people have been calling for The Broad Left to do this for literally years? i guess i'm not seeing the problem
— post malone ergo propter malone (@proptermalone.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Taylor Lorenz (IMO) is one of the people whose brains broke bad during the pandemic. She used to be a reasonable reporter, but since her all-too-online Covid health crisis, she’s increasingly been pushing right-wing talking points about GUBMINT SECKRISSY (which is bad, but only when Democrats do it). Her latest, at Wired:
In a private group chat in June, dozens of Democratic political influencers discussed whether to take advantage of an enticing opportunity. They were being offered $8,000 per month to take part in a secretive program aimed at bolstering Democratic messaging on the internet.
But the contract sent to them from Chorus, the nonprofit arm of a liberal influencer marketing platform, came with some strings. Among other issues, it mandated extensive secrecy about disclosing their payments and had restrictions on what sort of political content the creators could produce…
The influencers in the chat collectively had at least 13 million followers across social platforms. They represented some of the most well-known voices online posting in support of Democrats, and they’re key to wherever the party moves next. But ultimately, the group didn’t make much progress…
After the Democrats lost in November, they faced a reckoning. It was clear that the party had failed to successfully navigate the new media landscape. While Republicans spent decades building a powerful and robust independent media infrastructure, maximizing controversy to drive attention and maintaining tight relationships with creators despite their small disagreements with Trump, the Democrats have largely relied on outdated strategies and traditional media to get their message out.
Now, Democrats hope that the secretive Chorus Creator Incubator Program, funded by a powerful liberal dark money group called The Sixteen Thirty Fund, might tip the scales. The program kicked off last month, and creators involved were told by Chorus that over 90 influencers were set to take part. Creators told WIRED that the contract stipulated they’d be kicked out and essentially cut off financially if they even so much as acknowledged that they were part of the program. Some creators also raised concerns about a slew of restrictive clauses in the contract.
Influencers included in communication about the program, and in some cases an onboarding session for those receiving payments from The Sixteen Thirty Fund, include Olivia Julianna, the centrist Gen Z influencer who spoke at the 2024 Democratic National Convention; Loren Piretra, a former Playboy executive turned political influencer who hosts a podcast for Occupy Democrats; Barrett Adair, a content creator who runs an American Girl Doll–themed pro-DNC meme account; Suzanne Lambert, who has called herself a “Regina George liberal;” Arielle Fodor, an education creator with 1.4 million followers on TikTok; Sander Jennings, a former TLC reality star and older brother of trans influencer Jazz Jennings; David Pakman, who hosts an independent progressive show on YouTube covering news and politics; Leigh McGowan, who goes by the online moniker “Politics Girl”; and dozens of others. (The first two declined to comment; the rest did not respond to requests for comment.)
According to copies of the contract viewed by WIRED that creators signed, the influencers are not allowed to disclose their relationship with Chorus or The Sixteen Thirty Fund—or functionally, that they’re being paid at all…
The structure of the program highlights the vast differences between how Democrats and Republicans attempt to amass online influence. Republicans have spent decades building up a powerful independent media ecosystem, though the right-wing influencer world is far from transparent. In September 2024, a federal indictment alleged that the Russian state-sponsored network RT was covertly providing millions in funding to Tenet Media, a company working with major right-wing influencers including Benny Johnson, Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, and Lauren Southern. In 2024, the National Republican Congressional Committee spent nearly $500,000 on work with Creator Grid, an influencer marketing company whose website says it “connects Republican candidates with the internet’s most powerful conservative influencers,” according to analysis of campaign finance filings from The Washington Post.
Steven Buckley, a digital media sociologist at City St. George’s, University of London, says that these sorts of programs have been “happening in the right wing for ages.” But Heider said that the structure of The Sixteen Thirty Fund deal raises the question, “Is it ethical to match the tactics of your opponents?”
The Democrats appear to have no real counter to this system. “Democrats missed the next generation of media,” says Brendan Gahan, cofounder of influencer marketing agency Creator Authority. “Historically they owned Hollywood, but this next generation of influence is digital, and they’ve miscalculated that. I don’t think they feel comfortable in arenas where they lack control.”
So: Only Republicans are allowed to spend money on ‘propaganda’? They got there first, we can’t step onto their territory?…
I guess people want the dark money group to literally just give influencers money and no instructions, and also for the influencers to disclose?
— post malone ergo propter malone (@proptermalone.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:48 PM
===
bsky.app/profile/tayl…
— Vituperative Erb (@vituperativeerb.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:50 PM
===
===
This pearl clutching is ridiculous. We need to build a media ecosystem on the left and creators (none of whom are naive) need to get paid for their work. Otherwise it’s unsustainable. We have to ditch the freaking purity tests.
— (((Dr. Stephanie Wilson/Freedom Over Fascism))) (@freedomoverfascism.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 12:43 PM
===
the alternative to dems secretly paying influencers to push the party line is them putting out a bunch of explicitly dem-branded podcasts, which they already do and you all hate
— lars powderdry (@mmcgrath.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 1:37 PM
===
bsky.app/profile/mrne…
— MrNelson007, Slayer of Stroggs (@mrnelson007.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:51 PM
===
I mean, the reaction to this is a symptom of the reason Democrats have these "messaging problems" and why the dream of building lefty media infrastructure is pretty optimisitic.
— Chris Peterson (@realchrispeterson.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 3:11 PM
===
"A Democrat Did a Money!" is a common GOP complaint…🤷♂️
— the mjl (michael j leblanc) (@themjl.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:51 PM
===
Well they’re paying people to support Dems instead of undermining them, y’see
— 🇺🇦David Greybeard 🇺🇦 (@david-greybeard.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:44 PM
===
Reminder for folks that we have no visibility on who pays @taylorlorenz.bsky.social through her substack or patreon
— zoot car (@bookhouse.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 1:04 PM
===
I think people like the idea but then they feel icky when it’s actually done
— Beastcoaster🇺🇸🌹 (@beastcoaster.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:26 PM
===
bsky.app/profile/inte…
— InternetTheo (@internettheo.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:40 PM
===
Wake me if Russia is paying them. Then, they get admitted to the WH press pool.
— forrestnews.bsky.social (@forrestnews.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:26 PM
===
Prob not how I’d use these funds were I the grand poobah, but Dems pumping money into the information ecosystem is a plus, not a minus. I kinda hate the phrase “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good” but here it seems appropriate, despite worries as to who is pulling these purse strings.
— CD (@pesto-on-errything.bsky.social) August 27, 2025 at 2:50 PM
Baud
Wait till you here how the Dems are going to repond to Republican gerrymandering.
Baud
Dems are stupid. They should demand an equity stake influencers for the honor of praising Dems.
Baud
I could post so many more comments here for $8,000 a month.
MattF
@Baud: @Baud: @Baud: Dems are supposed to be unhappy about the role of M-O-N-E-Y in politics. It’s our brand.
SectionH
SectionH
@SectionH: oops, I’n out of practice, sorry.
Baud
@MattF:
I thought we were supposed to be unhappy with our brand.
Betty Cracker
Where’s our 8K a month, Anne Laurie? I realize blogs are no longer fashionable, but this site raises some serious scratch for Democrats. They could send us a token of their appreciation. I’d settle for biweekly handles of Tito’s.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
Very Nominated! Y’all deserve it so much.
CarolM
I saw this on Bluesky last night, and some of the criticisms of the program were regarding the secrecy and the control over the influencers’ content. Why not just throw money at people who are already either supporting Democrats or are otherwise effectively promoting anti-Trump or anti-authoritarian messaging? But I agree with the last Bluesky post here. I just wish more dark money groups would fund organizations like ProPublica with no strings attached.
Baud
I’ll note this thing we do when rich private Democratic funders do something, we say the “Democrats” are doing it even without evidence of any official’s involvement.
I think we give Republicans more respect in terms of how they divide up their influence operation, recognizing the componant parts as distinct.
Tony Jay
This is absolute horseshit. There’s no ‘independent’ wingnut infrastructure. They all get paid and they all honk the same horn. Any ‘small disagreements’ (until Epstein blew up) were always solved with threats financially and reputational (no physical threats are necessary, that’s all just an accepted part of mixing in Creamtone Thug circles) and there so much pitch-black money sloshing around in the wingnutosphere that there are always feral young newbies who’d like nothing more than to earn their salt swarming a more established shit-spewer.
Money wants a product. Money pays for product. Don’t want to provide the product? Don’t take the money.
Yeah, it’s murky and nasty and makes you feel dirty? Welcome to the War Against Fascism. Spoilers: Sometimes the good guys have no good choices to make.
MattF
Still, videos of politicians stuffing bags of cash or gold bars into hiding places are considered evidence of criminal activity. If they are Democrats. Quaint, I know.
Baud
@MattF:
I’m not sure how much Republicans hide it anymore.
NobodySpecial
When the paid media starts squawking, you know it’s working. Fuck Taylor Lorenz and all the other haters.
p.a.
My comments are pretty much a pile of horseshit, but if you paid me… and NOT in ColeCoins…
Well, they’d still be horseshit, but I could spraypaint them gold, like…🤡
SectionH
Now then, I’m kinda way out my of practice to post here, but damn.
I was never fan of Gavin. But when Jerry Brown picked him to be his successor, I thought, OK… let us see. And when asshole media gave him a hard about some random remark he made, about High Speed Rail, after he was the Gov guy, he said, yeah no, I’m still still behind HSR, and yes HS rail keeps going through and getting funded, and it’s still being built; in the Central Valley.
I’m so ALL IN on matching a gun fight with 2 bigger guns.
Srsly, Gavin is absolutely right: California does have the 4th biggest economy in the world. And all we are saying is stop this shit. When I saw that people on Encinitas confronted a a bunch masked thugs, I was amazed and happy. Encinitas is very rich white coastal town. And white people who lived there told those nazis to fuck themselves. T
Betty Cracker
I’ve observed plenty of factional infighting among online right-wing media figures, although lately the controversy is over who loves Trump more. I recall a particularly nasty online slap-fight between Christine Pushaw and Laura Loomer.
There was a schism between Bannonites and establishment Repubs for a while. Now the Rogan crowd is mad about the Epstein files, or pretends to be. Bongino’s fans have turned on him over the same issue, and Bondi hired a babysitter to keep him in line.
Tension between populists of any stripe and those with actual political power is inevitable, no? It’s structural and independent of ideology.
Baud
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
@CarolM: The way I read the article, these are liberal influencers they’re working with. It’s just that if they’re going to hand out money they want guarantees that the messaging will stay pro-democrat, which seems like a reasonable and prudent condition. My guess is the secrecy clause is just so they don’t look like paid advertising. The only reason it’s a controversy is that it’s a step towards Dems fighting without one hand tied behind their back which is just not done!
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
Conflicts among factions within a party is different than what we have where a faction claims the entire party leadership is dominated by people from another faction and must be brought down.
People on the left (who we’re more likely to encounter online) say the party is dominated by neoliberal corporate Dems and centrists will argue that the party is moving left too fast because we’re under the influence of Bernie and AOC.
I don’t think either is accurate, but the point is the rhetoric on our side is against the party institutionally, not a battle for influence within the party umbrella
ETA: The practical difference is, when you’re competing for influence, you get your people to come out and outvote other factions. When you’re at war with the party, you walk away from it.
Omnes Omnibus
So, Soros-bucks are real?
Baud
I wonder if the people opposed to this are being paid to be opposed to this.
satby
@Baud: Dr. Demetre Daskalakas is a hero. And they will try to destroy him
And I used to enjoy Taylor Lorenz’s writing, but I think she was losing her mind before COVID. Haven’t read her since way before that, just another basher and they’re a dime a dozen.
satby
I do appreciate you, AL, for reading through all the links you curate before you post them. I guess that’s a lost art.
matt
‘90% as evil’. oh go eat shit please.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: I don’t disagree with any of that, but I think the institutional Republican Party deals with the same challenges. Some Repubs who had a ton of influence in the past have walked away (Kristol, Rubin, Nichols, et al.). Others make attempts to steer that party back toward traditional small-c conservatism (Thune, McConnell) or herrenvolk populism (Hawley) from within.
Analogs for all that exist for Democrats, e.g., the dirtbag left at war with the Democrats from the outside and centrist and leftist Dems fighting to steer the party in their preferred direction from within.
Sometimes I think we (not you and I, necessarily, but Dems writ large) overestimate Repub unity, and because we believe that’s why they won in 2016 and 2024, there’s a temptation to police each other to achieve what I’m arguing is a mostly illusory state of lockstep.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
They’re certainly not perfectly unified, and we’re not in perfect disarray.
On the continuum, however, I believe they’re more focused than we are. Obviously, that’s a subjective judgment
ETA: I do agree it’s a waste of time to police opinions. Disagree with an opinion, sure. But policing doesn’t work.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: I agree Repubs are probably a few clicks closer to the “unified” pole than we are on the continuum, which I attribute to their greater homogeneity. (As they diversify, cracks emerge. We’re seeing that in FL.)
I just don’t want us to make too much of it because it leads to despair and highly destructive infighting. They’re not 10 feet tall and bulletproof, is what I’m saying…
geg6
About fucking time. And Taylor Lorenz can go fuck herself. This idea that Dems should only fight with one (or possibly both) arm tied behind our backs is bullshit. At this point, everything should be up for grabs. Whatever it fucking takes. I’m in.
Professor Bigfoot
They’re not.
But what they ARE is unapologetically and quite proudly WHITE.
My perception is that this unapologetic and proud whiteness is also very attractive to white people ostensibly on our side, and that’s what makes them actually dangerous.
SFAW
Y’all are forgetting the MOST IMPORTANT SCANDAL SHOWING DEMON-RATS ARE CORRUPT!!!!!!!!!!!
Specifically — according to FoxLite, a/k/a CNN — that Ghislaine Maxwell something something something Clinton Global Initiative something 2013 something something. A scandalously corrupt scandal so much worse than any fascism done by Dear Leader (or Stephen Miller, or both), that I may need to lie down for awhile.
So quit talking about Demoncraps, or Dear Leader will be forced to declare “MARSHAL LAW” to teach America a lesson.
I long for the day when I can read/see/hear the news that does not spike my blood pressure.
SFAW
@Professor Bigfoot:
I really hope your perception is wrong. The sad part is, I can’t honestly proclaim that you are.
Professor Bigfoot
Speaking as a very recent graduate of Cardiac Rehab, you ain’t the onliest one.
Professor Bigfoot
@SFAW: It’s among the many in which I WISH TO FUCK I was wrong, and hope to fuck I am wrong.
SFAW
@geg6:
Many many years ago — during Reagan, I think — a Boston political commentator (Mark Jurkowitx, in case anybody cares/remembers) talked about Equal Opportunity and “reverse discrimination.”
His metaphor was a boxing match: for the first 14 rounds (of a 15 round match), the Champion (i.e. White people) is allowed to use both arms, while the Challenger (Blacks/PoC) has one hand tied behind his back. For the 15th round, the Challenger is allowed to use both hands, and the Champion immediately screams “NO FAIR!!!”
Not sure why I thought of that.
BellyCat
If we can’t get rid of dark money, welcome it and put it to good use. It’s GO time.
hells littlest angel
Taking fucking pride in bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Professor Bigfoot
@hells littlest angel: Ain’t it the truth.
May the ghost of Jesse Unruh haunt them forever.
”Money is the mother’s milk of politics.”
”If you can’t take their money, eat their food, drink their booze, screw their women and then vote against them anyway you have no business being up here.”
Eyeroller
@geg6: She had disturbingly nice things to say about Nazis/fascists in that one post while simultaneously attacking Dems but claiming she hates Republicans too. Makes one wonder.
Wired has done some really great journalism on technical topics related to DOGE, RFKjr, etc. so i’m disappointed they’d publish this hit piece. Gotta get that “objectivity” cred I suppose.
Paul in KY
@Baud: Me too! I’d be fine with $4,000.
Check my stuff out potential clients. I’m pretty snarky and have a way with words.
Paul in KY
@SectionH: Gov. Newsom is kicking ass and taking names!
Paul in KY
@Baud: Probably.
Paul in KY
@SFAW: ‘Marshal Law’ would be a good name for a Bro-Country artist.
Paul in KY
@SFAW: It’s a good analogy, IMO.
Paul in KY
@Professor Bigfoot: I thought that quote was from Sen. Dirksen of Illinois. Great quote, no matter who said it.
Professor Bigfoot
@Paul in KY: I’ve always seen it attributed to Unruh; and I thought that more likely a state politician to say the bald truth like that than a national politician (and I DO note the absolute sexism in the statement, but “he was a product of his time” ;^) but yeah, WHOEVER said it just “spat facts,” as the kids useta say (gawd I’m getting old).
SFAW
@Paul in KY:
I even remember where I was when I heard Jurkowitz utter it. I also think/thought it was great (obviously), and have repeated it over the years (when people start with the “reverse discriminatio” bullshit).
Torrey
@Professor Bigfoot:
Part of what makes it attractive is the safety inherent in whiteness in our culture. One doesn’t have to actively be proud of being white in order to recognize that one is less at risk in all sorts of ways because of that whiteness. Those who study such things have pointed out that there’s an unavoidable mentality, particularly in fascist states, that has one gauging one’s own safety as the result of being a member of a particular group. And if your group is white people, well, there you are. Even the awareness of your own unearned and undeserved privilege, which is a damn good thing, can get very close to sliding over into “none of this is my fault and therefore my responsibility is limited” and then into exactly the mentality Professor Bigfoot has described. I think we’ve all seen that happen.
(Oh, and now I’ve given all us white people an excuse to complain about having a heavier mental burden than everyone else. Oh hell.)
Professor Bigfoot
@Torrey: Perhaps an “obligatory #NotAllWhitePeople” would serve. ;^)
Paul in KY
@Professor Bigfoot: I’m sure you’re right. Great quote! Wish I’d come up with it!
Paul in KY
@SFAW: I had not heard it. Thank you for posting it.
Paul in KY
@Torrey: It is sooooo much easier to be white in this country than it is to be non-white. Sad but true.
Denali5
@Tony Jay: You are so right. Now explain what is going on in Jolly Olde England.
UncleEbeneezer
@Omnes Omnibus: You mean (((Soros))) bucks. Good lord, imagine the outrage if we somehow setup a Dem media machine but one of the people financing it turned out to be a
Jew…er…Zionist!!1!It would be nothing but Protocols of Elders of Zion op-eds in thinly veiled Post-Colonial/Social Justice lingo.
Torrey
@Professor Bigfoot:
Ironic or unironic? ;^)
(I have to ask. My family swings both ways.)
More seriously, thank you for your comment (the earlier one). You bring attention to a fact that’s way too easy for the privileged on “our side,” merely ostensibly or more sincerely, to ignore, and the reminder is much needed.
kindness
I find the whole concept of influencers to be an abomination. I mean, yea sure, I have been influenced by others many times in my life. Usually by someone who is intimately involved in what ever the subject was. And usually (I’m a Boomer old so..) they weren’t doing if for money so much as educating those of us who weren’t so focused. I guess what I really don’t like about the modern version of influencers is they are stars for being stars. And I don’t find that to be enough for me.
RaflW
Taylor Lorenz joining the Unilateral Disarmament Caucus.
Just another day in paradise here.
And speaking of unmitigated twits, MattY is saying Dems should give up Vote By Mail as a sop to Trump in any voting rights “deal”, as if DJT has ever, once, for an ignasecond honored the terms of any deal!
(Also, VBM is an unvarnished public good, irrespective of who it allegedly ‘benefits’ partisanly)
gene108
@CarolM:
A bunch of the content creators have been anti-Republican, if not pro-Democrat, for years, so unless this money is going back 5+ years, they’re paying existing creators to raise their profiles.
Backing by big money is how shit like the Daily Wire can position itself to dominate social media. Plus $8k per month is peanuts compared to the millions high profile Republican influencers make.
Lobo
@Tony Jay: That’s my attitude. If you want purity join a monastery.
Amy!
I’m not clear on why all the hatred for the reporter, or why her position is considered so obviously wrong.
Secrecy + Editorial control = Bad. Here’s $8000/month, you have to follow our (reasonable) guidelines, and never mention that it’s us giving you guidelines. Okay? Oh, this month, we have some new guidelines, so you can keep getting paid, and stop talking about that nasty new mayor of New York, or you can follow the guidelines. Oh! Next month we want you to remove criticism of the OBBB, and if it comes up, stop calling it Onan’s Blowjobs for Billionaires Bill, that’s so extremely uncivil that we can’t even.
Secrecy + Editorial control = Bad. It almost always kills itself (or exposes itself in some way), but while it’s active, it’s poisonous. “Stop talking about how tobacco is bad for people. It’s our position that that is a matter of personal belief. Mr Reynolds has been very hurt by your latest posts.”
JustRuss
JFC, how can a sentient being be that stupid? First, Trump never honors a deal. Second, if Trump wants VBM abolished the onus is on him to prove it’s a problem. Don’t just give it away to pacify him.
TurnItOffAndOnAgain
@Amy!:
Because we want to do whatever we can to stop fascists?
Amy!
@TurnItOffAndOnAgain:
By approving of letting more billionaires buy more outlets secretly, and hoping that they (unlike all those other billionaires) will be “on our side”? The subsidized influencers are not supposed to admit to receiving money, and are also not allowed to say what the editorial restrictions are. But we trust them because they’re buying Democratic influencers instead of throwing more money at right wing influencers?
‘Kay, then.
Geminid
@Amy!: One thing about this story that makes me wonder: the people approached by Chorus are already successful “influencers” with wide reaches. They are making it on their own without Chorus’s support.
So why does Chorus want to incorporate them into its “stable”? And to what end? The whole thing smells fishy to me.
Ruckus
@Tony Jay:
I think one of the major concepts needs to be that a lot of the journalists work for companies that have a LOT of money and if the owner(s) don’t like what is said and how it’s said they could often lose their not insignificant paychecks. Now some will be news organizations and carefully play the middle. But I’d bet that is not most news sources. Especially any politically oriented news sources. And in a country with a lot of citizens and a lot of power on both sides of the aisle it is going to depend on the size and voice of any organization as it relates to their voice and how well it carries.
Mike S. (Now with a Democratic Congressperson!)
How is thus different from rethugs hiring people to work for fox news? The secrecy is only needed beccause the MSM and ‘thug swill freakout and threaten people.
Another Scott
Secretive Secrets of Secrecy!!
Ah, the old looking for your keys under the streetlight because the lighting is better there, situation.
Taylor is very online, so Harris-Walz losing must be because they weren’t very online correctly. They’re doing it Rong, indeed. I’m glad she cleared that up.
[ groucho-roll-eyes.gif ]
She should have thrown in a few “Whistleblowers” and “Shadowy” and “Leaks” and suchlike to make the Snowden fans happy, also too.
(sigh)
Thanks.
Forward!!
Best wishes,
Scott.