Post

That’s…not a retraction? Are you just counting on people not to read the actual text you are sharing?

It was published by Wired

Many of the creators have spoken out, my TikTok feed was full of them.

Sounds like Tim Pool with fancier words. "They don't pay me to say stuff, they'd just stop paying me if I didn't say that stuff" Weakly disputed tbh

yes they did. Lorenz claimed they're not allowed to criticize Dems, she and others have done so. Lorenz claims they are required to keep the relationship secret, but several of them have posted about it publicly before

yeah, don't know this lady, but she hasn't lied to my face about things she personally said to me in the past lol

Thank you, Mr. Cooper. This seems to be an out-of-character misstep by Wired. Maybe a great magazine like Wired could figure out what is behind it?

You've got to be able to see through something like this.

here we go. Wired alleges that the contract says Chorus members can't *disclose* the relationship without permission, but what it actually says is *publicize.* not the same thing!

Bryan Tyler Cohen @briantylercohen.bsky.social said there is a 1630 funder who is paying Taylor Lorenz $8000 a month. What is the name of that person; I didn’t hear you say it

Welp, there it is! He said it's not true. Bedtime for me now.

Eh. Not taking TL/Wired's side, but it's germaine that Brian Tyler Cohen is a shady little try-hard grifter. Always has been. You can do your own googling.

you can't buy into the one thing and then tell me you're doing something else. you can't. I know you're probably a paid subscriber and everything so you don't notice this stuff. lots of journalists don't. but I do and I know it doesn't matter at all

I can't actually listen to this. because I deleted my Facebook account. and I have to sign up do it again to hear the audio. instead of watching his face. I no longer care why he found it chorus although to be fair I know it's benign. anybody who buys into that, I am definitely checking out of

I don’t have any skin in this game, but Chorus is distinct from the 1630 Fund. I don’t think Taylor made any allegations about Chorus. Her story is about the terms for the funds coming from the 1630 Project. BTC’s video seems to only be about Chorus, sidestepping the issue

I am *deeply* skeptical of any claim of misleading reporting coming from someone with a financial stake in the reporting going away but that's not to say that Taylor Lorenz is a beacon of unimpeachable credibility

You're doing exactly the thing they wanted. Falling for it hook, line, and sinker. By believing the people most likely to already agree with their bottom line and ignoring those who turned down the money, or were never asked, you assume a limited pov. Survivorship bias, every time.

I KNEW IT! I ARGUED WITH SOMEONE ELSE ABOUT THIS WHEN THEY JUST ASSUMED EVERYTHING WAS GOING TO BE JUST LIKE THE REPUBLICANS DO IT

Well yeah that’s the problem…they are only funding people who are wildly out of touch with the base

Probably not great to get too het up about a TL piece until you get more details

Wired picking up two strikes in a week is not a great look.

The aren't denying getting paid, no, but I think you know what I mean.

look up Brian Tyler Cohen’s video on Chorus. He’s the cofounder and goes into explicit detail why the article was riddled with inaccuracies and also points out Taylor Lorenz is paid by the same funders

If it’s not really a secret, publish the contracts and the names of the donors. What billionaires are seeking to capture and influence Democrat influencers?

"maybe a bit less substantial" is doing a lot of work here

To me the only concerning part was the secrecy - this video is clearly not from someone keeping her relationship with Chorus a secret, but I'm curious whether other creators are, and whether there's anything saying they need to do so in their contracts.

Yikes!

Wow, I am shocked -- SHOCKED! -- that one of the paid shills is upset at being outed as a paid shill. Who could have seen this coming??

I wrote a piece on why both sides have a right to be upset, and what groups like Chorus can do to be more transparent in the future.

If they want to throw some of that cash my way, I will gladly turn my Twitch feed into whatever they want. MyDad66 is where to go!

Several are speaking out and I believe them way before I would believe that hack Lorenz.

The "content restrictions" really seemed to be "you can't endorse candidates so they don't sic the IRS on us"

This is a hot mess-WIRED and Lorenz have already had to issue corrections. Silly question-did she get paid for her piece?

Dems should be loud & proud re promoting our ideals, & yes, people can & do get paid to promote Dem policy, facts, etc., just like MAGAts & religious leaders like Franklin the antiChrist Graham. As long as there's transparency & the legal line is towed, that's all that maters. Dark money, tho...

Who are these liberal donors & where's all my free money? If I had obscene wealth. I'd set up a totes doable super low interest long term loan program & mentoring assistance that would help bail people out of debt, pay immediate needs, etc. Not charity or ownership but a rising tide hand up.

Does Wired not have a factchecking process? Surprising if so

They were looking the the context through the lens of reporting by Taylor Lorenz.

it's a good question, surely this can be figured out

Ever seen someone not stepped in contract law or analysis try to read and interpret a contract?

given the author one suspects the confusion is intended

money being fungible and all it does not seem very difficult to make content you don’t want to pre-clear with not-Chorus resources

Or the author’s views.

“funnel” is such a weird word there because it definitely is not the contract text and also does not particularly tell you what the contract says