Josh Greene, a 26-year-old progressive social media influencer with nearly 800,000 followers, has emerged as a notable figure in the current U.S. election cycle by endorsing and promoting various political candidates. Operating mainly on platforms like TikTok, Greene has publicly supported numerous progressive candidates in midterm races, from local contests to high-profile Democratic primaries. However, investigations into campaign finance disclosures have revealed that Greene has been paid by at least seven political campaigns or affiliated groups this cycle, including a super PAC backing Senate nominee Dr. Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan and former California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer, who paid him $21,500.

Greene and others like him highlight a rapidly growing trend where political campaigns increasingly rely on social media influencers to engage younger and more digitally connected voters. These endorsements often come at a lower cost than traditional advertising channels. Still, the practice exists in a largely unregulated space, as federal election law has yet to address or clarify requirements for disclosure when influencers receive compensation for political promotion.

While Greene acknowledges receiving payment for endorsements, he states that he only accepts funds from candidates whose platforms align with his values and calls for clearer rules around transparency. “If anything, we do need more clear transparency laws so that creators like myself aren’t confused,” Greene said.

The use of paid influencers spans the political spectrum. On the Republican side, Representative Barry Moore of Alabama filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging paid social media accounts were used to attack him during a primary. Similarly, in Texas and Kentucky, campaigns have engaged networks of social media personalities who promote candidates without openly disclosing financial ties.

California’s recent gubernatorial primary illuminated these concerns most sharply. Campaign finance filings show that Steyer’s campaign paid at least 17 influencers $5,000 or more each — among them Carlos Eduardo Espina, a TikTok creator with over 14 million followers who received a recorded $400,000. Former Representative Katie Porter’s campaign paid 12 influencers at least $139,500, including $25,000 for a single post by TikTok personality Avery Cyrus. Despite California’s legal requirement that paid political posts disclose sponsorship, many posts either failed to include clear disclosures or relegated them to hidden comment sections on TikTok.

The platforms themselves complicate compliance. TikTok’s terms prohibit paid political advertising altogether, which prompts campaigns and influencers to employ creative disclosure methods, often placing disclaimers in less visible areas. Some campaigns contract intermediary digital marketing firms that pay multiple lesser-known creators to saturate social media with political messaging, raising further challenges in tracing funding and enforcing transparency. For instance, a Kansas City-based creator, Paige Dunmeyer, posted paid content across multiple states for various Democratic campaigns through a company called SideShift, which encourages creator payment but advises compliance with disclosure laws.

Only four states currently mandate influencers reveal payment for political endorsements, and these rules apply mostly to state and local races, not federal contests. At the federal level, the FEC has so far refrained from issuing formal guidance on the matter. The Federal Trade Commission requires disclosure for paid commercial content but exempts political advertising, leaving a regulatory gap.

In response, Representative Mark Takano, a Democrat from California, introduced legislation intended to require social media creators paid by campaigns or political committees to disclose such payments visibly, similar to requirements for traditional campaign ads. Takano cited the California governor’s race controversy and emphasized the importance of transparency to maintain public trust: “It’s unfair when an influencer is allowed to be silent or not transparent about money they’re taking from a candidate, making it seem like what they’re saying is authentic and not influenced by money.”

Campaign officials defend their practices as compliant with current laws and point to publicly available reports detailing expenditures, particularly in states with more rigorous transparency requirements. Steyer’s campaign, for example, stated that every dollar spent is publicly disclosed and noted the complexity of their spending, which often involves multiple subcontractors and digital firms managing influencer payments.

As influencer-driven political promotion continues to expand, questions remain about the adequacy of existing regulations and the potential impact on voter perception, with advocates and legal experts calling for clearer rules to ensure that audiences can distinguish between genuine endorsements and paid advocacy.