Welcome to Regulator, your source for insights on the intersection of Big Tech and Washington (end of summer edition). If you find value in this, consider subscribing to receive weekly updates and more from Technology News.
Following the landmark Citizens United v. FEC decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted corporations free speech rights, wealthy Americans have increasingly sought ways to channel significant funds into politics. Although there are legal restrictions on direct contributions to candidates and political entities, these limitations are viewed by many as outdated. Innovative billionaires, particularly in the tech sector, have found creative methods to influence electoral outcomes by leveraging their financial resources.
While major tech donors often contribute to super PACs and advocacy groups, a new wave of influential figures has emerged. These individuals bring unique political perspectives to the table. For instance, Peter Thiel has played a key role in nurturing Republican candidates, influencing party acceptance of these figures, some of whom have now reached significant political heights. Mark Zuckerberg’s $350 million investment in voter access initiatives during the 2020 election highlighted his impact on electoral processes. Recently, Elon Musk has engaged deeply in free speech politics, purchasing Twitter and donating $300 million to pro-Trump efforts, dramatically influencing the political landscape.
However, there are indications that the political ambitions of individual tech billionaires may have limits. Thiel has distanced himself from political contributions, expressing fatigue from the Republican Party’s constant financial demands. Zuckerberg’s funding was turned against him by Trump, who accused Zuckerberg of manipulating resources to undermine his campaign. Musk, who once proposed a third party in response to Republican spending, has recently shifted focus to supporting potential 2028 presidential candidate J.D. Vance, abandoning earlier more radical ideas.
An intriguing dimension is added to the discussion with Donald Trump, who, as of 2024, could be considered a tech billionaire by virtue of his significant stake in the Trump Media and Technology Group, valued at over $4 billion before his return to the presidency. Trump’s brand has diversified into various tech-related ventures, including cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and now Trump Mobile. Each initiative seems to reflect the Trump family’s grasp on both political influence and profit-making opportunities.
Despite appearances, many of these ventures lack genuine profitability. The financial viability of Trump’s tech initiatives often correlates more closely to political capital than fundamental business metrics. A Trump associate once remarked that the Trump brand remains lucrative only as long as the Trump name retains power. Consequently, the Trump family has a vested interest in prolonging their political clout.
Nevertheless, traditional avenues of political engagement have not vanished; they have evolved. The latest significant development in political fundraising is the launch of Leading The Future (LTF), a $100 million initiative aimed at promoting candidates and policies that support artificial intelligence. This multifaceted financial operation combines elements typical of super PACs and advocacy groups, all with the objective of advancing AI-friendly leaders ahead of the upcoming 2026 midterm elections.
The funding for LTF has attracted contributions from notable tech magnates and firms, pledging a combined $100 million. Prominent donors include venture capital heavyweight Andreessen Horowitz, AI company Perplexity, and billionaire entrepreneurs such as Greg and Anna Brockman, Ron Conway, and Joe Lonsdale. More sponsors are expected to join this campaign in the near future.
The urgency behind this collective effort stems from increasing proposals for AI regulations across the country, alongside Congress’s struggles to establish effective laws to govern the technology. Nonetheless, despite the optimistic language surrounding innovation and progress, LTF fundamentally embodies the characteristics of traditional Washington lobbying groups advocating for business interests.
Shifting gears, here are some highlights from our reporting at Technology News this week…
This week in Technology News
“When the blade breaks.” Last summer, a massive wind turbine blade weighing 114,000 pounds fell into the Atlantic Ocean near Nantucket, creating environmental and political ripples that could threaten the renewable energy sector. Gabriella Burnham covers the implications of this event.
“Trump’s immigration crackdown could be hindering child predator investigations.” As the Trump administration emphasizes immigrant targeting, agents at Homeland Security report that cases involving child exploitation are suffering delays. Agent insights suggest that stretched resources limit their ability to manage multiple priorities effectively.
“Will Trump intervene to help 4chan evade UK regulations?” The U.S. State Department is threatening tariff increases against countries that penalize rightist American social media outlets. A legal representative for 4chan expresses hope that Trump can assist in their ongoing regulatory battles in the UK.
“I thought I wasn’t going to cover this administration on the phone beat.”
Reflecting on a chaotic day in June, I witnessed a flurry of messages about the launch of Trump Mobile overwhelming our communication channels at Technology News. The excitement among colleagues was palpable, with several assignments circulating as everyone scrambled to make sense of this unexpected announcement.
Having reported on Trump-related topics previously, I often sensed the fast-cash allure of family businesses. However, the rationale behind Trump Mobile perplexed me, leading to a desperate plea for insight from our technology reviewer, Allison Johnson. “It’s amusing how swiftly I became involved in covering this administration again,” she remarked, alluding to the unpredictable nature of this beat.
This interview has been condensed for clarity.
Tina: I’m noticing comparisons between Trump Mobile and Ryan Reynolds’ Mint Mobile. Can you clarify this?
Allison: Ryan Reynolds was a co-owner of Mint Mobile but later sold his share. He remains a prominent face in their marketing. While I’m unsure about his specific marketing role, he contributed significantly to making Mint Mobile appealing and approachable for new customers unfamiliar with mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs), a category that also includes Trump Mobile.
Are there other celebrity-branded phone services that fit this model?
Yes, the hosts of the SmartLess podcast have launched their wireless service as well.
Really?
Absolutely. It’s an unexpected trend.
What about hardware? Are there specific claims regarding Trump Mobile devices being reskinned or unique?
I’m not aware of any exclusive Trump Mobile products yet. Most celebrity-branded phone services tend to market existing devices rather than developing new hardware. There are substantial challenges and costs involved in launching a unique phone brand, which explains why many prefer simpler business models.
In your opinion, would you recommend this phone or plan to potential customers?
As of now, the phone hasn’t been launched, so it’s difficult to provide a recommendation. If it does launch, I would expect it to be a standard mid-range Android device. While it may function adequately, it probably won’t have cutting-edge specs.
The service itself utilizes infrastructure from Liberty Mobile, connecting to T-Mobile networks. The model doesn’t present any groundbreaking innovations, and potential customers should consider privacy concerns associated with sharing their information.
Is Liberty Mobile aligned with MAGA principles?
It seems so. It’s headquartered in Florida and appears to promote themes of personal freedom.
In fact, I found that Liberty Mobile is based out of a luxury apartment in Trump Tower in Miami.
(Laughs) That adds to the suspicions we had. I would hesitate to share my credit card information with such a company.
Are MVNOs typically launched from unconventional locations?
Not that I know of. Many are small businesses aiming to serve niche markets, often by tailoring their services to specific communities.
There’s a trend that companies engaging with the Trump family could be benefiting from proximity to them.
That’s a curious situation.
Lastly, how feasible is it for Trump Mobile to become profitable?
The model seems straightforward in theory. Key factors include maintaining a good relationship with the underlying wireless provider, attracting adequate subscribers, and managing marketing costs. Since they don’t need to invest in infrastructure, their operational complexity is reduced.
And now, for Recess.
One of the reasons I cherish my time at Technology News is the opportunity to express my excitement for the upcoming new Katamari Damacy game for Nintendo Switch. Although I’m a bit late to the party, my nostalgia for the original PS2 version drives my enthusiasm for its soundtrack and visuals.
Exciting times ahead!
4 Comments
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
