Sounds like pretty bad advice to me tbh

I dunno I prefer to know whether content is being made by a creator on their own accord or whether someone is paying them. I might be committing pundit's fallacy, but I assume most people feel the same, and would be mad if they found out they were misled.

i think if we took a sample of applicable influencers, randomly assigned half of them to say "hi, I'm here with the Democrats" then do their normal job and half to just do their normal job, the latter would have several orders of magnitude more audience and reach in a very short timeframe

Sure. The problem is that it's not really possible to keep a program like this top secret -- opsec not immaculate -- and press about the nature of the program casts a bad look on the whole program and those involved. That's why it is better to be honest, and in line with FEC rules, to begin with

This embarrassing article -- and the way it makes this entire effort look bad -- could have been entirely avoided by honesty and transparency to begin with. Influencers should in fact be honest about when they are doing paid ads. Paid media is good -- provided its done right.

Doing things the wrong way hurts us on any reasonable timescale, even if its tempting. Its totally predictable that the nature of the program would be talked about publicly and that people would react as they are reacting. Those who came up with this should plan for that strategically going forward

This is also definitely wrong. I am so glad people are actually out there doing things and trying things instead of being unwilling to risk getting yelled at on Bluesky.

This is also not definitely wrong because this is a description of what has happened. Its not plausible to expect that you can run a large operation like this -- paying large numbers of individual influencers large ongoing sums -- and keep the entire thing hush-hush. Given that, good to think ahead

Dude I live in a red state and volunteer for my local Ds including doing canvassing, calls, etc. I think its good for people to be politically involved. I think its important that we be honest about who we are with and abide by FEC rules. Trying to trick people is not a good idea.

When I volunteer (unpaid) for the Ds I'm required to tell people who I am with etc. I don't think paid employees should be required to conceal who employs them. That's an obviously bad idea

I think it's actually great when you're working for, say, a brand that your audience is currently extremely skeptical of

"I call and canvass voters, trust me, it's bad to try new things" is the exact mindset Democrats urgently need to dismiss and reject as soon as humanly possible

I'm not saying its bad to try new things dude. I'm saying the new things we try should have thought put into them and should follow the law. LMAO

I volunteered the whole last month of the Zohran campaign as a materials distribution node that helped increase throughput of volunteers in the neighborhood. Id been volunteering on and off for 16 years and never saw the like . That's innovation. These are paid sock puppets.

And a bunch of online assholes he was doomed and he proved them all wrong. I completely disagree with you here -- what Mamdani did is actually good! Trying new things and taking risks is actually good!

Like I filled out a form and a week later a tub of fliers was on my doorstep. Every day people picked them up on their way to talk to people. And we crushed a political dynasty.

Idk I think the good thing is most of the people who view progressive media investment as bad are idiots on Bluesky who no one cares about so it doesn't really matter if people find out so long as people have time to build trust with their audiences in the meantime

This happened in *months*

And I guess let's see what happens to these influencers' audiences! One of the many reasons this is fine is that most people who aren't lunatics agree that it's okay to pay people for their work

I think it is good to pay people for their work! I think it is weird and possibly illegal to require people you pay to read political ads to conceal that you paid them to read the political ads. This is obvious and saying its crazy to care about this is embarassing and self-defeating.

The part where you think this is "reading political ads" is the part that reminds me most people don't actually understand the work that is needed here.

And what happens when this shit inevitably leaks, like it just did?

I don't know, how many followers did Rogan and Kirk and Shapiro lose over their political ties that took decades for anyone to notice or care about, my sense is they're doing fine because they had time to build trust with their audiences

What. Kirk and Shapiro are known political actors that work for political advocacy outfits. Always have been. It's not a secret who their employers are. We don't need to be ashamed of funding advocates either. In fact, self-conscious embarrassment IS self-defeating

You missed literally the first decade of their careers. Speaks to my point.

There is a cumulative effect on the electorate. They are badgered, exhausted and distrustful. I did door to door canvass in 2012 and they hated us *then* even before we made every text we sent them a hyperventilating lie.

Thank you!!! Yes!!! Cumulative effects are key to thinking about this in any kind of useful way. None of these are like one-and-done -- all ongoing, interventions, methods of engaging with public -- that adversaries will respond to. We need to think about how our plans play out over time to succeed