Well that's the thing about dark money, we don't know. The contract does say that they need to run their ideas for interviews by Chorus, but like so much of our politics, presumably much is left unsaid with only a nudge and a wink, or explained in a private communication.
But I'm less interested in what Chorus *says* than I am the effect its existence and the money paid to creators has on their own conscious and subconscious positions. Even if Chorus was the most transparent, honest institution ever, it wouldn't change the fact that receiving large amounts
of money will... Change your perspective on the people giving you the money.
So even if you weren't told explicitly not to criticize Democrats, you're still less likely to do so because they're paying you. it's basic human behavior. Don't rock the boat, so to speak.
That part is the claim that I was replying to. The party supporting influencers can subconscious bias them, but the party NOT supporting influencers is undermining its own ability to gain public support.
Without having the infrastructure to actively persuade the public of things, you are left pathetically chasing poll results on what others have made into the issues of the day, which is exactly where mainstream Dems have been for decades.
This is something that can only be stated by a reverse ourobouros where your head is so far up your own ass the very concept of daylight is nothing more than myth and legend.