Huh? I don’t accept dark money and never have. The issue here is that the creators *did* accept dark money. I did *not* accept dark money. This is nonsensical
Subscribe to my tech and online culture newsletter UserMag.co Listen/watch Power User podcast on all platforms!! Support my work on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/taylorlorenz
259,231 followers 1,727 following 6,023 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Huh? I don’t accept dark money and never have. The issue here is that the creators *did* accept dark money. I did *not* accept dark money. This is nonsensical
Omidyar Network does NOT fund 1630 and never has. Pierre Omidiyar the person, gave $ to 1630 once years ago, but so what? Pierre also funds The Intercept, does that also mean all The Intercept’s reporting on dark money is false? You have no idea what ur talking about or even alleging.
LA Taco is such a great example of fearless local journalism
This is a great interview. LA Taco really has been doing great stuff, well before the ICE raids. One of the best Los Angeles-based outlets. I remember a very good piece profiling the one voting center inside Skid Row, in an election where homelessness was the top issue.
I am not part of the Omidyar Foundation, that's something else. I know it's confusing. But to answer your question, I am not just focused on Sixteen Thirty, I'd LOVE to report on other big dark money groups and am currently chasing down leads. If you have information go ahead and send it! :)
Covid is airborne: there's no evidence of fomite transmission (i.e. from surfaces). Covid hangs in the air like smoke & lingers in rooms with bad ventilation, hours after infected people have left. Those baggy blue surgical masks are pretty useless anyway - we've been gaslit from the outset by govt.
When people say this, they don’t just mean mental health They also strongly desire to fit in & not be left out They saw everyone following the gov’t & mainstream media & thought “everyone’s moving on, I want to do the same” “Everyone’s abandoning immunocompromised people, I want to do the same”
If you claim to care about marginalized people, but don’t wear a mask in public, you don’t care ab ALL marginalized ppl The irony is u could become immunocompromised / chronically ill at any time You’re 1 COVID infection away from being 1 of us Research shows that COVID damages your immune system
Wow you are wildly misreading this doc. What you are showing is a years old record of 1630 fund issuing a $45k refund *to* an organization within the Omidiyar Network. What you are not seeing on this screenshot is any record of Omidiyar Network's RIR program receiving money from Sixteen thirty
No bc the flow of $ is not backwards, and u have confused Pierre Omidiyar & his wife (private ppl) w the Omidiyar Network, which he founded but is completely separate. If he personally wants to give 10 billion to Chorus, that's his choice. That only bolsters my reporting. 1630 never funded ON RIR.
The Omidiyar Network very much NOT funding Chorus through 1630. The Omidiyar Network RIR program has NEVER received a single penny of dark money and has never received funding from The Sixteen Thirty Fund. You need to be able to engage in basic facts. omidyar.com/update/omidy...
The Omidiyar Network issued a press release which backs up my reporting and confirms that the Omidiyar Network RIR program has NEVER received a single penny of dark money and never received funding from The Sixteen Thirty Fund omidyar.com/update/omidy...
No I'm very much not and you guys fell for a conspiracy on TikTok that came from an influencer doing ChatGPT "Research". The Omidiyar Network RIR has received ZERO funding from Sixteen Thirty. Receipts here: omidyar.com/update/omidy...
No, not Pamela at all. Pierre funds the Omidiyar Network, and my program is an LLC that’s in that network. There’s plenty of info on the website but I know exactly where all my money comes from AND I always publicly disclose where I’m getting it omidyar.com/update/omidy...
Very telling that Chorus boss BTC and creators named in Taylor's article are attacking the messenger and not the message: and mark, how none of them have targeted WIRED, which stands by everything in the article, which was written in accordance with the high journalistic standards they're known for.
I am currently in a reporting fellowship that is funded by a billionaire, yes. I previously worked for a billionaire at WaPo, a billionaire at NYT, and a billionaire at The Atlantic. If you want to talk about the problem with billionaires funding media, welcome. It’s part of why I went independent
I don’t care what some billionaire does personally with his own money. I am not and have never received dark money. omidyar.com/update/omidy...
You guys sound insane omidyar.com/update/omidy...
WIRED has issued zero retractions and zero corrections
Good for them. That doesn’t mean Sixteen Thirty ever funded my non political, non partisan reporting program, they did not. omidyar.com/update/omidy...
Full statement here. TLDR millions of people on TikTok are currently falling for ChatGPT misinformation. Apparently one if the influencers used ChatGPT to “research” my “funding.” Unsurprisingly, it was completely wrong. Please help me amplify this correct information.
Here is the statement from Omidiyar on the network's Reporters in Residence program debunking false claims that my journalism fellowship is funded by Sixteen Thirty. Neither I nor they have ever received funding from the Sixteen Thirty Fund. I have never received a dollar from any dark money group
The Omidiyar network is NOT A DARK MONEY GROUP. I have always disclosed my funding. I have never taken dark money. These creators have not disclosed funding and have taken dark money. I have never taken funding from 1630 and I have zero financial ties to the 1630 fund.
I am very much NOT being paid by the same people as Chorus. I have zero ties to The Sixteen Thirty Fund and have never once received payment from them or any other dark money group.
You think I (very much not a Democrat) am in the dark money Democrat political influencer program that I just reported on that they’re all threatening me over? You guys are nuts. But no: I have not and never will accept dark money without disclosure. I have never accepted a single dollar from 1630
Going live on TikTok right now to discuss the controversy surrounding my WIRED piece and debunking these influencers desperate PR narratives www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Going live on TikTok to discuss our WIRED story and liberal influencers accepting dark money. Join me over on TikTok to ask any questions you might have! I will be debunking all these influencers ridiculous claims :)
Anyone claiming @taylorlorenz.bsky.social is lying is getting blocked. Y’all chose your side and it’s two party propagandized fascism. Go fuck your not mask wearing eugenics ass selves.
It’s not and these people are just lying about me because I criticized their beloved Blue party
Oh that makes sense! I just don’t think Matt Yglesias is worth engaging with on this issue. I hear ya!
Just appalling and another example of how AI can be weaponized to attack journalism.
This is how Meta’s AI integrated into IG and Threads is currently summarizing why I’m trending after my WIRED story. www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Even this framing from PSA sounds deranged, there is no worthy “debate” over trans rights. Trans people deserve full rights and equal protections and freedom under the law full stop. There is no reasonable other “side” on this issue.
so there’s gonna potentially be a pod save america “debate” on democrats future support for trans rights in the near future i had to back out because of scheduling conflicts, and for some reason they didn’t want my help finding a replacement on the other side of the “debate” is… matt yglesias
This is a great read albeit very disappointing but expected. However, the reactions in the comments and elsewhere are so discouraging. Instead of questioning the ethics and intentions behind this scheme you have people mad that it's being reported.
@faiz.bsky.social is correct
this is an excellent piece
I am not and have never taken money from a dark money group.
Nope, they said explicitly that approval would not be given on calls with creators. If someone needs to approve how you disclose you are not free to disclose.
I'm scared to click
Sorry didn't understand ur Q at first
Oh I see, the ACLU is doing civil liberties advocacy, not electoral politics. Its status requires it to disclose donors above certain thresholds and restricts it from engaging in political campaign activity. 1630 is a political vehicle that channels large sums of undisclosed money into elections.
It's about disclosure, also I'm not being paid to do political advocacy and never have been.
A dark money group is not required to disclose its donors, which is why we don't know who funds The Sixteen Thirty Fund. By contrast, the Omidyar Network publicly discloses its grants and funding sources. It is not a dark money group. Here's more on Sixteen Thirty
A dark money group is not required to disclose its donors, which is why we don't know who funds The Sixteen Thirty Fund. By contrast, the Omidyar Network publicly discloses its grants and funding sources. It is not a dark money group. Here's more on Sixteen Thirty
It's bizarre what people fall for, the whole internet really is gamergate
It is utterly dismaying how deliberately stupid people can make themselves when they don't want to believe something right under their nose. The Omidyar Network is well known in the industry, this is nothing like what was stipulated in contract of these content creators. These are empty smears.
It's quite wild that that's the line they all decided on, especially when the majority of influencers involved in the program appear to be white.
I was not fired from WaPo? WaPo even said this on the record. I encourage you not to fall for every single tweet you read online.
That video is full of a bunch of false info.
I am not and have never taken money from a dark money group.
Nope!
Elizabeth Booker Houston is one of the creators in our story who was part of the dark money program that every ethics expert we spoke to called dubious. She/Chorus were asked for comment repeatedly in reporting process and declined to respond. Now that the reporting is public she's trying to deflect
Omidiyar is not a "dark money" group at all. Omidyar Network operates transparently under a 501(c)(3) and LLC structure. The reporters in residence program is a PUBLIC program with complete editorial independence. I have never accepted dark money, these creators have: www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Listen to @espiers.bsky.social!!!!!!!!
this story is great journalism and anyone who says otherwise is a partisan hack
My story is at the top of the @wired.com homepage, read my scoop about the Democrats secret paid influencer efforts! www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Sources: a secretive project offering influencers $250-$8,000 a month to boost Democrats kicked off in July; creators were told 90+ influencers were taking part (Taylor Lorenz/Wired) Main Link | Mediagazer Permalink
This is such a great scoop. Whatever weird twitter beef odd people might have with Taylor Lorenz, she is one of the best culture reporters around, you are delusional if you attack their reporting over w/e petty disagreements you have.
My story is at the top of the @wired.com homepage, read my scoop about the Democrats secret paid influencer efforts! www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Abolish dark money groups!
Those are links to other stories in the newsletter. If you read the article at the top of the newsletter it’s about Republicans taking dark money
was gonna try a "i do not support all transes some of you bitches are very dumb!!!" joke but they're not dumb they're depraved and it's not a joke it's killing us
It’s “purity testing” to ask the Democrats not to attempt to thwart FEC regulations and erode trust in our political and media environment? Hmm
This is concerning. “Creators in the program are not allowed to use any funds… they receive as part of the program to make content that supports or opposes any political candidate or campaign without express authorization from Chorus in advance and in writing…” www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
This is not how social media & a left-influencer network should work. The party won't learn a damned thing or gain any feedback from an audience-funded & influenced network trapped in the iron fist of the party machine. You can't rigidly control their message & access. www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
![“If I want to work with another politician, I have to fully collaborate with them,” said one creator who was offered the contract but ultimately declined to take it and asked not to be named. “If I get Zohran and he wants to [do an] interview with me, I don’t want to give that to them.” Creators in the program are not allowed to use any funds or resources that they receive as part of the program to make content that supports or opposes any political candidate or campaign without express authorization from Chorus in advance and in writing, per the contract. - The goal of Chorus, according to a fundraising deck obtained by WIRED, is to “build new infrastructure to fund independent progressive voices online at scale.” The creators who joined the incubator are expected to attend regular advocacy trainings and daily messaging check-ins. Those messaging check-ins are led by Cohen on “rapid response days.” The creators also have to attend at least two Chorus “newsroom” events per month, which are events Chorus plans, often with lawmakers.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:fcubzsjmfozgnqy3qov2txep/bafkreicnji5zg3p3ymsqsd5hl5l7i3xap2ila5ruvkwmssttlwfx4syzma@jpeg "Click to view full size")
The draconian contracts are IMO a large issue in this. The resistance should not be paved with that.
Why would anyone trust an anonymously funded propaganda network? Because that's what this is.
As with all gamergate style harassment campaigns, none of this was ever or has ever been about “ethics in journalism”
have you ever stopped to consider why you only care about “ethics in journalism” when it’s about specific women but say nothing about news outlets taking oil and gas money every day
Another one of those "I'd be making a lot more money if I had no leftist principles" situations.
An initiative aimed at boosting Democrats online offers influencers up to $8,000 a month to push the party line. All they have to do is keep it secret—and agree to restrictions on their content. www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
www.usermag.co/p/we-need-to...
I have written the same story about Republicans: www.usermag.co/p/we-need-to...
Wait Blue MAGA so-called influencers have giant group chats where they discuss taking dark money and organize to sabotage legit criticism of the party? No never, that’s not why I had to create a Blue MAGA bots moderation list. 🤣 www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
You know, I definitely remember Ben Wikler explicitly promising not to do shit like this if he were elected head of the DNC.
If only we could use this money to do something else instead of paying these influencers to push centrist talking points. Easily can say that this will just create more content for Boomers to share on FB and not bring in any new voters from the next generation. Stop. www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
This is why "Joe Rogan of the Left" doesn't work for Dems. They are terrified of being populist/controversial, so they require 100% control of messaging. The result is dark money and exploitative contracts given to moderate creators only. TY @taylorlorenz.bsky.social www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
I think that the lawyer for a powerful dark money group openly saying on a Zoom call to dozens of influencers that they’re attempting to thwart FEC guidelines by secretly paying them, is a story www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
Taylor's reporting confirms a lot of things I've been feeling and seeing since November. 1. The increase in influencers and pundits saying the same thing and using the same language. 2. The loud silence about trans people or any of the abuse we face. 3. The sudden nut coddling of Gavin Newsom.
A Democrat-allied dark money group is trying to bankroll a liberal influencer network, but, in very Democrat fashion, it's mandating restrictions on what influencers who take the money can do, say, and criticize. I think this guy has it right www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
some of them are listed in the story www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
What do you think? Are the terms outlined here for the Democratic influencers ethical? Is it ok for Democrats to engage in this sort of shady marketing? Should the FEC crack down on these influence operations? I'm very curious to hear people's thoughts!!
“What we need is for people to invest in independent media, and that doesn’t necessarily mean investing in a consulting group that is going to become a middleman for independent media."
. @stevenjcbuckley.bsky.social l a digital media sociologist, 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?”
“Sometimes it is actually clear that influencers are being used to, for example, evade spending limits. I think that we need to remember that for democracy to thrive, we do need transparency around who is paying for political messages.”
Elizabeth Dubois, who has researched the ways influencers are reshaping the US political system, says that “we are seeing influencers being pulled into these dark campaigns or shadow campaigns, where the legal aspect is murky at best.”
Don Heider, the chief executive of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, says that the outlined restrictions violate ethical norms. “We’re living in an era where a lot of powerful people have taken the rule book and thrown it out the window.”
The FEC & FTC declined to comment, but regulations in the influencer space are notoriously murky, the intentional non disclosures raise ethical questions about political advertising in the internet age. Republicans have been doing this for a long time, but Democrats always claimed to be against it
Creators were told on a group Zoom obtained by WIRED: “With this structure, it avoids the public disclosure or public disclaimers—you know, ‘Paid for by blah blah—that u see on political ads. We don’t need to deal with any of that. Your names aren’t showing up on, like, reports filed with the FEC”
Creators in the program are not allowed to use any funds or resources that they receive as part of the program to make any content that supports or opposes a political candidate or campaign without express permission from their funders, raising questions about editorial independence.
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 program kicked off last month, and over 90 influencers are allegedly taking part. Creators told WIRED that the contract stipulated they’d be kicked out and cut off financially if they even so much as acknowledged that they were part of the program.
Democrats hope that the secretive content creator program, funded by a powerful liberal dark money group called The Sixteen Thirty Fund, might tip the scales in their favor online after Kamala Harris' stunning loss to Trump last fall. They're seeking to buy influence in online spaces.
SCOOP: A Powerful A Dark Money Group Is Secretly Funding High-Profile Democratic Influencers. Big liberal content creators are being paid up to $8,000 per month to push party messaging. www.wired.com/story/dark-m...
