• sorter_plainview@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I wonder what is the purpose of this article. I mean political parties do fund influencers. Probably the only problematic part is the clause where they said this will avoid disclosure of funding. Pretty sure other parties are also doing this.

    So why a long form article with so many details, while it could have been a small report on the discrepancies in the contract.

    If this is about ‘politically funding contect creators’ which is ‘ethically’ wrong, then I want to see all other ethically wrong things happening in America reported in detail by media outlets.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Genocide apologists such as David AIPACman are getting paid to shill for the DNC.

      Others like Hasan Piker who oppose genocide are not getting paid.

    • Spectre@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      A lot of this funding was for genocide apologia for the Democratic party

      • sorter_plainview@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I see. Now the pattern is clear. I was thinking, “I don’t see names like Hasan Pikar in this”. Thanks for clarifying.

        But the article did not mention this point at all, right? They just published it, naming people, to stay away from controversy, I guess.