Press Gazette’s investigation which uncovered 1,000 articles in the British press attributed to 50 fake, non-existent and AI-enhanced experts has spurred PR trade bodies into action.
Britain’s two leading trade bodies, the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) and the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) joined forces for the campaign.
Calling for journalists to check sources and the credentials of PR people they deal with, the two organisations wrote to journalism trade bodies the National Union of Journalists, Chartered Institute of Journalists and British Association of Journalists.
The campaign follows months of Press Gazette reporting which has uncovered everything from fake psychiatrists to fake royal cleaners to seemingly tireless AI gardeners .
The full text of the letter is below.
Press Gazette has continued to investigate this issue, and is uncovering more fake experts who have featured widely in the press.
Rogue PR operators appear to be using AI to generate press releases which then secure lucrative links and brand mentions for their clients. The advice, on everything from when to mow your lawn to when to book a flight, is often AI-written and attributed to experts who do not exist.
The issue damages both the press and the PR Industry according Sarah Waddington CBE, CEO of the PRCA.
She told Press Gazette: “The rise of so-called ‘fake experts’ is damaging for both journalism and public relations because it undermines trust at every stage of the information chain.
“Journalists need reliable sources to inform the public and hold power to account, while ethical PR depends on accuracy, transparency and accountability. When false or unverified expertise is promoted, it weakens confidence. Access to credible data and professional opinion is vital to critical thinking – something that’s increasingly needed when ‘flooding the zone’ tactics are in play.
“Press Gazette’s exceptional work in identifying this issue and calling out bad actors is incredibly welcome. It supports our joint goal of weeding our poor practice and those who bring our industry into disrepute.
“It’s why in response the PRCA today teamed up with the Chartered Institute of Public Relations to remind people that our members sign up to a Code of Conduct and only adhere to the highest professional standards. We both have member registers which can help journalists to identify legitimate sources.
“While directories and professional Codes are an important safeguard, confronting this issue will require continued collaboration between newsrooms, PR professionals and representative bodies, and we remain open to exploring further measures if they are needed to protect standards and public trust.”
Press Gazette compiled a ‘Hall of Shame’ spreadsheet highlighting the worst known ‘fake experts’ (it focuses strictly on cases where the ‘expert’ does not exist , rather than the many other cases where the expert does not have the knowledge they claim).
The two PR trade bodies called on journalists to verify PR sources via the CIPR register and PRCA directory , publicly searchable registers which list their members.
Many of the stories reported by Press Gazette revolve around seemingly fake or non-existent ‘PR agencies ’ with links to countries abroad often in Eastern Europe.
Alastair McCapra, CEO of the CIPR said: “Our joint letter followed Press Gazette’s investigation that found more than 50 fake ‘experts’ associated with over 1,000 likely fabricated stories.
“We’re moving into a world where vast quantities of low-quality content can be produced cheaply and instantaneously. Every fake source makes the next legitimate pitch harder for the tens of thousands of public relations practitioners who operate honestly and ethically.
“The professional challenge isn’t to produce more, faster – it’s to produce something of genuine quality that stands out from the rising tide of AI-generated noise.
“Journalists need practical tools to distinguish genuine professionals from potential bad actors, and our membership registers provide exactly that. CIPR and PRCA members are bound by codes of conduct with real consequences for misconduct. We stand for integrity, standards and professional judgement, and in a world where anyone can hit send and unleash a flood of undifferentiated, generic content, that distinction matters more than ever.”
There is no one ‘smoking gun’ for identifying fake experts, says Alex Cassidy, founder of NeoMam studies, which worked with Press Gazette to uncover fake experts including the hugely prolific gang of non-existent experts from MyJobQuote .
Cassidy said: “Often the warning signs are small on their own but raise questions when grouped together: no photo or a single uncanny headshot, a reluctance to ever get the contact on a call, and an insistence on vague titles rather than a specific, verifiable role.
“Genuine experts usually have a clear online footprint that can be cross-referenced, whether on a company site or through their own professional and personal profiles. Ultimately, the most useful tool is instinct. A few simple clarifying questions about someone’s background often reveals very quickly whether there’s substance behind the authority.”
The CIPR and PRCA letter to UK journalists
“The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) and the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) note with concern recent reports highlighting instances where public relations professionals have pitched stories to the media featuring fake “experts”.
“Promoting accurate, ethical, and transparent engagement – including with the press – is central to our respective missions. To support this, we each maintain publicly accessible directories of accredited and verified practitioners. We encourage journalists to use these resources to check whether a PR professional is a current member in good standing, should any concerns arise:
“ The CIPR Public Relations Register
“Membership of either body signals a commitment to high professional and ethical standards, including adherence to established codes of conduct. While membership is voluntary, our directories provide an additional safeguard for media professionals seeking to verify the legitimacy of a PR representative. They also offer access to a complaints process where issues warrant further scrutiny.
“We welcome constructive dialogue with media organisations on how we can collectively strengthen transparency, accountability, and trust between the PR profession and the press.”
Email [email protected] to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog