily Camera

163. Alden uses similar harvesting tactics in other large-scale consumer interest markets which reporters and editors are forbidden from reporting on, including the transportation and real estate industries.

164. Alden, through a once secret affiliate, has acquired over 10,000 manufactured housing lots in 138 parks across 17 states, investing more than a quarter of a billion dollars in the last four years. While initial purchases were believed to have been made in cash, Alden subsequently encumbered these properties with mortgages leading to significant rent increases, reduced maintenance, and the elimination of previously free services for residents, predominantly affecting low-income Americans.19

165. Despite coverage of these issues in non-Alden information reports, The Denver Post and The Daily Camera have not reported on this housing controversy, leaving consumers in Boulder and Denver uninformed about these developments in the housing sector.

166. In the transportation sector, Alden purchased 33 Greyhound bus terminals for $140 million in 2022. Following these acquisitions, the terminals are being sold off for gains to Alden, forcing passengers to board buses at curbside locations without adequate facilities.20

167. These actions reflect a pattern of acquiring assets, leveraging them with significant debt, and reducing services, adversely impacting consumers who rely on affordable housing and transportation.

168. Notably, newspapers at Alden have not been allowed to write about this major American transportation story or refer to these activities, which not only adds to interference editorially throughout the information reports for media, housing, and transportation information sectors but helps to protect Alden’s secret dealings and remain out of the public eye.

169. In an article about the sale of the architecturally notable Greyhound station in Denver, The Denver Post made no mention of the fact that their owner, Alden, was the one selling it, in their information report titled Greyhound station hits the market in downtown Denver’s “new neighborhood.”21 In case the Denver Post newsroom didn’t know about it at the time, the most recent known article to date about Greyhound’s lack-of-a-station woes makes no mention in the September 2024 information report.22

Diversity Letter Omission is Clear and Distinct Consumer Fraud Among The Worst In Kind

176. In 2021, workers from the Denver Post determined their workplace was not diverse, and that their news coverage was not diverse, and they created a report to increase newsroom diversity and to be transparent with consumers about their lack of diversity within their production process. They created an information report to publish in The Denver Post in the form of a “Letter to Readers,” in an attempt to be mindful of their mission and promises to consumers to uphold The Policies and Procedures and inform consumers of their critical production deficiencies, but Alden rejected the publication of the letter to readers.23 The Denver Post guild wrote:

For months, we worked with local management to craft a letter, which management then sent to corporate lawyers and human resources personnel. But the board of Alden Global Capital, the hedge fund that owns this newspaper, earlier this month rejected the release of the letter.

177. This fact — Alden board interference in the editorial— is one of many that establishes a direct link between both the editorial and staffing decisions at The Denver Post to Alden’s controlling board of directors, where Defendant Heath Freeman is President. This establishes in no uncertain terms the direct connection between Alden and the control over editorial and management decisions at The Denver Post.

178. In the omission to consumers forced by The Defendants, the workers of The Denver Post admitted the following:

We want a newsroom that is continuously committed to changing its culture internally so that people of all backgrounds are supported in their careers and feel welcome in our newsroom. We want a newsroom committed to telling the stories of people who are excluded or underrepresented in the pages of The Denver Post, and to giving those stories the resources and prominence they deserve…The Denver Post staff does not represent the makeup of our larger community. Our coverage is not reflective of the diversity within our city and state. And we have failed to make these issues a priority.

179. Paying and non-paying consumers all across Colorado who read The Denver Post trusting that the information reports are of value because of the advertised commitments to their standards of diversity are grossly deceived by The Defendants.

Freeman’s Misrepresentations to The United States

197. The extraction of revenue is also problematic because Colorado consumers are tricked into believing their money supports quality local journalism. However, in a series of letters with the United States Senate, included in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated by reference, it was shown that:

…over 80 percent of Alden’s clients are non-U.S. persons and that more than $830 million of Alden’s assets under management are connected to non-U.S. citizens. Furthermore, Alden has domiciled significant funds in the Cayman Islands, a well-known tax haven that lends itself to corporate secrecy.

210. In a subsequent letter in 2021 also provided in Exhibit D, The NewsGuild wrote to Senators expressing fears of the potential of foreign interference at work and noted two funds control MediaNews Group, and both are incorporated in the Cayman Islands.

• 75% of Alden Global Opportunities Master Fund, incorporated in the Cayman Islands, was beneficially owned by non-US persons. The fund had 36 beneficial owners.

• 77% of Turnpike Ltd., incorporated in the Cayman Islands, was beneficially owned by non-

U.S. persons. The fund had 9 beneficial owners.

Alden owns its stake in Tribune Publishing through two funds, the Alden Global Opportunities Master Fund and Alden Global Value Recovery Master Fund. As of Alden’s March 2020 form

ADV filed with the SEC.

212. Alden’s control has crippled The Daily Camera and The Denver Post to such a degree that it’s not just a matter of misleading consumers about the type, grade, and quality of journalism — the ethical type promised in The Policies and Procedures— but that The Defendants’ products are no longer even of the kind “journalism” at all.

Because:

(a) revenue generated from Colorado consumers who support The Daily Camera and The Denver Post is actually payment to secret foreign investors,

(b) Freeman’s promises to The United States Senate about his products and production method are not true,

(c ) the degree of the destruction to the workers and product is not reasonable,

Colorado consumers do not know:

(a) what the senators want to know, to rule out any fears that the dismantling of Colorado Journalism is the intentional acts of foreign adversaries,

(b) that the method of production is a complete lie,

(c ) that the editorial independence statement is deceptive, and completely not true.

In addition to my personal claims, this is what I’m seeking from the Court to protect consumers:

Entry of Injunctive Orders to effectively cause Defendants to:

1. Remove The Policies and Procedures from The Denver Post, as well as any similar policies from Alden Global Capital and MediaNews Group-owend companies in Colorado.

2. Alert consumers by publishing a notice of the change to all Alden and MendiaNews Group-owned companies in Colorado, in the form of a “Letter,”

3. If and when The Defendants prepare a new Policies and Procedures to accurately reflect their capabilities and promises, alert consumers by publishing a notice of the change to all Alden and MendiaNews Group-owned companies in Colorado, in the form of a “Letter,”

It’s a simple matter. This is not one of those “Let’s go after the media!” matters, it’s about cleaning up our democratic institutions and not allowing democracy to be overrun. Most people across the spectrum agree that “the press” is not trustworthy and that it has problems, including a problem with polarization and misinformation effecting elections. “The media”, including The Denver Post, can do whatever they want and should enjoy the First Amendment. They could push it all the way, everyday. But this is not about that, and it’s not about other media companies…it’s specifically about Alden Global Capital, the second largest newspaper conglomerate in the U.S. (i.e. they have a lot of news companies), and what they are doing to interfere with the press that they should stop doing: They should stop pretending that they are following their own stated policies. They do not follow their policies anymore. This is about cleaning up so as to not cause damage in pretending to do the work that other trustworthy, committed ethical journalism companies do (or at least try in good faith to do bless their hearts), on their mission to be of public service. If The Denver Post would simply remove their public policy, to be more in line with most media companies that do not have an ethics policy, like The National Enquirer, then consumers will know that The Denver Post for example can not be trusted with the most important matters when it comes to the community and law. And then one day, if they decide they’re ready to give it a go again, go right ahead, but they’ll need to make sure that their new policy matches their actual practice. Until then, without a policy, consumers will be safe, for people will know to double-check such information to be sure, and not expect that it was ethically produced. Especially when there is no sign of accountability. But so long as Alden continues to keep their old policy for The Denver Post, and pretends that The Denver Post is practicing the ethical journalism that they say they are, they might gain more subscribers, but they are eroding trust in the news organizations that genuinely uphold their standards, leaving people unable to figure out what’s going on.

If you would like to view the full complaint or learn about the status of the case, see CCPA 2025CV11.