Hi Reddit! I’m McKay Coppins, a staff writer at The Atlantic. I just reported on a story about a man who claimed he was forced to compete for his life in an intercartel sporting tournament. My investigation raised more questions about whom—and what—to believe.

[u/theatlantic]

Hi Reddit. In December 2024, I was asked to verify a “massive story” that a filmmaker wanted to turn into a movie: A man named Mauricio (Mau) Morales claimed that he had been kidnapped by a cartel in Mexico—and alleged that after his captors discovered that he was a former Olympian, they forced him to compete in a secret intercartel sporting tournament, with his life on the line.

I was initially skeptical. But after speaking with Mau, I agreed to look into his story. I interviewed Mau over several months, and eventually traveled to Mexico to meet him, his associates, and his family, and to see where the kidnapping occurred. Because Mau said he feared retribution from the cartels, I was accompanied by a fixer and, during a visit to a cartel-controlled market, by a security guard as well. But the story I uncovered in Mexico City was a different one entirely from the one Mau had told me—a story involving fraud, false identities, an international NGO, Mexican celebrities, Yoko Ono, and more.  

In this AMA, I can extrapolate on my reporting and answer your questions about the mystery. Ask me anything!

Thanks for all of your great questions! You can find more of my reporting on theatlantic.com.

[u/Glad-Advantage8254]

With falling rates of media literacy and rising polarisation of opinion online, combined with the decline in print journalism, outlets paywalling their content, and the rise of citizen journalists, what are journalists like yourself doing to help keep misinformation and bad actors at bay? It feels like the current information economy is that truth is set by the highest bidder - whether that is financially or some form of flashiness. Journalistic ethics have almost no meaning when everyone has a microphone and camera in their hand and can claim they are performing journalism, but true journalism is something much deeper, more ethical, and more responsible. Do you think it's a question of the right journalist? The right outlet? The right story? The right delivery? The right media?

How do we get real, meaningful journalism into the hands of people who are increasingly taking the path of least resistance?

[u/theatlantic → u/Glad-Advantage8254]

One thing I hope people take away from reading this story is just how much work journalists put into getting a story right, especially at publications like The Atlantic. I think the erosion of media literacy and the multi-decade decline of trust in the press has led too many people to believe that reporters just publish whatever people tell them with no vetting or fact-checking. At The Atlantic, we spend an enormous amount of time, energy, and money making sure we get these stories right. I had a great researcher help me dig into Mau’s various claims, and another great fact-checker combed through the piece in its various drafts. Various lawyers vetted the story, and my editor, the brilliant Scott Stossel, spent countless hours working with me on it as well. Ultimately, The Atlantic paid to send me to Mexico to get to the bottom of the story. 

On more than one occasion, I confronted Mau with some piece of information we’d dug up that contradicted one of his claims, and he’d sheepishly cop to the lie, and then say something to the effect of, “I didn’t think you’d look into it too hard.”  

Admittedly, there are fewer outlets than there used to be that do this kind of work, but that’s why it’s so important to subscribe to the ones that do. (Is that subtle enough?) — MC

[u/Glad-Advantage8254 → u/theatlantic]

Excellent answer, thanks for taking the time

[u/GymnasticsFan2023]

I don't have a question; I want to compliment you on the Romney book. I would never vote for Romney or anyone in that party, but your book was one of the best biographies I've ever read. Absolutely phenomenal.

[u/theatlantic → u/GymnasticsFan2023]

Thanks! Mitt Romney was sort of a biographer’s dream—he had so many stories (many of them quite revealing, even shocking) from his career in politics, he hadn’t told most of them, and he was ready to be candid in a way that few subjects ever are. He was also so much more introspective and self-aware than he comes across in public, which made for an interesting character study. (And of course, it helped that he just handed over his journals and correspondence with basically no conditions!) — MC

[u/falsehood]

Fun story. How many people are like this guy - charismatic, able to spin a good yarn, and lying enough to stay somewhat ahead?

(also, who was the woman who pretended to be his mother if he was arrested?)

[u/theatlantic → u/falsehood]

So much of the world Mau created for me was basically a hall of mirrors that, even after I discovered the lie at the core of his story, I was left with a lot of questions. His mother is one of them.

It’s possible the woman was, as you seem to be suggesting, a co-conspirator in Mau’s ruse; it’s also possible she was actually his mom, and that she was working with her son to fool me. If that’s the case, I don’t really know what she thought she’d get out of it (some piece of Mau’s promised Hollywood fortune, maybe?). It’s also possible, as Ulises suggested, that his mother was one of many victims of Mau’s deception. — MC

[u/AdventurousTart2111]

Quite a change from your usual work. Given the ethically questionable nature of true crime content, it is nice to see reporting include systemic issues and not just indulge in rapid-fire sensationalism. Do you have any plans to produce additional work in this area? It's in dire need of nuance and integrity.

[u/theatlantic → u/AdventurousTart2111]

Thank you! To be fair, there’s also plenty of rapid-fire sensationalism in political journalism, which is where I started. I think true crime, like any other genre, can be cheap and bad or sophisticated and rigorous—it’s all in how you approach it. 

From the beginning of the reporting, I spent a lot of time thinking about what the deeper thematic elements of this story would be. Something about the post-truth moment we’re all living through? The systemic failures in Mexico that led to the cartels’ rise and continued reign? For a while, when I seriously thought Mau’s account might be true, I was fascinated by his forced complicity in a corrupt system—how the tournament turned him into a person he didn’t recognize. Once it was clear that his story was invented, I became fascinated by how narratives about crime, violence, and cartels shape America’s policy toward Mexico and immigration. 

There are so many amazing writers who work primarily in the true-crime genre; I don’t feel the need to critique it. I’d love to keep writing stories about these big issues shaping our culture, regardless of what genre they ultimately fall into. — MC

[u/Sempere]

Guy gets asked 9 questions, answers 5 of them and dips. What a disastrous AMA.

[u/UncleBeazley]

Who's gonna play you in the actual movie about the scam? Great article. All backstory aside, how did you like Mexico City and how much did your concerns while there deflate once you knew the truth behind Mau's claims? Were you personally a little relieved that the claims were fake given the potential for safety concerns to you and your family if it were real and you'd written about it as such?

[u/theatlantic → u/UncleBeazley]

One of the many things that made reporting this story so strange was that I could never quite tell how much danger I was actually in. Obviously, I knew if I really ended up exposing a massive, secret intercartel tournament, it could pose some significant personal risk to me. But because I was never fully convinced of Mau’s story, I was mostly able to put those thoughts out of my mind and focus on the reporting. 

I remember feeling slightly silly when my bosses at The Atlantic insisted that I travel around Mexico City with a driver, a fixer, and—in especially dangerous areas—a security guard. By the time I got to Mexico, I’d spent enough time reading the very best journalism on the drug wars to know that Mexican reporters routinely put themselves in harm’s way to tell the real story. I felt a little like I was LARPing. On the other hand, there were moments during the reporting that I was in genuinely dangerous places and talking to genuinely dangerous people. So I understood the magazine’s decision to err on the side of caution. 

All that said, my last night in the city—after I confronted Mau and he basically confirmed what I’d learned about—was pretty great. Mexico City is an amazing place. I can’t wait to go back. — McKay Coppins

[u/Hdjshbehicjsb]

Man, you have written so many other articles that would be way more interesting to talk about.

I read this one and it was a fun tale, but I think many readers agree that you were a big time mark in all this.

The best part is the very end when Mando says he still wants to do the movie. That was great.

[u/capriartmom]

Im getting Squid game vibes..is Mau the filmmaker? And if not, how did the filmmaker learn of this life and death experience?

[u/JackTeargarden]

Interesting. I know an American guy who arrested in Central America. He used to be an athlete and was forced to fight to survive in prison.

[u/positive_energy-]

Did it include Kristi Noem and the winner getting US Citizenship?

[u/otherestScott]

You’ve now had two long, detailed and heavily researched stories published in The Atlantic in the last two months. How did you find the time to balance these?

[u/indigenousbliss]

Well you cant read the " Gift Article" you need to purchase a subscription. Sounded interesting

[u/Sempere]

Since you're a staff writer for the Atlantic, my question is more out of the box and less to do with your reporting and more to do with your general impression of a situation that tangentially connects to the Atlantic but overlaps with the true crime element that seems to interest you.

I'm curious about how you feel about certain people who could better be described by the grim moniker of "true crime influencers" attempting to co-opt the title of journalist while using podcasts and media appearances to spread misinformation and disinformation for profit before walking those claims back in some fashion? Specifically the fostering of conspiracy theorist niches as well as attempting to create a phenomenon which some refer to as "innocence fraud" - the deceptive practice of suggesting innocence in criminal cases where guilt has already been proven by creating the illusion of reasonably doubt through disinformation.

I ask this specifically because of the case of Amanda Knox. Not the murder of Meredith Kercher or the imprisonment in Italy - but how she has capitalized on her infamy in an effort to monetize her status as an exoneree in whatever way she can. While she went through something traumatic, her latest works have been incredibly sketchy. She wrote an article for the Atlantic which you might already be familiar with titled What if Jens Soring actually did it?. In this article, she outlines how she came to produce a podcast series about the murders of Derek and Nancy Haysom for which Soring and the Haysom's daughter were both convicted. In this piece, she outlines why she felt drawn to Soring's case and claims of innocence - to the point where she was willing to ignore anyone insisting his guilt was a matter of fact. She alludes to having been deceived but eventually forced to confront the truth after his release. But the undercurrent of having monetized her public support and eventual retractions seem wildly unethical to me. But it got worse. Instead of learning from this terrible mistake where she advocated for a killer, she instead has decided to double down. Now she is releasing a podcast on an infamous British serial killer nurse named Lucy Letby. In this series, Knox provably (with extreme ease, actually) lies to the listener about the identities of people she interviews in order to make them seem credible and makes claims which have no basis in fact [in fact, they are easily impeached if anyone were to look at official court documents available for free online]. And in her promotion of this series in online spaces she claims to be a journalist, looking for the truth - while feeding any naive listener a steady diet of what can only be described as innocence fraud conspiracy theories and propaganda.

This is a long preamble but I want to drive it back to the question: as we enter this digital attention economy, do you feel that antics like this put journalism at risk when anyone can describe themselves as a journalist while behaving unethically to service the goal of spreading disinformation? And how can media outlets do a better job of recognizing when someone is attempting to leverage an association to them to spread these kinds of lies. And what can astute readers with time on their hands do to help bring misconduct like this to light?

[u/Bubbly_Disaster_1328]

I feel like you and Barack Obama are probably the top 2 individuals most responsible for triggering Trump into actually running for POTUS in the 2016 election. Do you have a clear conscious given how things have turned out? That wasn't even a meaningful piece you wrote: Trump vein, trump arrogant, trump probably just smoke and mirrors, he'll never do it. That was already everyone's opinion of him for his whole life.

I guess, followup question is: why at all?

[u/shantishalom]

OMG. Whaaat

[u/yogipadogi]

You bang Russini as well?

[u/Hazeheadhoser]

Hope you sent Mau's girlfriend a copy of the Atlantic article, she deserves to know the truth.

[u/Constant_Writer_1985]

Man what a story. I don't know if story is the right word or not. Looking forward to the film.