The secret weapon of this year’s election is online influencers.
This influence was perhaps most formally acknowledged at the Democratic National Convention in early August. The national party’s nominating convention welcomed five influencers to speak at the convention: Deja Foxx, Nabela Noor, Carlos Eduardo Espina, Olivia Julianna and John Russell. Combined, they have a total of more than 24 million social media followers. By inviting them, the party signaled a shift in how campaigns approach outreach; influencers have the most reach with the younger voters, bridging the gap between politics and the youth. In fact, a Pew Research Center study found that over half of Americans receive news from some form of social media, and nearly 40% of adults under 30 receive such news from TikTok.
Emily Soong, a spokeswoman for the convention, seemed to have an answer for why this is the case. “Content creators are a vehicle to reach new audiences, not just through their content, but through their unique ability to speak authentically to their communities,” Soong said. She is not wrong; influencers provide a level of authenticity that many mainstream news outlets don’t. But what does this mean for the future of TikTok and other social media platforms?
Most full-time social media influencers don’t generate most of their money through TikTok or Instagram. Rather, they accumulate most of their wealth through sponsorships, brand collaborations, or affiliate marketing, oftentimes attempting to inconspicuously incorporate sponsored content into their media output. However, no matter how cleverly an advertisement is disguised, influencers must still disclose them. The Federal Trade Commission, a consumer protection organization that works to protect consumers from fraudulent or unfair business practices of brands, requires that if you have a financial, employment, personal or family relationship with a brand, you must make it clear to your audience that the post was a paid sponsorship.
While consumers are perhaps most familiar with such marketing in the realm of beauty products, it appears that such techniques have transferred over to the political realm as well. On July 29, TikToker Bryce Hall endorsed former President Donald Trump on his account of over 28 million followers, saying, “If [Vice President] Kamala Harris becomes President, I’m definitely gonna off myself.” The video received around 2 million views.
On the surface, this could simply seem like an influencer expressing his political views. However, many were suspicious of his motives after another prominent influencer, Tana Mongeau, said she “hypothetically was just offered a lot of money to endorse a political party” on her podcast. She continued, explaining that she was “told an alleged list of other influencers that have already hypothetically accepted money to do those hypothetical things that were hypothetically offered to me to hypothetically do.” Though we do not know if Hall was paid to endorse Trump or not, it raises an interesting question — Are influencers being compensated to stand behind specific candidates? If so, to what extent is this happening?
Such methods of political campaigning are not unheard of. Prior to Biden dropping out of the race, Priorities USA, a super PAC supporting President Joe Biden’s reelection, spent $1 million paying influencers to post about the upcoming election. At the time, polling indicated that younger voters were increasingly critical of Biden because of his age or his stance toward Israel. Other PACs, such as NextGen America and American Bridge, also paid influencers during the 2022 midterm elections.
Recently, however, Mikey Angelo, an Instagram influencer with 743,000 followers, posted a video saying “There are only 22 days more to vote, so, like, seriously, go vote.” The caption clearly denoted that Angelo was paid by a Democratic political action committee for the post. But here’s the thing: Legally, he did not have to disclose this.
Because of how rapidly the influencer space is developing, particularly in politics, there are no general guidelines surrounding political sponsorships. The Federal Trade Commission’s rules regarding sponsorships only cover content related to “commerce.” Election advertisements are overseen by an entirely different agency –– the Federal Election Commission. The Federal Election Commission does have rigid rules regarding paid political communications over the phone, on TV or on mailers, but these don’t apply to influencers. In fact, regarding influencers and political sponsorships, there are no rules. Influencers do not have to tell us if their post endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris or Trump is genuine, or rooted in thousands of dollars.
Last year, the Federal Election Commission had the opportunity to extend its rules to influencers. A progressive nonprofit, the Brennan Center for Justice, argued that the Federal Election Commission should require that paid influencer posts include a disclaimer so that voters know it was a paid post. Ultimately, however, the Federal Election Commission decided against doing so, determining that campaign payments to influencers did not fit within existing ad regulations. Two of the commissioners dissented, saying that “the public is entitled to know when those influencers are being paid to spread a political message.” After all, if influencers are required to disclose payments for reviewing a makeup product or an energy drink, should they not also be required to disclose payment for endorsing a political party?
Due to the lack of federal laws, some platforms have formed their own rules, but this can easily get convoluted. Meta has allowed paid political content as long as the sponsoring organization is registered in the ad library. TikTok, on the other hand, does not allow any political advertising, even going as far to remove a video that was labeled as part of Priorities USA. But, if influencers do not have to disclose paid political content, then how would TikTok even know if content was paid advertising?
The rising influence of social media in politics raises some questions about transparency, ethics and the nature of political discourse. As influencers continue to shape public opinion, the absence of clear regulations leaves room for manipulation and voter deceit. Moving forward, both the Federal Election Commission and social media platforms will need to consider if and how they regulate political sponsorships. Clearly influencers can be bought –– and as of now, there is a high chance that we would not even know.
