The Dallas Express engaged in coordinated disinformation campaigns via its undisclosed relationships to Metric Media and Crowds on Demand
Executive summary
Available reporting shows a pattern in which the Dallas Express repeatedly amplified organizations and narratives tied to Monty Bennett and to a publicity firm called Crowds on Demand, and that independent outlets and former staffers have linked the site to the Metric Media network; those facts collectively support a credible allegation of coordinated astroturf amplification and undisclosed relationships, though the record contains denials from owners and lacks a single declassified internal “smoking gun” document explicitly labeled “disinformation campaign” [1] [2] [3].
1. The allegation, boiled down: what reporters found
Investigations by the Texas Observer, Dallas Weekly and others documented that the Dallas Express published hundreds of favorable articles about groups connected to hotelier and GOP donor Monty Bennett and that those groups were created or amplified by Crowds on Demand — a firm reported to have been hired by Bennett to seed astroturf organizations such as Dallas Justice Now and Keep Dallas Safe — while the Express rarely, if ever, disclosed those institutional relationships [1] [4] [5].
2. The Metric Media angle: pattern, precedent, and legal pushback
Multiple past reports have tied the Dallas Express to Metric Media’s network of pseudo-local outlets; D Magazine and other outlets reported the site ran on a Metric-like operation and the Express owner sued over such characterizations, initially prevailing in trial court but losing on appeal where courts protected the “right‑wing propaganda” description as opinion — a judicial outcome that undercuts a definitive denial of those ties and lends weight to the investigative framing used by critics [6] [3].
3. Crowds on Demand: hired actors, astroturf playbook, and amplification
Reporting and interviews with former contractors establish that Crowds on Demand — a company that sells staged protesters and manufactured grassroots events — was engaged to build a network of pro‑Bennett groups, and that the Dallas Express routinely amplified those same groups and narratives without disclosing the business relationships, a pattern investigators interpreted as coordinated influence rather than organic local advocacy [1] [7] [4].
4. First‑person reporting and internal testimony: how former staff describe editorial practice
Former Dallas Express employees interviewed by the Observer and other journalists described editorial direction that favored Bennett‑aligned positions, use of pseudonymous bylines, and editorial pressure to shape copy to fit a preferred slant; independent researcher Steven Monacelli has also documented defamation litigation, alleged use of fake authors and overlapping tech infrastructure with Metric Media, and retaliation patterns that together constitute a dossier of troubling practices consistent with coordinated disinformation campaigns [1] [2] [3].
5. Pushback, self‑representation, and limits of available evidence
The Dallas Express and its backers have contested some reporting — Bennett sued over characterizations and there are public denials that Metric Media “owned or ran” the paper — and the Express publishes its own portrayal of journalistic rigor and community service, demonstrating an alternate narrative that the outlet is an independent counter‑media voice [3] [8] [9]. At the same time, investigative articles and public records reveal undisclosed amplification of groups tied to Crowds on Demand and Bennett; however, the sources do not present a single internal memo from the Dallas Express explicitly ordering disinformation, so findings rest on patterns of coverage, former staff testimony, corporate connections, and corroborating reporting rather than a one‑document smoking gun [1] [4] [2].
6. Conclusion — balance and verdict
Taken together, the weight of investigative reporting, former‑employee testimony, and independent analyses establishes a credible case that the Dallas Express engaged in coordinated amplification of astroturf groups and political messaging linked to Monty Bennett and Crowds on Demand, and that the site’s relationship to Metric Media–style operations has been widely reported and legally litigated; defenders point to denials and the outlet’s own statements of integrity, and the record falls short of a single definitive internal confession, but the convergence of multiple, independent lines of reporting supports the user’s characterization as a substantiated allegation rather than an unfounded rumor [1] [2] [3] [6].