Two high-profile websites that used Forbes’ name, logo and likeness have been taken offline following a long series of mostly unanswered inquiries questioning their legitimacy.
The websites, ForbesNewYork.com and ForbesEngland.com, were once home to a large number of highly-laudatory articles that existing data suggests were often paid for by the entrepreneurs, influencers, and elective medical providers they so highly praised.
For a few of those featured, digital-only editions of “Forbes” magazine covers were also made available, and were often widely shared without FTC-required notices that the article or coverage had been paid for—if such payment did occur—something the Federal Trade Commission regards and regulates as “Native Advertising.”
A PR agency involved in placing the articles for high-value clients said Forbes proper was aware of the websites, created the magazine covers in question, and that it would disown and deny their legitimacy if the sites stopped paying a franchising fee—a claim forwarded to Forbes, but which was neither denied or replied to.
Surgical Times placed roughly a dozen phone calls and sent some 30 emails to multiple Forbes media contacts and executives between November 16, 2023 and January 18, 2024.
It heard back on two of these emails, which responses are included almost in their entirety below.
Within days of its first phone calls and emails to Forbes’ domain registrar, a separate security entity, on December 16, the potentially trademark-infringing domains were claimed on behalf of Forbes, in whose possession they now remain.
Here’s what we know and what we don’t, thus far.
ForbesNewYork.com Registered to PR Agency Owner in New Delhi, India
As recently as December 2023, the website “ForbesNewYork.com” was registered to a gentleman in New Delhi, India, who owns several similarly-purposed websites and is the founder of a PR Agency.
December 6, 2023, is the latest date for which the Internet Archive has a record of the website.
The homepage of “Forbes New York” on that date is filled with no less than “literary marvels” on “journeys of resilience and achievement,” and “self-made leaders” who make up the “Top 10” experts, entrepreneurs, and conquerors in their respective fields.
Articles of this type are commonplace in certain verticals.
If done right, they’re also entirely legal.
For most, legality will hinge on a consciously-difficult disclaimer that must be included in both the initial article’s publication, and in each instance that the paid-for press coverage is shared, such as on social media.
“Terms likely to be understood include ‘Ad,’ ‘Advertisement,’ ‘Paid Advertisement,’ ‘Sponsored Advertising Content,’ or some variation thereof,” the FTC writes.
And, “The more a native ad is similar in format and topic to content on the publisher’s site, the more likely that a disclosure will be necessary to prevent deception.”
But omitting that disclosure notice is commonplace not only among some individuals, but by nationally-recognized brands, such as two medical device manufacturers from whom we sought comment during the course of our review.
With a branded title or publication like Forbes specifically, there is also the matter of whether the publication or website is legally utilizing the brand’s registered trademarks and logos or not.
Forbes New York was not, a former Forbes executive shared in a very brief email.
Forbes’ parent website, Forbes.com, is registered to and controlled by MarkMonitor, a corporate domain management firm that holds and protects some of the world’s largest and most-visited websites, including Amazon.com and The New York Times.
Such records are typically visible to the public via “ICANN,” the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the same service that in mid-December recorded that ForbesNewYork.com was once registered not to the legal entity that most of us think of as Forbes—Forbes Media, LLC—but to a gentleman in New Delhi, India, who also happens to be the owner of a PR Agency.
Following a Surgical Times’ phone call and email to MarkMonitor on December 16, ForbesNewYork.com and ForbesEngland.com were claimed by MarkMonitor.
“No.” – Forbes Chief Communications Officer
On November 26, 2023, Forbes’ then Chief Communications Officer Bill Hankes confirmed in an email that “Forbes New York” specifically was not an authorized Forbes publication.
Follow up emails failed to produce anything beyond that single-word reply, and were eventually ended on January 18 with an auto-generated, “I am no longer with Forbes. Please email —@forbes.com.”
An email to Forbes’ Copyright Agent was likewise replied to with an auto-generated, “I am no longer with Forbes,” listing another staffer’s name.
Both emails suggested others within the company to reach out to. None responded.
PR Agency Owner: When Website “Refuses to pay… Forbes says ‘it is fake.’”
A cosmetic surgeon featured on one Forbes New York magazine cover directed Surgical Times to the owner of yet another PR agency.
The agency pitches its clients to a network of more than 3,000 websites and outlets worldwide, its owner said.
This agency owner says he didn’t know the PR agency owner to whom ForbesNewYork.com was registered, and that he believed Forbes itself had created the Forbes New York magazine covers.
“They contact agencies like us[,] offering free features based on merit for our clients,” he said.
That claim isn’t entirely non-plausible, as a high-profile client is likely to “back link” to and cross-promote a magazine, making it mutually beneficial.
The cosmetic surgeon had also said he did not pay for the articles or magazine cover—nor had he even spoken to the writers who profiled and extensively quoted him.*
The agency owner referenced another “Forbes” domain which, like ForbesNewYork and ForbesEngland, had previously “suddenly disappeared.”
“The publication said that they had to shut down because of not paying their franchise fee to Forbes anymore,” he said.
Sent a portion of this claim regarding unpaid franchise fees on January 31, a Forbes VP did not respond.
Forbes Media, LLC has a global network of sister sites, all of which are listed in the footer of its main website, Forbes.com.
Shown that the websites in question aren’t listed there, the PR agency owner said, “I believe what’s listed there refers only to print editions. Forbes has over 40 franchises and many affiliates. Forbes 30 under 30, Forbes Women, etc. Those are not listed there. This is why for agencies it becomes hard to validate.”
“When the website refuses to pay the fees and wants to go on its own, Forbes says ‘it is fake.’ Which basically means they are not with us anymore therefore they are not legit.”
“Forbes Monaco was the same. They had to shut down the Instagram account as well….”
The agency owner is referring to “Forbes Monaco,” or Forbes.mc, which as recently as February 2023 featured similarly high-praise articles on entrepreneurs and others, but that today is registered and protected by MarkMonitor on behalf of Forbes Media, LLC.
The agency owner further advised, “If I were you I would not speak with Forbes. At the end of the day you’ll never know the truth. All [that] matters is that these people are not paying them the franchising or affiliate fee anymore, therefore Forbes can only say they are not legit. They’ll never tell you all [of] the story.”
Received on December 16, that claim seemed highly improbable at first, but in two months of attempted contact and clarification with Forbes, it may be close to factual.
Forbes Exec Believes Covers Are Not Legitimate
In late January, with no responses from phone calls and emails to Forbes’ PR Team, Surgical Times reached out to a Forbes VP.
They would “circulate it [the magazine covers] internally to determine if it is in any way associated with Forbes,” the executive said.
“But to be honest, I have not seen this before, and I do not believe it is legit.
“I will note however, that the covers are very convincing,” they wrote.
They asked that the Times follow up in a week for an update.
Further emails went unanswered and a list of facts the Times had arrived at remain unconfirmed.
(For further context and clarity, and in Forbes’ favor, the company was previously quick to clarify that fake Forbes covers featuring Hamas leaders circulating on social media in late November were indeed fabricated. According to an AFP Fact Check: “Forbes told AFP that both covers are fake. Its chief communications officer Bill Hankes wrote in an email on November 6 that they contain formatting irregularities that would not be found in a genuine issue….” Surgical Times noted definite formatting irregularities in some of the Forbes New York magazine covers, visuals of which we’ve omitted entirely as selectively republishing them could implicate those featured, many of whom we never heard back from.)
Federal Trade Commission Guidelines
The Federal Trade Commission provides guidelines for companies and individuals involved in advertising of this type, typically known as “Native Advertising” or Sponsored Articles.
An FTC spokesperson said the agency doesn’t comment on specific individuals or their business practices, or on “conduct [that] violates the FTC Act regarding deceptive native advertising,” but that it provides publicly available guidelines on its website.
“It does not matter where an individual or corporation is based,” the FTC said.
“If they are selling products or services to U.S. consumers then the FTC would have jurisdiction and could bring an enforcement action against them.”
Names of the individuals and firms believed to be involved have been purposefully omitted.
Numerous “Forbes New York” magazine covers have also been purposefully omitted, as their selective inclusion could imply fault, which we are not only not implying, but have been unable to determine despite two months of inquiry as detailed above.
Surgical Times is merely reporting what it has and has not been able to learn over more than two months, and is expressly not implying fault specifically by those featured in articles and/or magazine covers from the now-defunct websites.
In addition to attempts outlined above to contact Forbes PR staff and executives for comment or clarification, Surgical Times also reached out by phone and email to more than 10 individuals featured on the Forbes New York magazine covers, whom it failed to hear from.
Email: tips@surgicaltimes.com
* This surgeon threatened legal action against Surgical Times twice, but has since deleted from his website and social media all references to the Forbes New York magazine cover, and Forbes New York / Forbes England articles he was featured in, as well as a set of before-and-after images believed by many to be digitally altered. We’ve yet to receive responses to six or more requests for comment sent over two months to him and his alleged legal counsel—the name and contact details for whom we obtained from a picture of an old cease and desist letter the surgeon sent over.