Politics

Beyond the megadonors, Silicon Valley is still stingy about donating to politicians

The tech industry has minted some of the wealthiest people in the world in record time. But many of them are still reluctant to get in the arena.

Beyond the megadonors, Silicon Valley is still stingy about donating to politicians

Despite the industry's enormous wealth, Big Tech is still giving relatively small amounts to politicians, compared to other industries.

Image: Getty Images

Silicon Valley has minted some of the world's wealthiest people in record time. But compared to other industries, a new analysis by Protocol shows, a relatively small slice of that wealth is being spent on the 2020 election. While the past decade has made millionaires and billionaires of loads of tech founders and Big Tech leaders, most of them remain deeply reluctant to donate to politicians.

"My read, as a member of the tech community, is that we have significantly large percentages of our community who have the ability to give to campaigns who just aren't," former Pete Buttigieg national investment chair Swati Mylavarapu told Protocol this spring. Mylavarapu and her husband, Matt Rogers, the co-founder of Nest, committed to giving $2 million to political campaigns before July 2020. "If you look at the subset of people who are actually hosting fundraisers and making contributions, it's a surprisingly small percentage," she said.

Sure, Big Tech's political megadonors have spent lavishly on Democratic campaigns this election cycle. According to a recent count by Recode, the top 15 donors who have made their money from tech have given a whopping $120 million in federal campaign contributions over the last two years. And contributions across the industry are growing substantially compared to elections past. But look beyond the shortlist of megadonors — beyond the Karla Jurvetsons and Dustin Moskovitzes and Reid Hoffmans — and Silicon Valley's contributions to politicians, particularly the ones running for president, begin to look stingy compared to other industries.

A recent Forbes analysis of U.S. billionaire contributions to Trump and Biden found that tech billionaires are both outnumbered and outspent by billionaires from the financial sector. That's despite the fact that eight of the top 10 richest people in America made their money from tech.

According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, among the top 20 donors to all federal campaigns and committees this cycle, only two — Jurvetson and Moskovitz — made their money from the tech industry. (Three if you count Michael Bloomberg, which we are not.)

These figures don't include contributions to dark money groups, but are telling nonetheless. And remember that when tech founders got rich, from Facebook or Google or Microsoft or PayPal, they weren't alone: In lots of cases, a swath of early investors and employees got rich, too. But according to data from The Center for Responsive Politics on total donations to the 2020 presidential race by sector, donors from the tech industry don't even make it into the top 10.

Those numbers don't include contributions to down-ballot races and can, of course, be skewed by a single individual like Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate and Republican megadonor who consistently puts the casino industry on the map.

Tech companies are similarly scant when the data is sliced to show top donors by organization. The Center for Responsive Politics tracks donations both from corporate PACs and from individuals who work at those companies, which means it would include not just the megarich CEOs and founders of big tech companies, but all of their employees, too. Even so, according to the figures, the only tech company among the top 20 organizational donors this cycle was Alphabet, which clocked in at No. 14. Only two others — Microsoft and Amazon — even make it into the top 50.

Protocol also recently analyzed the biggest donors at Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and found that not only had none of the companies' CEOs made large donations to candidates this cycle, but the average size of the top donors' biggest checks was just over $183,000 — sizable, but far short of the seven-figure checks that the largest donors are writing.

"There are a large number of uber-wealthy people who just don't want to get hit," said one top Democratic fundraiser who asked to remain anonymous. "For them to have such large checks under their name would put their companies needlessly in harm's way by the Republicans. There's no point."

Silicon Valley wealth extends far beyond the big five companies, of course. The past decade has made billionaires of dozens of founders whose companies either sold or went public, but many of them are also hesitant to donate to politicians. Protocol compared Federal Election Commission records to data on the top 20 U.S. venture-backed tech exits of the last decade provided by PitchBook and found stark differences between founder-CEOs and founders who have moved on or taken on less public roles within their companies.

Case in point: While Mark Zuckerberg has focused his political giving on ballot measures and election preparedness this year, his Facebook co-founders Moskovitz, Chris Hughes and Andrew McCollum have spent big supporting Biden and other Democrats. Moskovitz, in particular, has spent some $24 million up and down the ballot this cycle.

It's similar across the sector. While Twitter's Jack Dorsey contributed small amounts during the Democratic primary, his Twitter co-founder, Evan Williams, who now heads up Medium, has written a $250,000 check to the Biden Victory Fund. At Palantir, CEO Alex Karp has contributed $2,800 to Biden's campaign. His co-founder, Republican megadonor Peter Thiel, meanwhile gave $850,000 to a committee supporting Kris Kobach's Kansas senate primary race.

Two notable exceptions: Lyft President John Zimmer and CEO Logan Green together contributed $100,000 to the Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic group, and wrote smaller checks to dozens of other campaigns.

Concerns about appearing overly partisan at a moment when the president himself claims to be running against Big Tech are definitely standing in the way of some tech execs. But beyond the impact that donating can have on their reputations, tech donors often also prefer to have more control over how their money gets spent, according to the Democratic fundraiser. That can sometimes lead them to make bigger bets on, say, political tech companies, like Alloy, a Democratic data firm that LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman and former U.S. Chief Technology Officer Todd Park funded to the tune of $35 million. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has also reportedly funded 20 political startups through an outfit called OneOne Ventures.

Raffi Krikorian, a former Uber and Twitter exec and current managing director of The Emerson Collective, a philanthropic group funded by Laurene Powell Jobs, says an equally big barrier to political donating in Silicon Valley is a lack of education. Newly wealthy techies, he says, often don't want to align themselves with one candidate or another and prefer to donate to causes that are either nonpartisan or that don't have to disclose their donors. "I've had to get on the phone with people this cycle to say […] 'You don't just have to give money to candidates. There's other places you can give your money to make a difference this cycle,'" Krikorian said. "They just didn't know this is the case."

Krikorian added: "Then you've got the Coinbases of the world, who are asshats."

While the pool of political donors in tech is still relatively small, there are clear signs it is growing. As Recode noted, the top 15 tech donors this year had given only $7 million in collective federal political contributions prior to 2016. But that election changed everything. "Trump is as anti-Silicon Valley thinking as there could ever be a politician," the Democratic fundraiser said. "There was a visceral negative response to Trump once he won."

Silicon Valley is beginning to catch up on the political money race, in other words. But it's still got a long way to go.

Google’s latest plans for Chromecast are all about free TV

The company is in talks to add dozens of free linear channels to its newest streaming dongle.

Google launched its new Google TV service a year ago. Now, the company wants to add free TV channels to it.

Photo: Google

Google is looking to make its Chromecast streaming device more appealing to cord cutters. The company has plans to add free TV channels to Google TV, the Android-based smart TV platform that powers Chromecast as well as select smart TVs from companies including Sony and TCL, Protocol has learned.

To achieve this, Google has held talks with companies distributing so-called FAST (free, ad-supported streaming television) channels, according to multiple industry insiders. These channels have the look and feel of traditional linear TV networks, complete with ad breaks and on-screen graphics. Free streaming channels could launch on Google TV as early as this fall, but the company may also wait to announce the initiative in conjunction with its smart TV partners in early 2022.

Keep Reading Show less
Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.

While it's easy to get lost in the operational and technical side of a transaction, it's important to remember the third component of a payment. That is, the human behind the screen.

Over the last two years, many retailers have seen the benefit of investing in new, flexible payments. Ones that reflect the changing lifestyles of younger spenders, who are increasingly holding onto their cash — despite reports to the contrary. This means it's more important than ever for merchants to take note of the latest payment innovations so they can tap into the savings of the COVID-19 generation.

Keep Reading Show less
Antoine Nougue,Checkout.com

Antoine Nougue is Head of Europe at Checkout.com. He works with ambitious enterprise businesses to help them scale and grow their operations through payment processing services. He is responsible for leading the European sales, customer success, engineering & implementation teams and is based out of London, U.K.

Protocol | Policy

Iris scans for food in Jordanian refugee camps

More than 80% of the refugees in Jordanian camps now use iris scans to pay for their groceries. Refugee advocates say this is a huge future privacy problem.

A refugee uses their iris to access their account.

Photo: KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP via Getty Images

Every day, tens of thousands of refugees in the two main camps in Jordan pay for their groceries and withdraw their cash not with a card, but with a scan of their eye.

Nowhere in the United States can someone pay for groceries with an iris scan (though the Department of Homeland Security is considering collecting iris scans from U.S. immigrants, and Clear uses iris scans to verify identities for paying customers at airports) — but in the Jordanian refugee camps, biometric scanners are an everyday sight at grocery stores and ATMs. More than 80% of the 33,000-plus refugees who receive cash assistance and (most of them Syrian) and live in these camps use the United Nations' Refugee Agency iris-scanning system, which verifies identity through eye scans in order to distribute cash and food refugee assistance. Refugees can opt out of the program, but verifying identity without it is so complex that most do not.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email: akramer@protocol.com), where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Protocol | China

Weibo is muzzling users for discussing a landmark #metoo case

A number of accounts have been suspended, even deleted, after voicing support for the plaintiff.

Photo: Photo by Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

As a Beijing court dismissed China's landmark sexual harassment case on Tuesday, Weibo censors acted to muzzle a number of accounts that voiced support for the accuser, or even simply discussed the trial beforehand.

In 2018, the plaintiff Zhou Xiaoxuan, better known by the nickname Xianzi, filed a high-profile #MeToo case against Zhu Jun, a renowned state broadcast show host. Zhou claimed that Zhu sexually harassed her while she was an intern on Zhu's show in 2014. Chinese web users have closely followed the civil suit, which has also drawn international media attention.

Keep Reading Show less
Shen Lu

Shen Lu is a reporter with Protocol | China. Her writing has appeared in Foreign Policy, The New York Times and POLITICO, among other publications. She can be reached at shenlu@protocol.com.

Protocol | Enterprise

Take that, Slack: ServiceNow gets a little closer to Microsoft Teams

ServiceNow is expanding its decade-long partnership with Microsoft as both companies intensify their rivalry with Salesforce.

Microsoft and ServiceNow's "coopetition" is aimed at a higher goal: undermining Salesforce, which is fast becoming the main rival for both vendors.

Photo: Uwe Anspach/Getty Images

For ServiceNow, Microsoft is the lesser of two evils compared to Salesforce.

After ditching Slack for Teams following the Salesforce acquisition, ServiceNow is deepening its decade-long partnership with Microsoft, promising co-development of new products and fresh integration capabilities within Teams, it plans to announce Thursday.

Keep Reading Show less
Joe Williams

Joe Williams is a senior reporter at Protocol covering enterprise software, including industry giants like Salesforce, Microsoft, IBM and Oracle. He previously covered emerging technology for Business Insider. Joe can be reached at JWilliams@Protocol.com. To share information confidentially, he can also be contacted on a non-work device via Signal (+1-309-265-6120) or JPW53189@protonmail.com.

Latest Stories