Your Favorite Internet Personalities May Be Bought And Paid For By Politicians

Political campaigns are increasingly paying social media influencers to promote candidates online, often without disclosing the arrangement to viewers, according to a New York Times investigation published Saturday.

The Times reviewed campaign finance filings and found that Josh Greene, a left-wing commentator with nearly 800,000 followers, has received payments from at least seven candidates or their affiliated groups this election cycle. In February, Greene told his audience that California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer was not the progressive figure he claimed to be. In May, Steyer’s campaign paid Greene $21,500, and Greene subsequently reversed his position, calling Steyer the strongest progressive option in the race. Greene told the Times he only accepts money from candidates he already supports and does not view the payment as having changed his position.

The Times identified similar arrangements involving other campaigns. Former California gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter’s campaign paid 12 influencers a combined $139,500, including TikTok creator Avery Cyrus, who has 9.5 million followers and received $25,000 for a single post; that post was later deleted after the Times contacted the creator’s agency. California requires the disclosure of paid political posts, and the Times found several posts supporting Porter that did not include one.

The paper also documented the use of “user generated content” firms — agencies that pay smaller creators to produce large volumes of posts that appear organic. One woman paid through a firm called SideShift posted videos criticizing living costs in Michigan and then, the very next day, did the same in Wisconsin — despite living in Kansas City, Missouri, according to the Times’ review of corporate and campaign records.

There is currently no federal law requiring influencers to disclose payments from political campaigns. The Federal Trade Commission requires disclosure of paid endorsements on social media but exempts political messaging, and few states have their own disclosure rules, which apply only to state and local races. The Times reported that some campaigns have specifically instructed influencers not to disclose payments, and that compensation is frequently routed through layers of vendors and sub-vendors that obscure the source of funds.

The Times found that both parties utilize this practice. Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL) filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission in June alleging paid social media accounts had attacked his military record during a primary, and a coordinated influencer network was identified boosting Republican Senate candidate Nate Morris in Kentucky earlier this year.

Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA) introduced legislation in June that would require anyone paid by a campaign or political committee to disclose that payment, similar to existing requirements for traditional campaign advertising. Takano acknowledged the bill contains potential loopholes, since campaigns can still obscure payments through intermediary vendors.

Rynn Reed, founder of an influencer organizing group called Creator Congress, introduced a voluntary code of conduct last month asking creators to disclose payment regardless of whether the law requires it, telling the Times that without clear standards, the industry is headed toward a downward spiral in which nothing can be trusted.