**Fake Welsh News Site Promises ‘New Chapter’ for Journalism, Ends in Controversy and Closure**
A website claiming to herald a “new chapter for Welsh journalism” has come under scrutiny this month after it was revealed that its editor, ‘Harry Jazz’, was not the person he claimed to be. The website in question, The National Wales 2.0, fashioned itself as a revival of the original The National — a Welsh news outlet that ceased operations in 2022 — and adopted both its branding and website address.
At first blush, the site appeared to be a credible new addition to the Welsh media landscape. It promised an “independent, trusted, unapologetically Welsh” platform, boasting a friendly middle-aged man named Harry Jazz as its editor. However, a closer look at his profile picture exposed obvious signs of manipulation, with features distorted in ways that defied normal photography—an early warning that not all was as it seemed.
The website, beneath its patriotic facade, turned out to be an operation recycling content lifted from genuine Welsh media outlets. Articles were largely plagiarised, rewritten using artificial intelligence, and published to attract advertising revenue. The supposed team of eight “homegrown” journalists existed in name only. When questioned by WalesOnline, ‘Harry’ revealed himself as a pseudonymous figure with no verifiable ties to Wales, and promptly took down the website after the story broke.
This episode sees itself as part of a broader phenomenon of AI-driven content farms exploiting the digital news landscape. The original National, launched by publisher Newsquest in 2021, had initially hoped to offer Wales a robust, subscriber-backed national news service. Unfortunately, financial strains and intense competition from free news sources led to its closure barely a year after its inception. The dormant domain was soon picked up by unknown parties, publishing lacklustre AI-generated explainers until it briefly vanished, only to return under Harry Jazz’s stewardship.
The site’s comeback was noticed in mid-April when a WalesOnline journalist discovered that coverage of a high-profile court case he had written was quickly repurposed on The National Wales 2.0, appearing as a top result on Google due to the inherited search ranking of the domain. Further review revealed that all published stories shared a single byline and consisted mostly of uncredited replicas of Welsh news outlets’ content — photographs included.
On social media, the site attempted to promote itself with AI-generated content, including a surreal video featuring its relaunch announcement. Further digging uncovered more clues: the website’s bio was lifted directly from a real journalist’s profile, and all correspondence with the elusive ‘Harry Jazz’ came from outside the UK, even as he insisted he was motivated by a love for Welsh culture.
Despite asserting he had invested significant personal funds to obtain the domain, the man admitted that ‘Harry Jazz’ was a mere pen name. He identified himself as originally from Pakistan but denied having any real links to Wales. The website was registered in Iceland, a jurisdiction known for its privacy protections, and a popular destination for operators wishing to shield their identities from scrutiny.
Beyond this single website, the issue appears to be part of a growing challenge for journalism worldwide. AI content “slop” is filling the internet at a rapid pace, raising concerns over misinformation, potential defamation, and the wider problem of digital pollution eroding public trust. Some AI-driven content farms cause minor confusion, while others are capable of real-world harm, such as advertising non-existent events that lead to public disorder or mistakes that could trigger costly legal actions.
Industry experts caution that such exploits threaten already struggling news organisations by diverting traffic and income, while creating a feedback loop that gradually undermines the quality of online information. Studies have warned of AI-generated content infiltrating information sources like Wikipedia, potentially degrading shared factual records.
Disinformation specialist Alistair Coleman described the National Wales 2.0 operation as more financial than ideological, relying on republishing others’ work for ad revenue. “It’s a relatively easy scam — clone the content, pass it off as genuine, and wait for the ad revenue,” he noted, suggesting that now discovered, its operator will likely move on to another project.
As for the fate of the website, ‘Harry Jazz’ was quick to ask if WalesOnline wished to acquire the domain, and mused about turning it into a tourism blog in future. Google, for its part, declined to comment on its efforts to tackle this form of digital malpractice.
The incident stands as a warning to the public: in an age where AI tools allow almost anyone to mimic the appearance of legitimate journalism, verifying the source and authenticity of news has never been more critical. For readers and professionals alike, the question remains—how can trust and integrity be rebuilt in a media ecosystem increasingly vulnerable to exploitation?