Talk:Michael Leidig

Contemplating nomination for AFD

This article is filled with self-promotion, and self published links. I don't believe it complies with WP:BLP and it seems that there are others who have brought upWP:PROVEIT and WP:NOR

I'd appreciate some thoughts from other editors who are not affiliated with the subject of the article.

The Columbian Journalism Librarian (talk) 22:19, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

This needs gutting

I wouldn't go as far as an AFD on this, but the lack of sources, coupled with the appearance of original research sure does make this article smell bad. I'm going to hunt about for some citations for some of the major points. Otherwise, and unless anyone else steps up to improve things, I'm going to gut this on grounds of WP:PROVEIT and WP:NOR --gilgongo (talk) 20:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

According to the article below, this page mostly seems to have been written by Michael Leidig himself (as "bylinebandit"). He mostly just seems to fabricate news. It should be gutted. http://beijingcream.com/2015/04/sorry-xinhua-youve-been-out-bull-bullshitted-by-cen/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.122.127.226 (talk) 03:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

OK removed most of the stuff I wasn't able to cite properly or at all. This article is still borderline AFD though, particularly if there's a sock puppet in evidence. --gilgongo (talk) 11:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

NPOV

This entire article reeks of self-promotion. Every point levelled against Mr Leidig is, in my view, countered with examples that only detract his accusers... without addressing the substance of the accusation. It is also doubtful that this article even adheres to WP:BLP guidelines. --Booksworm ^Talk? 11:42, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Removing NPOV template from article now as I think the issues have been discussed and addressed. Article history also now shows reasonable editor diversity --gilgongo (talk) 10:30, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

COI edit request: BLP lead, chronology, agency status and missing career context

I am Michael Leidig, the living subject of this article. I am therefore declaring a conflict of interest and will not edit the article directly.

Extended content

I am asking uninvolved editors to review the article under the biographies of living persons, neutral point of view, due weight and verifiability policies. I am not requesting the removal of properly sourced criticism. My concern is that the current lead gives disproportionate prominence to one dispute, contains a serious chronological error and describes the 2024 agency transition in a way contradicted by subsequent independent reporting.

The wording below is offered as a suggestion only. I welcome neutral rewriting by uninvolved editors.

1. Replace the current lead

I suggest replacing the present lead with:

“Michael Leidig (born 19 April 1965) is a British journalist, author and news-agency founder based in Vienna, Austria. He founded Central European News (CEN) in 1995, co-founded the Fourth Estate Alliance and later founded newsX, a community interest company focused on supporting independent journalism. A story developed by CEN led to a Sunday Telegraph investigation into the trafficking of women from Eastern Europe that won the 2006 Paul Foot Award. Leidig also writes about journalism, press freedom and media issues for The European.”

Sources:

• Dominic Ponsford, “News agency employing 30 calls time due to falling publisher budgets”, Press Gazette, 3 April 2024:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/wires_and_agencies/news-agency-employing-30-calls-time-due-to-falling-publisher-budgets/

• Tom Morton, “NewsX becomes world's first media community interest company”, NationalWorld, 22 October 2024:

https://www.nationalworld.com/business/newsx-becomes-first-worlds-first-media-community-interest-company-4834865

• The European, Michael Leidig contributor page:

https://the-european.eu/our-writers/michael-leidig

The current lead devotes an entire paragraph to the BuzzFeed dispute, including BuzzFeed’s loaded description of CEN. I suggest retaining a neutral and properly sourced account of the litigation in the body rather than allowing that controversy to dominate the lead.

2. Correct the description of the April 2024 agency transition

The article currently says:

“In April 2024, Leidig shuttered Central European News along with his other news agencies: Newsflash, AsiaWire and Clipzilla.”

The cited Press Gazette source does not use that wording. It reported that the network had “ceased publication” after its income fell to approximately £25,000 per month against costs of £47,000.

More importantly, subsequent independent reporting contradicts the implication that all the agencies had been permanently shuttered. In October 2024, NationalWorld reported that newsX had an exclusive distribution deal with six agencies, specifically including Newsflash and Asia Wire Report, and was carrying a daily feed of up to 50 news items.

I suggest replacing the current paragraph with:

“In April 2024, publication by Leidig’s agency network ceased after its monthly income fell to approximately £25,000 against costs of £47,000. Later that year, NationalWorld reported that newsX had an exclusive distribution arrangement with six agencies, including Newsflash and Asia Wire Report, and was distributing a daily feed of up to 50 stories. Leidig subsequently concentrated on the development of newsX.”

Sources:

• Press Gazette, 3 April 2024:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/wires_and_agencies/news-agency-employing-30-calls-time-due-to-falling-publisher-budgets/

• NationalWorld, 22 October 2024:

https://www.nationalworld.com/business/newsx-becomes-first-worlds-first-media-community-interest-company-4834865

For complete transparency, my own account is that I stepped away from the agencies, while approximately one-third of the staff remained and continued parts of the operation independently. I recognise that this specific staffing detail should not be added to Wikipedia unless an uninvolved editor can locate a suitable published source. The narrower correction proposed above is supported by the published sources.

The lead should also cease describing CEN simply as having “operated from 1995 to 2024”, since subsequent reporting shows continuing distribution activity involving the agencies after April 2024.

3. Move and rewrite the BuzzFeed dispute neutrally

I suggest removing the current BuzzFeed paragraph from the lead and replacing the fragmented discussion in the “Libel cases” section with:

“In 2015, BuzzFeed published two reports alleging that CEN had distributed false or unverifiable stories. Leidig and CEN filed an $11 million defamation action in New York in January 2016. The action was dismissed in March 2019 after the court held that the plaintiffs had not shown the challenged statements to be false.”

Sources:

• The Guardian, 27 January 2016:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/27/buzzfeed-faces-11m-defamation-lawsuit-from-viral-news-agency

• Dominic Ponsford, “News agency’s $11m libel action against Buzzfeed dismissed by US judge”, Press Gazette, 28 March 2019:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/digital-journalism/buzzfeed-says-article-describing-agency-boss-king-bullsht-news-was-not-intended-be-defamatory/

This wording retains both the allegations and the outcome.

The current lead also presents BuzzFeed’s report about Noa Pothoven as an example of the stories involved in the original dispute. That is chronologically misleading. The original BuzzFeed reports were published in April and June 2015, the court dismissed the action in March 2019, and the separate Pothoven article was not published until 6 June 2019.

The Pothoven report therefore could not have been one of the reports over which the action was brought. If editors consider that later incident independently significant enough for inclusion, it should be clearly dated and treated separately rather than being used to characterise the 2015 allegations or litigation.

4. Correct the Kampusch-case chronology

The current article begins this section:

“In 2011 a PR agent for the Kampusch family alleged that Leidig had falsified interviews for his book.”

That date is incorrect.

Independent reporting states that the allegation was made three days after publication of The Girl in the Cellar in 2006. The Austrian court ruled in Leidig’s favour in early 2009, but he was prevented for legal reasons from making the result public until August 2010.

I suggest:

“Three days after the 2006 publication of The Girl in the Cellar, a PR adviser to the Kampusch family issued a statement alleging that interviews in the book had been fabricated. An Austrian court ruled in Leidig’s favour in early 2009 and ordered retractions, costs and damages. Leidig was permitted to make the result public in August 2010.”

Source:

• Laura Oliver, “Journalist accused of forging interviews can finally make libel victory public”, Journalism.co.uk, 31 August 2010:

https://www.journalism.co.uk/journalist-accused-of-forging-interviews-can-finally-make-libel-victory-public/

5. Correct the incomplete account of Leidig’s books

The career section currently mentions only The Girl in the Cellar. It was not Leidig’s only book.

I suggest replacing the present sentence with:

“Leidig co-authored The Girl in the Cellar: The Natascha Kampusch Story, published by Hodder & Stoughton in 2006. He also co-authored the Dorling Kindersley travel guide Top 10 Vienna with Irene Zoech and wrote Pyramid Games, a 2013 book about European connections to the Bernie Madoff scandal. Press Gazette reported that Austrian prosecutors opened an investigation into a banker following claims made in Pyramid Games.”

Sources:

• Google Books bibliographic record for The Girl in the Cellar:

https://books.google.com/books/about/Girl_in_the_Cellar.html?id=3ADiAAAACAAJ

• Google Books bibliographic record for Top 10 Vienna:

https://books.google.com/books/about/Top_10_Vienna.html?id=IrfnMgEACAAJ

• Dominic Ponsford, “Austrian banker investigated over Madoff scandal claims made in British journalist’s book”, Press Gazette, 25 November 2013:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/austrian-banker-investigated-over-madoff-scandal-claims-made-in-british-journalists-book/

The article’s existing litigation section already refers to the book published in response to the BuzzFeed reports. Editors may also wish to clarify that the later expanded work was published under the title The King of Bullsh*t News.

6. Add independently reported journalism-industry work

The article currently omits substantial independently reported work concerning copyright, payment and accountability for independent journalism.

I suggest adding the following short paragraph to the career section:

“As vice-chairman of the National Association of Press Agencies, Leidig campaigned on copyright protection, payment and regulatory access for independent agencies. In 2013, Press Gazette reported that ten NAPA agencies secured an out-of-court settlement of more than €50,000 concerning the unauthorised use of their photographs, with Leidig speaking on behalf of the group. In 2017, CEN sought membership of the Independent Press Standards Organisation so that news agencies could be directly accountable under the Editors’ Code.”

Sources:

• Dominic Ponsford, “News agencies secure 50,000 Euro payout over image theft in bid to tame ‘Wild West’ of online copyright theft”, Press Gazette, 15 November 2013:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/digital-journalism/news-agencies-secure-50000-euro-payout-over-image-theft-bid-tame-wild-west-online-copyright-theft/

• Dominic Ponsford, “Independent Press Standards Organisation urged to rethink ban on membership for most news agencies”, Press Gazette, 18 September 2017:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/independent-press-standards-organisation-urged-to-rethink-ban-on-membership-for-most-news-agencies/

7. Add current work for newsX and The European

I suggest adding:

“Leidig founded newsX, a community interest company established to support independent and original journalism. He is also a contributor to The European, writing about press freedom, misinformation, media accountability and changes in journalism.”

Sources:

• NationalWorld, 22 October 2024:

https://www.nationalworld.com/business/newsx-becomes-first-worlds-first-media-community-interest-company-4834865

• The European, contributor profile and article archive:

https://the-european.eu/our-writers/michael-leidig https://the-european.eu/?s=Leidig&post_type=post

I believe these changes would preserve the properly sourced criticism while correcting factual and chronological errors and restoring proportionate coverage of the independently reported career.

Thank you for reviewing this request. Michael John Leidig (talk) 19:33, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Reply 28-JUL-2026

  Unable to review  

• Your edit request could not be reviewed because the provided references are not formatted correctly. The citation style predominantly used by the Michael Leidig article is Citation Style 1 (CS1). The citation style used in the edit request consists of bare URL's. Any requested edit of yours which may be implemented will need to resemble the current style already in use in the article – in this case, CS1. (See WP:CITEVAR.) In the extended section below titled Citation style, I have illustrated two examples: one showing how the edit request was submitted, and another showing how requests should be submitted in the future:

Citation style

Bare URL reference formatting:

The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles, while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles. The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.

References

---

1. https://www.booksource.com
2. http://www.journalsource.com
3. http://www.websource.com

In the example above there are three URL's provided with the claim statements, but these URL's have not been placed using Citation Style 1, which is the style predominantly used by the Michael Leidig article. Using that style, the WikiFormatted text should resemble the following:

Citation Style 1 formatting:

The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Sjöblad|first1=Tristan|title=The Sun|url=http://www.booksource.com|publisher=Academic Press|date=2020|page=1}}</ref> while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Harinath|first1=Prisha|title=Size of the Moon|journal=Science|issue=78|volume=51|url=http://www.journalsource.com|date=2020|page=46}}</ref> The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Uemura|first1=Shu|title=The Sun's Heat|url=http://www.websource.com|publisher=Academic Press|date=2020|page=2}}</ref>

Which displays as:

The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles, while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles. The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.

References

---

In the example above the references have been formatted according to Citation Style 1, which shows the author, the source's name, date, etc., all information which is lost when only the links are provided. As Wikipedia is a volunteer project, edit requests such as yours are generally expected to have this formatting done before the request is submitted for review.

• Kindly submit a new, properly formatted edit request below this reply post at your earliest convenience, taking care to ensure that it makes use of CS1. If you have any questions about this formatting please don't hesitate to ask myself or another editor.

Notes

References

Regards,  Spintendo  17:44, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, Spintendo. I apologise for the incorrect reference formatting in my original request. I have now reformatted the references using Citation Style 1. To keep the request concise and straightforward, I am resubmitting the most urgent factual correction first.

Requested change: remove the chronologically unrelated Noa Pothoven material from the lead and summarise the BuzzFeed litigation neutrally

The current second paragraph of the lead states:

Central European News has been referred to by BuzzFeed as "The King of Bullsh*t News" due to a number of stories that CEN had been selling that Buzzfeed claimed were false. One such story BuzzFeed reported that CEN was selling was that 17 year old Noa Pothoven was killed by euthanasia, rather than the truth, which was that she had refused to be tube fed. CEN sued BuzzFeed over the story, alleging that it was attempting to damage CEN after it opened offices in London; the suit was dismissed.

I request that this paragraph be replaced with:

In 2015, BuzzFeed published an investigation alleging that Central European News distributed attention-grabbing stories that were often inaccurate or false. Leidig and CEN filed an $11 million defamation action in New York in January 2016. The action was dismissed in March 2019 after the court held that the plaintiffs had not shown the challenged statements to be false.

The proposed replacement is supported by the following sources:

The reason for the requested change is a clear chronological problem. The Noa Pothoven article was published by BuzzFeed on 6 June 2019, after the defamation action had already been dismissed in March 2019. It therefore could not have been one of the reports over which the action was brought.

I am not requesting that the separate 2019 incident be suppressed if uninvolved editors consider it independently significant enough for inclusion in the body of the article. I am requesting that it not be used in the lead in a way that appears to connect it to litigation concerning publications made several years earlier.

The proposed replacement retains both BuzzFeed's allegation and the outcome of the litigation while correcting the chronology and presenting the dispute neutrally.

References

Michael John Leidig (talk) 20:28, 29 July 2026 (UTC)