Post

ryan cooper
@ryanlcooper.com

it also makes that Chorus thing look a lot better. according to her, they *are* doing a lot of the talent pipeline and backend stuff that I mentioned earlier, it's not at all secret, and they *aren't* exercising an iron grip on what the creators say bsky.app/profile/ryan...

ryan cooper@ryanlcooper.com

I think paying established influencers would likely work okay, though I'd like to see more of a talent development pipeline rather than buying up big accounts. trying to keep it secret and attaching all kinds of conditions, though, not so smart, because it's going to leak and discredit them

ryan cooper
@ryanlcooper.com

Brian Tyler Cohen, who founded Chorus, categorically denies that it forbids people from mentioning membership or controls their content www.instagram.com/briantylerco...

instagram.comBrian Tyler Cohen on Instagram: "Some people have questions about the creator scholarship program I cofounded, Chorus, so let’s talk about it"8,285 likes, 569 comments - briantylercohen on August 28, 2025: "Some people have questions about the creator scholarship program I cofounded, Chorus, so let’s talk about it".
ryan cooper
@ryanlcooper.com

here we go. Wired alleges that the contract says Chorus members can't *disclose* the relationship without permission, but what it actually says is *publicize.* not the same thing!

16 reposts140 likes

Longhair 🇨🇦
@longhair.bsky.social

What's funny to me is that everyone is going after Lorenz directly. Wired have solid credibility, and there's no way they ran this without thorough vetting AND having their lawyers verify it. So are they lying? And if so, why are there no retractions and no talk of suing them?

Neovagina Evangelion
@gammarae.design

If you can't publicize it, doesn't it functionally prevent disclosure from...a pundit contract? And equally there is the "disclose" word explicitly used with regards to "The Funder" identity. I'm not sure how Wired is necessarily wrong here...

ryan cooper
@ryanlcooper.com

and I suspect this explains the rest of it. nonprofits always have this kind of legal boilerplate bsky.app/profile/book...

zoot car@bookhouse.bsky.social

I think the non-disclosure thing is a serious own-goal by Chorus. But this is the sum total of detail provided by the article on "content control" - there's a clear throughline here, that the restrictions are around voting & campaigns. Notably these are also the legal red lines around 501c4 funding

Teeklin
@teeklin.bsky.social

It isn't the same thing, but it also has zero meaningful distinction to the story "You can tell your wife but you can't tell the public" uh, yeah, way better? And it's telling that the "source" you cite to refute that is a social media post by someone literally being paid by Chorus

Aozora
@aozorasf.bsky.social

It would be good to get a copy of the entire contract to see if it defines these terms, but I think that in this world publicize would mean putting a Chorus badge all over your website while disclose is not as overt.

ryan cooper
@ryanlcooper.com

I read it as making content specifically about the Chorus relationship, as opposed to mentioning it in a disclosure section. hence why it actually does say you can't disclose the identity of funders later on

Peter Sterne
@petersterne.com

Maybe, but in my experience, when someone says "you can't publicize this information" they mean that you're not allowed to make that information public. So I think publicly acknowledging the relationship could still be considered "publicizing" it and get creators in trouble.