Less than a month into his term, newly elected Josephine County Commissioner Chris Barnett has already sparked controversy—not for fulfilling campaign promises or enacting policy changes, but for prioritizing social media engagement, self-promotion, and media control over effective county governance. For many residents who voted for him, this reality may come as a shock. However, for those who have been paying close attention, it appears to be a continuation of a troubling pattern.
A Commissioner More Interested in Publicity Than Policy?
Barnett’s approach to governance suggests that he views his role more as a media personality than a county leader. Instead of prioritizing policy, budgets, or the needs of the community, he appears to spend a significant amount of time on social media and other media platforms, some of which he allegedly controls or funds. Voters argue that he focuses more on creating attention-grabbing headlines and promoting personal interests, such as posting videos of his daughter’s basketball game across multiple county pages, rather than engaging in the real work of governing. His behavior mirrors that of his political ally and financial backer, former Commissioner John West, who has been known to align himself with news sources that fit his narrative or that he financially supports. Instead of confronting legitimate news outlets or addressing the truth, Barnett takes to the airwaves, where his prerecorded, edited messages go unchallenged. However, when it comes to direct interaction, whether through a one-on-one meeting or an email, there is often silence.
West, who was recalled due to allegations of self-serving politics and unethical behavior, was accused of manipulating media narratives for his benefit. Now, Barnett appears to be following the same playbook, using similar tactics to push his agenda, silence critics, and discredit opposition.
Weaponizing Media to Control the Narrative
One of the biggest concerns surrounding Barnett is his use of media to suppress dissenting voices. His approach is simple: if you agree with him, you are amplified; if you oppose him, you are deleted, blocked, or even legally threatened. In a democracy, where free speech and open dialogue are fundamental, this pattern is particularly concerning.
Barnett has been accused of leveraging media sources such as The Oregon Grape, Real Live News Southern Oregon, and The Oregon Eagle—platforms he and his allies own or influence—to push misleading narratives, attack political opponents, and discredit independent journalism. In addition to these outlets, Barnett also uses his personal and various real estate and business social media pages to promote his political agenda, as well as his new venture, “Josephine County News.” Those who disagree with him on these platforms reportedly find themselves blocked, raising concerns about his ability to govern fairly and objectively, as well as his adherence to the laws governing political office in the state of Oregon.
Meanwhile, traditional news organizations such as the Grants Pass Daily Courier and the Grants Pass Tribune have been labeled “fake news” by Barnett and his supporters. The hypocrisy of this claim is evident: Barnett expects residents to believe that only news coming from his personally aligned sources is legitimate, while dismissing everything else as false or biased.
Potential Ethics Violations Looming
Barnett’s media entanglements may present not just a political issue but a legal one. According to the Josephine County Charter and Oregon state law, a commissioner must avoid conflicts of interest that could compromise their ability to serve the public fairly.
As a sitting commissioner, Barnett owns and operates several businesses within the community and maintains an active presence on at least six social media pages. He frequently uses these platforms to promote both his personal business interests and county commissioner matters. More concerning is his involvement with Real Live News Southern Oregon and his more recent creation, Josephine County News—a self-published media platform with no formal approval, state registration, or oversight. Notably, a search of the Secretary of State’s database indicates that the name Josephine County News was registered by a Dennis M. Becklin in 2003, raising questions about the legitimacy of Barnett’s claims to the title.
The most glaring issue is the conflict of interest created by Barnett’s dual roles. As both a news publisher and an elected official, he has the ability to shape how county affairs are reported, often in ways that serve his own interests. While the role of a free press is to hold government accountable, Barnett’s involvement in media allows him to control the narrative rather than be scrutinized by it.
This conflict became even more apparent during a recent county executive session when Commissioner Andreas Blech asked independent journalist J.J. Scofield, representing The Grants Pass Tribune, to leave. The Tribune, much like Barnett’s news outlets, is not an officially recognized newspaper by the Board of Commissioners. Yet, Barnett was allowed to stay while Scofield was removed—an act that raises serious questions about fairness, transparency, and the suppression of dissenting voices.
Scofield protested the decision, citing his First Amendment rights and arguing that barring him was an example of blatant bias. His objections were ignored. Meanwhile, the Grants Pass Daily Courier—an officially recognized outlet—was allowed to stay. If media sources are being excluded based on their lack of official status, why is Barnett’s news outlet exempt from the same rules?
The way media outlets are being handled under the current Board of Commissioners reveals a pattern of hypocrisy and censorship. If independent journalists like Scofield are being dismissed due to a lack of official recognition, yet Barnett is allowed to remain, then the board is effectively silencing critical reporting while promoting its own controlled messaging.
Furthermore, Barnett has been accused of deleting critical comments from his social media pages, further demonstrating a pattern of suppressing dissent. For an elected official, transparency is paramount. When a county commissioner actively silences critics and refuses to engage with opposing views, it undermines the democratic process.
Adding to these concerns is the fact that Barnett campaigned on a promise to dedicate 100% of his time to serving as commissioner. Yet, he continues to operate multiple businesses—including real estate ventures, food review blogs, drone photography, and his self-run news outlets. If his job as commissioner is a full-time commitment funded by taxpayers, how does he find the time to juggle so many side ventures?
A Growing Threat to Democracy
The increasing control over media is not the only alarming trend emerging in Josephine County. The new Board of Commissioners appears to be stifling opposition through more aggressive means. Dissenting voices—whether journalists, community members, or county employees—are being met with censorship, termination threats, lawsuits, and public slander.
If Barnett continues to actively operate or financially support media outlets while simultaneously serving in government, he may find himself in direct violation of ethical guidelines. The Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) explicitly state that public officials cannot use their office to benefit private interests. Given that Barnett’s media platforms are used to shape public opinion in his favor, the question arises: Is he governing, or is he using his elected position to act as a media mogul?
The solution, according to legal experts, is clear. Barnett must choose between his media empire and his elected office. If he wishes to continue producing news content, he should recuse himself from all executive sessions and ensure his media operations are entirely independent from his role as commissioner. Essentially, this means he should resign as commissioner, as overseeing executive sessions is a crucial part of his elected duties. Alternatively, he must sever ties with these media platforms and commit to the ethical standards required by his position.
A “Fresh Start” or More of the Same?
During his campaign, Barnett promised a “fresh start” for Josephine County, positioning himself as a change agent who would bring transparency and fairness to local government. However, his early actions suggest otherwise. Instead of focusing on pressing county issues—such as economic development, homelessness, public safety, the library, and infrastructure—he has devoted substantial time to controlling public perception through media manipulation. It has also been reported that county employees have been tasked with scrutinizing photos used by the Grants Pass Tribune, suggesting that retaliation against independent media is taking precedence over county business, wasting taxpayer dollars in the process.
Many voters are now questioning whether Barnett’s campaign promises were ever sincere. Did he truly intend to lead with integrity, or was his goal to establish a self-serving media network under the guise of public service?
The coming weeks and months will be telling. If Barnett continues down this path, he may face increasing public scrutiny, potential legal consequences, and even the threat of recall—just like his predecessor, John West.
The citizens of Josephine County deserve elected officials who prioritize policy over publicity, facts over propaganda, and governance over grandstanding. Time will tell whether Barnett rises to that challenge—or follows the path of self-interest that has already led one commissioner to political downfall.
