Zuckerberg’s Trillion-Dollar Meta Empire Sits On Razor’s Edge As Antitrust Case Rolls On
'First chink in the armor'
Despite PR Pivot, Meta Is Still A Monopoly And A Threat To A Free Society
Revealed: Pro-Kamala social media millions that couldn’t sync ‘Brat’ with ‘Democrat’
The abrupt withdrawal last year of President Joe Biden as the Democratic presidential nominee, followed rapidly by his replacement with Vice President Kamala Harris, irked many voters left out by the process. Yet social media seemed to ooze with enthusiasm and Gen Z-friendly hipster appeal.
Influencers flooded the web with neon matcha green pro-Harris videos synced to beats from singer Charli XCX’s album “Brat” released last year. The poppy rave videos, gushed journalists, showed that Harris embodied the confidently independent “brat” vibe conveyed by the music. Social media pages bubbled with memes celebrating Harris as the voice of queer and black youth, in contrast with the Republican agenda of “white supremacy.” Digital creator Amelia Montooth, in one viral TikTok video, kissed a woman and tried searching for pornography, actions her sketch suggested would be banned if Harris lost the election.
The attempted reach and spending of the pro-Kamala Harris 2024 effort is unprecedented.
Harris, a career politician favored by the Democratic Party’s establishment, never quite fit the bill as an icon of activist movements. But the sudden influencer buzz seemed to transform the stodgy former prosecutor into an icon of the cultural zeitgeist.
As it turns out, the tidal wave of enthusiasm was not entirely genuine. Much of the content, including Montooth’s videos, was quietly funded by an elusive group of Democratic billionaires and major donors in an arrangement designed to conceal the payments from voters.
RealClearInvestigations obtained internal documents and WhatsApp messages from Democratic strategists behind the influencer campaign. Way to Win, one of the major donor groups behind the effort, spent more than $9.1 million on social media influencers during the 2024 presidential election — payments revealed here for the first time. The amount was touted in a document circulated after the election detailing the organization’s accomplishments.
The effort supported over 550 content creators who published 6,644 posts across platforms TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Twitch, and X. Way to Win coached creators on phrases, issue areas, and key themes to “disseminate pro-Kamala content throughout the cycle,” a post-election memo from the group noted.
The look behind the curtain reveals that at least some of the image-making around the Harris candidacy was carefully orchestrated by the same types of covert social media marketing often used by corporate brands and special interest groups. Such campaigns provide the illusion of organic support through the authentic appeal of trusted social media voices.
Way to Win, in internal messages, touted its work with a stable of Democratic Party-affiliated influencers and activists, including Harry Sisson, Emily Amick, Kat Abu, and Dash Dobrofsky. The group also overtly cultivated “non-political creators” — influencers typically known for travel vlogs, comedic skits, or cooking recipes — and seeded them with “positive, specific pro-Kamala content” that was “integral in setting the tone on the Internet and driving additional organic digital support.” The effort often took the form of talking points that were rapidly distributed to the in-network creators.
“Bro who is Tim Walz,” said @AbeeTheArtist, one of the TikTok creators backed by Way to Win. “He’s a football coach, that’s hard,” the influencer continued. “It’s time for Republicans to drop out, it’s not looking good for ya’ll!”
Identity appeals fall flat
In a series of internal presentations about the influencer campaign, Way to Win emphasized its data-driven approach. “We know what messaging works,” noted Liz Jaff, a branding strategist working with Way to Win, during a call with donors last year. She touted the use of an AI-based focus group tool developed by Future Forward, the Harris campaign’s primary super PAC.
Jaff also explained the process for developing talking points that could be inserted into organic-appearing messages and posts on social media. “We then convey that to the influencers, who take that into their own words,” continued Jaff. “We then test those videos and see what needs to be boosted,” she added, referring to paid media efforts to amplify specific TikTok videos or favored streamers.
The lofty promises of message mastery, however, often fell short. Way to Win directly financed a series of clunky YouTube shows and liberal identity politics-oriented social media skits designed to bring voters out to support the Harris campaign and Democrats more broadly. There’s little evidence that such measures moved any significant numbers of voters during an election in which Democrats lost historic levels of support from key constituency groups — the youth vote, Latinos, and black men swung significantly to Donald Trump last year, upending decades of voting patterns.
Ilana Glazer, a comedian who starred in the Comedy Central show "Broad City," received Way to Win funding for a series of election videos called “Microdosing Democracy,” in which she half-heartedly endorsed Harris as she lit a spliff of marijuana. Another TikTok and Instagram series backed by the donors, called “Gaydar,” featured interviews quizzing people on the streets of New York City about gay culture trivia with little election-related content.
Way to Win also funded a caravan with an inflatable IUD to Philadelphia; Washington, D.C.; Raleigh, North Carolina; St. Louis, and other locations. The tour, which featured content creators producing posts along the way, was designed to bring attention to claims that Trump would ban contraceptive devices.
In an apparent attempt to boost Harris’ support among black men, Way to Win directly funded a series of YouTube interview-style talk shows called Watering Hole Media.
“I heard a brother say to me, ‘Man, I didn't know I was going to be excited when Kamala was selected,’” said Jeff Johnson, a managing director with the lobbying firm Actum LLC who worked as a host for the Watering Hole Media series “Tap In.” “One brother said, ‘I’m not even fully sure why,’” continued Johnson. “No, seriously, he said, ‘When I look at her, though, she reminds me of my aunt,’ and I said yes, so there is this communal piece.”
The discussion, taped at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago last August, buzzed about the “through line” from the Black Panthers to the Nation of Islam to Harris' nomination, suggesting her candidacy represented another moment in radical black politics.
The Way to Win-sponsored media group sponsored many similar discussions attempting to buoy the Harris candidacy with appeals to racial identity politics.
Despite the well-funded efforts, few tuned in. The seven video programs produced at the DNC collectively garnered fewer than 1,000 views. One video had fewer than 40 viewers.
Where did the money go?
Questions have mounted over the campaign spending decisions by Harris and her supporting organizations. The Harris campaign and her super PAC spent over $1.5 billion in the last months of the campaign, with much of the money flowing to consultants and media advertising. Alex Cooper, who hosted Harris for an interview on her “Call Her Daddy” podcast, was baffled about why the campaign spent about $100,000 on a “cardboard” temporary studio set that “wasn’t that nice.” Others have raised similar concerns about payments to Oprah Winfrey’s production firm.
“Our 2024 creator program reached key audiences with nearly a billion views, but there’s more to do, and we’re applying lessons from last cycle,” a Way to Win spokesperson said in a statement to RCI.
“Sometimes in presidential campaigns, there are times when there aren't any cost controls,” observed Mike Mikus, a Democratic strategist in Pennsylvania. “The biggest question is whether they had any empirical evidence that this TikTok messaging would work.”
The payments occupy a hazy area of election law. Way to Win structured the funds through nonprofit corporations that paid various influencer talent agencies — firms such as Palette Management and Vocal Media. The money was not listed in Federal Election Commission disclosure portals that show political funds spent during the campaign.
While television or radio ads require disclaimers showing the groups responsible for paying for the advertisements, there are no equivalent mandates for TikTok stars or Instagram personalities who receive payment to promote election-related content. Despite some attempts to reform election transparency regulations, minimal progress has been made. The FEC has deadlocked over attempts to form new rules to govern the influencer space, leaving the entire medium virtually lawless regarding campaign cash.
Way to Win operates several entities and corporations, most of which do not disclose donors. The group did not respond to a request for comment for more information. However, the cache of documents about the influencer campaign pointed to some clues. Way to Win hosted a series of donor-only events in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., with representatives of the Open Society Foundations, the charity backed by billionaire investor George Soros. OSF did not respond to a request for comment.
Democrats are hardly alone in payola for influencers. Republican campaigns have spent several hundred thousand dollars on similar social media marketing agencies that tout the ability to seed content with popular accounts on X and TikTok.
But the attempted reach and spending of the pro-Kamala Harris 2024 effort is unprecedented. Way to Win justified the spending sprees as the only way to compete with pro-Trump voices and popular podcasts, such as Joe Rogan, which the Harris campaign eschewed.
“Our goal this year was to combat conservative content domination on Instagram and TikTok. We did that,” Way to Win claimed in a triumphant memo to donors after the election.
“Had more Americans gotten their media from Instagram and TikTok,” the December memo argued, “Kamala Harris would be the next president of the United States.”
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and LeeFang.com and made available via RealClearWire.
Meta officially ending 'fact-checking'
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, announced on Friday that it is officially ending its "fact-checking" program in the United States.
Joel Kaplan, the company's chief global affairs officer, stated that starting Monday, it will terminate the program for good and switch to a community notes system, similar to Elon Musk's X.
'We don't expect this process to be perfect, and we'll continue to improve as we learn.'
Kaplan declared, "By Monday afternoon, our fact-checking program in the US will be officially over."
"That means no new fact checks and no fact checkers," he continued. "We announced in January we'd be winding down the program & removing penalties. In place of fact checks, the first Community Notes will start appearing gradually across Facebook, Threads & Instagram, with no penalties attached."
A Meta spokesperson told Fox Business that community notes are "a better approach that will be less biased and more scalable."
The representative noted that the company expects "more people with more perspectives adding context to more types of content."
"The community decides what notes get written and rated — not Meta," the spokesperson continued. "That said, this is a brand-new product that we're still testing and building. We don't expect this process to be perfect, and we'll continue to improve as we learn."
Meta explained that as part of the change, no social media users should have strikes against their account by Monday. Since January, anyone who has been so-called "fact-checked" will reportedly not face any account penalties or demotions.
The company's website explains that the changes will be rolled out to the U.S., improved over the year, and then implemented in other countries.
Meta began testing its new community notes feature in mid-March, allowing some social media users to write and rate notes across its platforms.
"Around 200,000 potential contributors in the U.S. have signed up so far across all three apps, and the wait list remains open for those who wish to take part in the program. But notes won't initially appear on content. We will start by gradually and randomly admitting people off of the wait list and will take time to test the writing and rating system before any notes are published publicly," the company stated.
The rating system for determining whether a community note is added to a post "isn't majority rules," Meta added.
"No matter how many contributors agree on a note, it won't be published unless people who normally disagree decide that it provides helpful context," it said.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the forthcoming changes in January when he released a video stating that the company was returning to its "roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies, and restoring free expression on our platforms."
"More specifically, here's what we're going to do. First, we're going to get rid of fact-checkers and replace them with community notes similar to X, starting in the U.S.," he said, citing the 2024 presidential election as a contributing influence in the decision.
"The recent elections also feel like a cultural tipping point towards, once again, prioritizing speech," Zuckerberg added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Big weddings, bigger regrets: Gen Z says ‘I don’t’ to wedding debt
“What do you mean you don’t want any furniture underneath the pergola?”
’Tis wedding season, the time of year when nuptial excitement contends with a seemingly endless stream of design choices with a hefty price tag. As a bride-to-be myself, I have been astounded by the pressure to spend beyond my budget, as if not including an ice cream truck and a balloon selfie wall would make or break the entire event. It’s a winning formula for the wedding industry: Heightened expectations plus soaring price tags equal staggering profit margins. And the industry has social media to thank.
Gen Z is proving that a beautiful, meaningful wedding does not have to come with a hefty price tag or the expectation of social media perfection.
In an era when weddings are often measured by their Instagramability, many couples feel pressured to plan a picture-perfect day that meets the aesthetic standards of social media. The rise of platforms like Instagram and Pinterest has turned wedding planning into a high-stakes production, fueling the wedding industry’s ever-growing price tag. But as costs continue to soar, a new trend is emerging — one driven by a generation that is more financially cautious and less enamored with the idea of a fairy-tale wedding at any cost.
A wedding arms race
Social media has revolutionized wedding planning. With a single scroll, couples are bombarded with curated images of extravagant floral installations, designer gowns, and luxury venues. While such platforms can serve as helpful tools for inspiration, wedding “doomscrolling” has transformed a deeply personal and intimate occasion into a public spectacle, where likes and shares serve as the currency of validation. According to Forbes, social media’s effect of raising expectations — and costs — is making 60% of couples consider elopement over a traditional wedding.
Escaping the pressure of staggering wedding costs is palpable. The average wedding budget for 2025 is projected to be around $36,000 — compared with $29,000 in 2023 — with high-cost areas like New York City pushing that number to $65,000. Unsurprisingly, many couples are turning to loans and credit cards to fund their big day. One survey found that 56% of newlyweds go into debt for their wedding — an alarming trend as 34% of divorcees blame credit card debt and spending as contributing factors to their divorces. Is that really the best gift for newlyweds?
Rebelling against wedding debt
However, unlike Millennials, who embraced the Instagram-fueled wedding culture, Gen Z is showing signs of resistance. Facing economic challenges such as inflation and housing affordability, Gen Z couples are putting cost-effective celebrations over extravagant ones. The Guardian reports that many opt for smaller weddings, alternative venues, and even elopements to avoid unnecessary financial stress.
There is also a shift away from the performative aspect of weddings. While Millennials often sought highly curated, shareable moments, Vogue notes that Gen Zers are less concerned with social media validation. They prefer authenticity and meaningful experiences over staged perfection.
This has led to a rise in DIY elements, intimate ceremonies, and budget-friendly wedding choices. For example, some brides choose to do their own makeup, saving thousands of dollars compared to hiring a professional artist. Others prefer unconventional locations like back yards and public parks rather than expensive banquet halls.
Rethinking the wedding industry
The movement away from over-the-top weddings is not just about finances — it’s about values.
Weddings are meant to be a celebration of love and commitment, not a financial burden that lingers long after the last dance. While the wedding industry thrives on convincing couples that their big day must be grand and expensive, Gen Zers are beginning to challenge that notion. They are proving that a beautiful, meaningful wedding does not have to come with a hefty price tag or the expectation of social media perfection.
As more couples reject the pressures of an Instagram-worthy wedding in favor of financially sane choices, the industry may be forced to adapt.
Bring Back Slut Shaming
EXCLUSIVE: Federal Trade Commission Launches Probe Into Big Tech Censorship
'We do not intend to take our foot off the gas'
Zuckerberg's Meta to pay Trump massive settlement after banning him on Facebook, Instagram
Tech giant Meta is expected to pay President Donald Trump tens of millions of dollars in a lawsuit settlement after the company banned Trump from its social media platforms just before the end of his first term in office.
On Wednesday, spokesperson Andy Stone confirmed that Meta had agreed to pay $25 million. The lion's share of that sum — $22 million — is expected to be given to Trump's future presidential library, while another $3 million will go toward legal fees and other plaintiffs, NBC News reported.
Meta has already filed the settlement notice in federal court in San Francisco. According to the conditions of the settlement, Meta does not have to admit wrongdoing. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Trump threatened that Zuckerberg would 'spend the rest of his life in prison' if he interfered with the 2024 election.
The case relates to the melee at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, just two weeks before Trump left office. Immediately following the incident, Trump was banned on most social media platforms, including Meta's Facebook and Instagram.
At the time, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed that Trump had attempted "to undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor, Joe Biden."
In July 2021, Trump filed a series of lawsuits against various social media companies for banning his accounts. The suit against the platform then called Twitter was tossed, and the suit against Google was "administratively closed" but could be reopened, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Roughly 18 months later, with Trump gunning for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, Meta lifted the suspension on Trump's accounts, though with some "guardrails" in place to prevent "repeat offenses." "The public should be able to hear what politicians are saying so they can make informed choices," the company said in January 2023.
During the campaign, Trump continued to call out social media platforms for apparently engaging in censorship and malicious political activism. In a book released earlier this year, Trump even threatened that Zuckerberg would "spend the rest of his life in prison" if he interfered with the 2024 election.
Zuckerberg, meanwhile, had lately changed his tone regarding Trump. After the then-candidate was nearly assassinated in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July, Zuckerberg claimed the photograph of Trump pumping his fist and yelling, "Fight!" was "one of the most bada** things" he had ever seen.
A month later, he pledged to end the controversial "Zuck Bucks" scheme that affected the 2020 presidential election. He also admitted in a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that Facebook spiked the Hunter laptop story and claimed that Facebook had been "pressured" to censor Americans during the Biden-Harris administration.
After the November election, Zuckerberg had frequent contact with Trump, visiting the then-president-elect at his Mar-a-Lago home on at least two occasions, in part to discuss the pending lawsuit against Meta.
Meta also donated $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund, and Zuckerberg attended several events on Inauguration Day, including the prayer service at St. John's Episcopal Church and the swearing-in ceremony at the Capitol.
On the evening of Inauguration Day, Zuckerberg posted to Facebook a photo of himself and his wife, Priscilla Chan, with the caption "optimistic and celebrating" along with an American flag emoji.
Perhaps to make further inroads with the new administration, Meta has also ditched its DEI policies and signed Trump ally Dana White of UFC fame to its board of directors.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Donald Trump Is A ‘Malevolent Coxcomb,’ And Other Deranged Takes From Nicholas Carr
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories