I’m Brian Gordon, tech reporter for The News & Observer, and this is Open Source, a weekly newsletter on business, labor and technology in North Carolina.
Read more 90 Day’s Armando Gives Update on Daughter After Reunion at Hospital
Let’s take a moment to remember Jordan Parker, who for the past year had been one of North Carolina’s most productive journalists. With as many as eight stories a day, he (it? they?) published community news for a website called “Hey Durham” that states it is “Proudly Made in Durham, NC.”
These articles lacked original reporting. They were instead rewordings of recent local coverage from outlets like The N&O and WRAL. And Jordan Parker appears to be fictitious. There is no record of a Triangle journalist with that name. And after I reached out to “Hey Durham” on Wednesday to ask about the potential AI byline, the website within an hour removed the name and replaced it with “Hey Durham” underneath all its headlines.
The outlet, whose creator is hidden in website registration filings, did not respond to my questions.
“There’s just tons of these out there,” said Tony Elkins, a faculty member at the journalism research nonprofit Poynter Institute and a board member of the NC Local news organization. “It takes nothing to pop these up.”
Artificial intelligence has made aggregating (with some attribution) or downright stealing local reporting quite easy. Teams of one can sprout up outlets within a day. The objectives of some are partisan; there is a category of AI-generated news websites often labeled “pink slime” run by interest groups. Others, like “Hey Durham,” simply republish local news broadly without an apparent agenda, except for perhaps gaining enough traction to eventually sell ads.
And “Hey Durham” wouldn’t be the only one to have invented reporter bylines.
Hoodline, a website from a California company called impress3, looks like a bizarro Axios. It has local community pages for more than 30 cities, including Raleigh, Durham and Charlotte. I formally invite any of the reporters behind Hoodline bylines to a North Carolina journalist meet-up, though I doubt any could conceivably show up.
Ryan Fletcher, Brynn Hawthorne, Nina Caldwell, Carlos Hernandez, Adrianne Sinclair, Edith Carmichael and Talia Wren aren’t real. Beside each name is a small blue icon that says “AI.”
“Boy, that’s small,” said Philip Napoli, director of Duke University’s Center for Media & Democracy. “My 56-year-old eyes didn’t notice.” Impress3 did not respond to my questions asking why it uses bylines in this way.
Napoli said fake bylines are one of several ways AI can blur the distinction between accountable local journalism and slop. My colleagues and I can be transparent in a way “Desmond Larkin” can’t.
A core discussion in the ongoing Duke Energy Carolinas rate case hearing (which you can stream here) has been what North Carolina’s first-ever large load tariff should look like. In energy regulation, tariffs are rules — not import taxes. The state has never had one for large load consumers, but AI data centers are changing that.
After initially arguing a tariff was unnecessarily duplicative, Duke last month concurred with the state advocate Public Staff that unique policies for the biggest electricity consumers would be beneficial. More states have begun adopting specific tariffs for large electricity consumers to protect their grids and ratepayers. Especially if ambitious data center projects require utilities to spend a lot upfront.
“There’d be a base contract that would be modified for individual customers,” Will Scott of the Environmental Defense Fund said in a phone interview. “But the base level of protection would be something that everyone could understand.”
Read more Justin Bieber Performs Shirtless During Surprise Fanatics Fest Appearance
Duke’s and the Public Staff’s tariff proposals align in several ways: The rules would start applying when consumers seek at least 50 megawatts. These consumers would then be billed for at least 75% of the megawattage they request, even if they never ultimately use that much. There would also be an exit fee for projects that fail and minimum 10-year contracts, with even larger consumers having to sign on for 15 years.
How do their tariff plans differ? Public Staff witnesses last week testified that Duke’s exit fees would be “more lenient” than what the Public Staff seeks. A second difference between the two sides revolves around curtailment, or Duke’s right to reduce large consumers’ power usage to ensure overall grid reliability. While Duke wants the ability to control curtailment rules going forward, the Public Staff says the Utilities Commission should have oversight.
Fraud accusations. Congressional lobbying. Income questions. A marriage that spotlights an inconsistency in North Carolina’s lawmaker disclosure laws.
My story on Sen. Sophia Chitlik of Durham this week detailed previously unreported connections between her and her husband’s company, American Efficient, which federal regulators claim cost ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars. The company has strongly denied it violated the law.
Why did Chitlik, several months into being legally separated from her husband and the same year she won her first primary, join him to actively advocate for American Efficient’s interests at a time when the company knew it was under investigation? “Before I became a legislator, I helped Ben navigate a situation to be a supportive friend to the father of my child,” she said.
What Chitlik didn’t explain is how she supports herself financially or if she was aware of the FERC investigation at the time of the lobbying. Legally, she doesn’t have to. That doesn’t mean some won’t want to know.
On July 7, Wolfspeed sued fellow semiconductor supplier Navitas for patent infringement. Navitas is a younger publicly traded company with far fewer employees, but its market value is actually greater.
Durham’s Wolfspeed manufactures a specific semiconductor called silicon carbide (SiC). It alleges Navitas violated patents on five SiC-based products, four of which Navitas gained through a 2022 acquisition of another company, GeneSiC.
It’s been 10 months since Wolfspeed exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy with a new shareholder structure. Navitas has denied wrongdoing and vowed to defend itself in court. Both companies have seen much of their 2026 stock market gains erased over the past month amid a sector selloff.
“It’s very likely that Navitas will counterclaim and sue Wolfspeed for infringement of its patents,” Wake Forest University School of Law professor Keith Robinson told me after reviewing Wolfspeed’s claim. Robinson also spotted an interesting overlap that suggests the two companies know each other well: GeneSiC founder Ranbir Singh is a former Wolfspeed scientist.
Thanks for reading!
Thank you for supporting local journalism. If you liked it, consider sharing it with a friend. If it was forwarded to you, sign up here to subscribe.
Read more Kyle Busch’s Widow Celebrates Son Winning 1st Race Since His Dad’s Death
This story was originally published July 17, 2026 at 8:30 AM.