For years, the data center industry has largely fallen through the cracks when it comes to gaining attention from the media and the wider public at large.

Aside from local news outlets only interested in select projects, or the likes of Bloomberg covering the bigger deals in the industry from a financial perspective, the day-to-day minutiae of the industry has largely only been covered by DCD and a small handful of specialist trade publications, with the occasional glance from some of the more general technology outlets.

And while the industry was focused on smaller data centers that could hide in plain sight on a street, or fit nicely into a nondescript industrial park, the world was happy to ignore them. But that is changing.

Data centers are now regular fodder for business publications of all stripes. And not only are data center projects now making mainstream national headlines with increasing regularity, but so too is the backlash.

It’s not unusual to see stories about data centers in the likes of the New York Times, BBC, Guardian, Washington Post, Times, and Telegraph. Likewise, they are just as inclined to cover the issues and objections to data center projects raised by locals.

This shouldn’t be a surprise. In the age of the gigawatt data center campus, the industry can’t expect to be developing campuses that need more energy than entire cities and go unnoticed. It can’t be seen to be straining the grid, sucking up billions of gallons of water, and buying up renewable energy en masse and not expect repercussions.

More attention on both the good and bad is coming to the industry, whether the sector wants it or not. The only thing that can be controlled is how the data center ecosystem responds to such coverage, both in tone and action. Platitudes with no follow-through will simply draw more negative headlines. Angry reaction, even if backed with action, risks attracting even more bad headlines.

Over my time at DCD, we’ve seen it all. I’ve been called a liar and fake news and worse, been accused of being overtly and unnecessarily negative, blacklisted by companies and, of course, seen threats of legal action for something I’ve written. As a journalist, that’s sadly par for the course.

While we make no questionable claims about biting the hand that feeds, DCD’s editorial team takes its independence seriously. Just because the companies we write about might be spending money with us, doesn’t mean we avoid writing difficult stories about them. Our sales team might hate it, but we’re willing to risk upsetting a client if we have a story we believe is fair, accurate, and in the interest of the industry.

Most companies are willing to engage with us respectfully when we come to them for comment, but others can be surprisingly churlish in their reaction. In response to stories, we’ve seen companies threaten to pull funding and had their PR representatives say they’ll tell clients to stop working with us. We’ve seen people ignore the editorial team’s replies entirely and take their complaints directly to DCD’s senior management in an attempt to go over our heads – only to be rebuffed just as quickly. We remain thankful that management believes in and supports quality independent editorial – which can be a rare thing in today’s difficult media landscape.

More often than not, it’s for stories they don’t like or appreciate the angle we’ve taken, rather than anything factually inaccurate. And where we do get things wrong – we’re not perfect, and own up to our mistakes – people are usually very polite and willing to work with us to get the facts right.

If you’re reading this and thinking I am referring to you, I probably am; but we’ve probably also dealt with far worse. Some in this sector don’t seem to understand media very well and assume we’re only here to report how great their latest next-gen product is, or assume that spending money with our commercial teams grants them special treatment when it comes to our editorial. Neither is true.

My point is, however, we’re still advocates for the industry. We’re here to report the good and the bad, without an agenda. We’re here to report the facts and tell the stories of the people and projects in this exploding sector. We put the commercial interest second to fair and accurate reporting. Anything less would be doing our audience a disservice. But in the grand scheme of things, we’re small fry.

Attempts to throw your toys out of the pram with major national publications will not go down well. And while we’re always willing to talk and listen to the industry, a lot of the larger publications will be less inclined to listen to what the data center industry might consider ‘unkind’ coverage. And with no commercial leverage, calls from mid-size vendors or operators to the CEOs of the NYT or WaPo might fall upon deaf ears before they even make it past the switchboard.

And that’s before we start talking about the tabloids, which love taking a scrappy controversial angle to generate angry clicks and quickly moving on, regardless of your carefully worded press releases, suggested corrections, or media-trained spokespeople. I was once sat behind a hack from a UK tabloid at a technology conference openly telling reporters he was there solely to get the headline ‘AI will destroy the world' and, I promise you, despite no one at that event saying anything close to that, he still got that headline.

Face the opposition now, or face the consequences later

This thin skin also appeals to dealing with opposition at a local level. All the big operators might talk a big game when it comes to community outreach and engagement, but we know the reality is different.

Companies still routinely operate behind lawyers, shell companies, and NDAs until the last possible minute, and routinely ignore the people leading these opposition groups. We won’t name names, but we’ve heard some are much better than others at actually following through on engaging with the public and taking feedback on board; others we’ve heard have never even acknowledged opposition exists in the first place.

We've also heard of companies refusing not only to share a stage with the likes of the Piedmont Council, but getting them barred from attending events altogether, which is poor form. There's no value to navel-gazing and just telling each other how great you are at community outreach.

For what it’s worth, DCD is happy to talk with opposition groups to understand their stories. From our experience, these are mostly reasonable people with opinions about the future of where they live. Hearing their perspectives first-hand can be a great way to understand their objections and potentially find a middle ground.

But ignore them now and the future could see Just Stop Oil or Extinction Rebellion-type activist groups starting to target data centers. The likes of the Sierra Club and the Piedmont Council, though occasionally litigious, play by the rules.

Would you rather have a difficult conversation with a Piedmont Council member in person at a data center event today, or deal with people gluing themselves to your servers in protest a few years down the line? I can see it happening if things don't change, especially as more media outlets cover the industry with increasing regularity and in a less complimentary light in future.