TOMS RIVER, NJ — In a move raising serious ethical and legal concerns, Mayor Dan Rodrick is under fire for allegedly funneling taxpayer money into Shore News Network, a local digital outlet now serving as a political echo chamber for his administration. Once an independent media platform, Shore News Network has taken a sharp turn under Rodrick’s tenure, morphing into what critics are calling “Toms River’s CNN” by publishing slanted, promotional coverage that increasingly reads like political propaganda.
Shore News Network Admits It’s on the Payroll
The controversy escalated this week after Shore News Network publicly admitted — in a Facebook comment posted Monday — that it is being paid by the Township of Toms River. The comment was quickly deleted after drawing backlash from residents, but not before screenshots were taken and circulated online. (See photo below.)
According to inside sources, the Township’s arrangement with Shore News Network totals roughly $100,000 per year — a staggering figure given the site’s role in promoting one-sided narratives and attacking Rodrick’s political opponents.
The site published an article echoing campaign talking points directly provided by Anthony Matarazzo, a council candidate backed by Mayor Dan Rodrick. Shortly after the post appeared online, the outlet acknowledged, in a now-deleted Facebook comment, that it is being compensated by the Township of Toms River. (See screenshot below.)
The Stilton Connection
Behind the scenes, Shore News Network is run by Phil Stilton, who has quietly joined the Rodrick operation following the mayor’s decision to fire all of the Township’s in-house public relations staff. While the move is being pitched as a “cost-saving measure” for taxpayers, insiders say the real motive is more insidious: to consolidate media control and craft an unchallenged narrative. In reality, this isn’t about saving money but manipulating the message.
Prior to Rodrick taking office, Shore News Network operated without a single taxpayer dollar. Now, under the mayor’s watch, that same outlet is reportedly pocketing six figures annually to boost Rodrick’s image, attack his opponents, and sanitize his administration’s record — all without clear disclosure to readers.
A Dangerous Precedent: Public Funds for Political Gain
This pattern mirrors classic tactics used by entrenched political machines: using government resources to control the narrative, silence dissent, and promote favored figures. Critics say it’s a page straight out of the Democratic playbook — ironic, considering Rodrick’s long history as a registered Democrat before switching parties. Many believe the mayor hasn’t left behind the political habits of his former affiliation.
“The articles don’t even try to appear neutral anymore,” said one longtime resident. “Everything reads like a campaign flyer paid for by taxpayers — because, essentially, it is.”
At a time when services are being slashed and taxes are climbing, residents are asking why their hard-earned dollars are being spent on a media outlet that functions more like a campaign arm than a news organization.
Shore News Network: From Reporting to Repeating
In the past year, Shore News Network articles have followed a clear pattern: Rodrick is cast as the town’s savior, while his political adversaries are smeared with innuendo, mockery, or flat-out misinformation. Stories critical of the mayor are nowhere to be found, while favorable headlines and press release-style features dominate the site’s front page.
Equally disturbing is the site’s failure to disclose its financial ties to the Township in its reporting. Residents reading these stories — especially senior citizens and those who rely on local news — are left to believe they’re consuming independent journalism. In reality, it’s government-funded spin.
The Real Cost of “Fake News”
The implications are stark. By effectively buying a media outlet, Mayor Rodrick has gained a powerful — and unaccountable — tool to shape public opinion. But it comes at a cost. Trust in local media has plummeted. Civic discourse has grown more toxic. And taxpayers are footing the bill for content designed not to inform, but to manipulate.
What’s happening in Toms River is not journalism. It’s propaganda — bought and paid for by the people it’s supposed to serve.
As the Primary election approaches, one thing is clear: Toms River residents deserve the truth, not taxpayer-funded lies. They deserve journalism with integrity, not backroom deals and political puppets. And they deserve leaders who respect the public’s trust, not exploit it for power.
Because when government buys the press, democracy loses — and the people pay the price.
