The Government Paid Hundreds Of Influencers To Promote COVID Vaccines. I Unmasked Dozens Of Them.

 The federal government initiated an $80 million project that employed 496 social-media influencers to promote COVID vaccines, targeting parents, pregnant women, and families. This campaign surfaced numerous advertisements asserting the safety and necessity of vaccinations.

1. Influencer Promotion:

496 influencers were paid to create content advocating for COVID vaccinations, particularly aimed at children and mothers.

Several posts highlighted messages like "vaccinate your children!!" and promoted the idea that vaccinated mothers could lower COVID hospitalization risks for their infants.

Influencers participated in various campaigns that included contests for sharing vaccination stories in exchange for gift cards.

2. Campaign Structure:

The campaign was part of a broader effort monitored by Public Good Projects, which tracked misinformation and adjusted messaging accordingly.

From September 2021 to April 2022, a monitoring system captured 247.7 million messages across social media and news outlets to detect trending misinformation.

Influencers were regularly given updated prompts to include in their posts based on findings from this extensive monitoring.

3. Funding Sources:

The campaign was fully funded by the CDC/HHS and fell under a larger $25.66 million grant aimed at increasing vaccine equity.

While the project’s report detailed influencer involvement, it did not disclose the funding sources on the posts, which only mentioned El Beacon as the sponsoring entity.

4. Outreach and Impact:

The influencer network created over 1,000 posts with an estimated reach of 37.2 million people.

In addition to influencers, the campaign involved digital volunteers and developed materials for community organizations to promote accurate information.

5. Examples of Campaign Content:

Posts called for vaccination during pregnancy, presented stories of vaccinated families, and used terms like “completely safe” to describe the vaccines.

Engagement incentives included contests for $100 or $200 Amazon gift cards aimed at encouraging personal testimony about vaccination.

6. Unreported Associations:

The sponsorship disclosures in recovered posts failed to identify the CDC or HHS as the funding sources, misrepresenting the nature of the campaign to followers.

7. Questionable Claims:

Some messages contained inaccurate statistics about vaccination rates, with one post claiming an impossible “678%” vaccination rate for those over 5 years old.

8. Risky Messaging:

Ads used emotional appeals and high-stakes scenarios, such as focusing on children’s health and public safety, potentially generating fear among viewers if they remain unvaccinated.

The investigation revealed that the government utilized a network of social media influencers to promote COVID vaccinations, creating a highly structured campaign that emphasized emotional and family-oriented messaging. While the effort aimed to combat vaccine misinformation, the lack of transparency about funding sources and the nature of the influencer endorsements raises questions about the authenticity of the campaign. The collected data demonstrates the intricate methods used by federal agencies to influence public perception around vaccination during the pandemic.

https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/revealed-the-government-paid-hundreds?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3382126&post_id=211951563&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Lies, Damned Lies, And A $40 Tril. Debt

The national debt crisis, which has reached $40 trillion, and critiques mainstream media narratives surrounding the causes of this increase. It emphasizes that the narrative accusing tax cuts and military spending is misleading.

1. Misleading Media Narratives: Mainstream journalists are portrayed as focusing on wars in the Middle East and tax cuts as key reasons for the rising national debt, while ignoring the significant rise in federal spending over the years.

2. Federal Spending Growth: Federal spending has increased nearly 300% in the past 25 years. The editorial argues that this disproportionate growth in spending, rather than tax cuts or wars, is the real cause of the debt increase.

3. Tax Revenue Insights:

Federal revenues increased by 159% since 2000, and tax revenues as a share of GDP remain stable at around 17.4%, the same as the historical average from 1946 to 2000.

Tax cuts from Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump are claimed to have merely maintained revenues without causing significant shortfalls.

4. Spending Trends:

The average federal spending from 1946 to 2000 was 19% of GDP. The last budget surplus occurred when spending was below this average.

Spending since then has continued to escalate due in part to stimulus plans by Presidents Obama and Biden, which the editorial argues were unnecessary and contributed to sluggish economic growth.

5. Entitlement Programs: The expansion of entitlement programs under Obama and Biden has set a higher trajectory for federal spending, compounding the issue.

6. Bipartisan Spending: The commentary emphasizes that increased spending is not solely the fault of one political party, as both parties have contributed to the problem through bipartisan spending increases.

7. Proposed Solutions: The key solution suggested is to cut spending or at least moderate its growth so that it aligns with historic averages relative to GDP. This step is presented as essential to address the national debt effectively.

The editorial concludes by firmly stating that the current national debt crisis is primarily due to excessive spending, not just tax policies or military expenditures. The only viable path to resolve the debt issue is through significant reductions in spending, urging readers to understand this fundamental issue rather than accepting the misleading narratives often presented in the media. 

https://issuesinsights.com/2026/08/25/lies-damned-lies-and-a-40-t-debt/

WHO’s High-Price Pandemic Plan

The release of Anthony Fauci's diaries and his subsequent refusal to answer questions has revealed a significant divide in how public health authorities managed the Covid pandemic, highlighting issues of trust in official claims.

Fauci's private discussions indicated uncertainty among scientists about the Covid virus origins and health policies despite public assertions of confidence.

This uncertainty contributes to growing skepticism regarding public health institutions and their future pandemic plans.

The WHO and World Bank are proposing a $31.1 billion budget for pandemic preparedness, with significant contributions from struggling low and middle-income countries.

A recent article suggests that financial projections for pandemic investments are flawed, relying on questionable assumptions about health outcomes compared to other major diseases.

Current pandemic funding risks diverting resources from essential health areas like nutrition and sanitation, while international efforts are shifting focus to the pandemic agenda.

The WHO’s and World Bank’s recommendations are seen as lacking transparency and accountability, raising concerns among taxpayers about prioritization of funding in global health initiatives.

The Australian government and other entities face a crucial decision: either advocate for accountability and effective health funding or continue to support a flawed pandemic preparedness agenda that may not serve public health effectively. The call is for clearer prioritization in global health investments. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/whos-high-price-pandemic-plan/

Who’s Paying for Climate Reporting in the Mainstream Media?

The consistent views on climate change and energy issues, while highlighting the need for transparency in journalism regarding funding sources. They specifically criticize the evolving nature of news organizations, particularly the Associated Press (AP), in relation to biases and financial dependencies.

The writer emphasizes their connection to The Empowerment Alliance (TEA) and believes this relationship should be disclosed in their media appearances.

The AP, once a model of unbiased journalism, has shifted towards a more activist-driven approach, mirroring trends among other major news outlets over recent years.

A Pew Research Center study reveals that only 57% of Americans trust journalists to act in the public's best interest, with trust notably higher among Democrats than Republicans.

To survive financially, the AP relies on external funding for reporting, particularly in climate issues. This includes significant donations from the Walton Family Foundation, known for its environmental advocacy.

The AP claims editorial independence despite receiving large grants from organizations with specific agendas, raising concerns about biases in climate coverage.

The writer argues that readers should be aware of the funding sources behind news stories, as they may influence the reporting.

The reliance on external funding by news organizations, especially in climate reporting, warrants careful scrutiny from consumers. Awareness of these financial ties is crucial for understanding the potential biases in the information presented. Readers should always seek disclosures regarding such funding to make informed judgments. 

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2026/08/24/fair_question_whos_paying_for_climate_reporting_in_the_mainstream_media_1201315.html

Trump’s Canada Tariffs Aren’t the Betrayal Ottawa Claims

Recent trade negotiations between the U.S. and Canada have led to heightened tensions, with differing narratives emerging from the two nations regarding a breakdown in talks. This summary explores the complexities of the situation and its implications for U.S.-Canadian trade relations.

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney claims that the U.S. ambushed Canada during trade negotiations, portraying the U.S. stance as unfair. However, this perspective may overlook significant issues regarding trade asymmetry.

The U.S. has historically provided Canada with access to its large consumer market while Canada maintained protective measures, notably its dairy supply management system.

President Trump’s statement that Canada wants the benefits of statehood without the responsibilities reflects ongoing tensions regarding trade fairness.

The collapse of talks resulted from Canada rejecting terms it found undesirable, which U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer suggested were already agreed upon.

Canada’s refusal to dismantle its dairy tariffs, exceeding 200%, contrasts with the relatively smooth flow of Canadian goods into the U.S., indicating a significant imbalance.

Recent Canadian moves towards strengthening trade relations with China raise concerns in Washington, with the U.S. perceiving this as Canada playing both sides.

The trade conflict is likely to increase costs for consumers in both countries, disrupting established supply chains and impacting businesses.

The breakdown in negotiations highlights that alliances can withstand disagreements but may struggle if one partner misjudges the other's ongoing patience.

The current trade dispute signifies a complicated relationship where past tolerance of imbalanced trade practices is being challenged. Both sides may experience economic consequences as tensions persist, emphasizing the need for a strategic reevaluation of their trade dynamics. 

https://spectator.org/trumps-canada-tariffs-arent-the-betrayal-ottawa-claims/

Do Flock Cameras Actually Work?

New research by Ian Adams and Scott Mourtgos on the effectiveness of Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPRs) in reducing crime, particularly motor vehicle theft. The study aims to contribute to the ongoing debate about the technology's safety benefits versus potential privacy concerns.

1. Concerns Over ALPR Misuse: There has been significant backlash against ALPRs following various reports of police officers misusing the technology for personal reasons, revealing concerns about privacy and abuse of power.

2. Debate on Public Safety and Costs: Policymakers are debating whether the benefits in public safety provided by ALPRs justify their costs, both financial and in terms of privacy. Existing arguments are predominantly anecdotal, with both supporters and critics sharing stories rather than empirical evidence.

3. Study Findings:

The researchers conducted what they believe is the first rigorous study of ALPRs. Their findings suggest that ALPRs are linked to an 11% reduction in motor vehicle theft.

Their study analyzed the crime data from 216 law enforcement agencies before and after the deployment of ALPRs and compared it to 1,800 other agencies that did not use ALPRs.

Results indicate that in the year following the installation of ALPRs, logged vehicle thefts were significantly lower in the agencies that used them.

4. Mixed Results on Recovery Rates:

While the overall rate of vehicle recovery did not improve significantly, recovered vehicles were found approximately six hours faster, which can be seen as a positive impact of the technology.

Potential reasons for the slower overall recovery rate include the nature of how stolen vehicles are typically found and the limitations of the system.

5. Call for Regulations: The authors argue for the need for regulations regarding the use of ALPRs rather than outright bans. They suggest that audits of the technology's use should be mandatory to prevent misuse.

6. Need for External Audits: Current auditing practices are mainly internally driven, which may result in conflicts of interest. There are calls for an external auditing system, akin to those used for FBI databases, which would hold police departments accountable for how ALPR data is handled.

7. Actionable Recommendations:

Establish regular and mandatory audits of ALPR usage.

Implement limits on data retention and specify rules governing who can access the data and under what conditions.

Engage in ongoing community discussions on the balance between the benefits of crime reduction and the costs to privacy.

The research conducted by Adams and Mourtgos offers valuable insights into the impact of ALPRs on crime rates, specifically motor vehicle theft. While it provides evidence of their effectiveness, it highlights the need for careful consideration of the privacy implications and regulation of ALPR systems. The findings serve as a starting point for deeper discussions on how to best employ ALPR technology while safeguarding civil liberties.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/flock-cameras-automatic-license-plate-readers

Socialism vs. God, science and prosperity

 Robert Knight's commentary discusses the negative impacts of socialism and contrasts it with the positive contributions of Christianity and the free market to human progress. He argues that socialism, emerging during violent revolutions, has historically led to oppression, misery, and a rejection of the values that foster scientific and economic advancements.

1. Historical Context of Socialism:

Socialism originated during the French Revolution (1789) and was further developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in "The Communist Manifesto."

Knight argues that socialism was responsible for the tyranny exhibited by various leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, claiming it undermines Western civilization.

2. Free Market Contributions:

Knight attributes modern technological advancements such as electricity, modern medicine, and the internet to the free-market principles nurtured in the West, especially during the period known as Christendom.

He highlights that socialist regimes have historically failed to innovate and often resort to stealing technology from more prosperous nations.

3. Religion and Science:

The commentary emphasizes Christianity's role in shaping a predictable and discoverable universe that fostered scientific progress, as articulated by physicist Stanley J. Laki.

Knight suggests that other cultures, constrained by their theological views, were unable to develop science to the same extent.

4. Contrasts with Socialism:

Knight argues that socialism promotes divisive envy and undermines traditional values, whereas capitalism affirms individual rights and supports personal responsibility.

He critiques socialism's appeal to vice and its tendency to suppress independent thought and morality.

5. Moral Implications:

Knight claims that socialism leads to increased violence and societal breakdown, citing examples like recent riots and legislation perceived as promoting a culture of death (i.e., abortion).

He concludes that the welfare state and socialist policies lead people to blame others for their issues, rather than seeking personal growth and responsibility.

Knight calls for Americans to reject socialism and embrace the principles that have historically led to prosperity, supported by God-centered values. He warns against the dangers of socialism and urges a return to the foundations that promote human dignity, innovation, and moral integrity as essential for a flourishing society.

https://www.wnd.com/2026/08/socialism-vs-god-science-prosperity/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=socialism-vs-god-science-prosperity