A look at the network of group chats that surged in 2020 as a place where Silicon Valley leaders allied with the new right, revolving around Marc Andreessen

THE SCOOP — Last Thursday morning, a bit before 10 am in Austin and nearly 11 pm in Singapore, Joe Lonsdale had enough of Balaji Srinivasan's views on China.

Semafor 2025-04-28 Ben Smith

Context & Ripple Effects

The reporting adds private-chat infrastructure to Marc Andreessen’s publicly documented political shift, following his account of moving from Democratic politics toward Trump support. It also extends a 2020 record in which tech figures used semi-private online venues to coordinate responses to critical press coverage, including the Clubhouse and Twitter backlash against journalists.

The disclosed exchange between Joe Lonsdale and Balaji Srinivasan shows that this network was a forum for internal disagreement as well as alignment, including over China.

First-order effects

Andreessen, Lonsdale, and Srinivasan face greater scrutiny of how private conversations among influential tech leaders intersect with their public political positioning.
The account makes visible that new-right tech alignment was networked rather than uniform: China-related views could generate open friction inside the same circle.

Second-order effects

Journalists, political actors, and business counterparts can more readily assess informal relationships that may precede public endorsements, policy advocacy, or coordinated messaging.
Participants in similar invite-only groups may face stronger incentives to separate personal debate from conversations that could be read as political coordination.

Third-order effects

If such networks remain central, political influence in technology may increasingly run through small, trust-based communication circles rather than only firms, trade groups, or public platforms.
The pattern points to a blurrier boundary between investor networks and political networks, though this reporting alone does not establish that the chats produced specific policy or business outcomes.

The trend: Private founder-and-investor networks are becoming a more visible layer of technology’s political realignment and geopolitical debate.

Discussion

@leahmcelrath Leah McElrath on bluesky
We knew the COVID pandemic changed things, but we did not know the role of the tech mogul/right-wing propagandist/journalist encrypted and often disappearing-message group chats in those changes. — Until now. — Worth reading to understand better how we got here: — www.semaf…
@ryanlcooper.com Ryan Cooper on bluesky
a lot of things falling into place reading this piece www.semafor.com/article/04/2... [image]
@sethcotlar Seth Cotlar on bluesky
So basically, the reactionary right wing & centrist elites whose identities are based on the idea that “the left” is a conspiratorial borg that coordinates its messaging and targets, have a group chat in which they coordinate their messaging and targets. How shocking. www.semafo…
@nicholasgrossman Nicholas Grossman on bluesky
A lot of what social media algorithms, professional media, pundits, and political consultants insist “everyone” thinks is actually what a small, aggrieved group of people inside a tight information bubble tell each other everyone thinks.
@harikunzru Hari Kunzru on bluesky
Observations on SV billionaire group chat - unsurprised that Andreessen is a degenerate poster shifting conversation rightward - when I was researching Red Pill 2015-16 I was looking at a lot of NrX / r/acc accounts ... www.semafor.com/article/04/2...
@claireconnelly Claire Connelly on bluesky
'Rufo had been there all along: “I looked at these chats as a good investment of my time to radicalize tech elites who I thought were the most likely and high-impact new coalition partners for the right.” www.semafor.com/article/04/2... [embedded post]
@jonathanfriedman.com Jonathan Friedman on bluesky
Read the whole crazy thing, including @semaforben.bsky.social's view at the end. This snippet on groupthink and the impact on the public sphere is key www.semafor.com/article/04/2... [image]
@nathantankus Nathan Tankus on bluesky
What is most interesting in this article is that it illustrates both that “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” & that a bunch of cowards who wouldn't openly say they disagreed drove themselves insane during the early years of Covid — www.semafor.com/a…
@tomscocca Tom Scocca on bluesky
Amazing how David Sacks is clearly and reliably always the worst guy in a collection of the most terrible guys in the world, it's like watching Usain Bolt run the 100 but for Being an Asshole [embedded post]
@esqueer.net Alejandra Caraballo on bluesky
So basically there's a cabal of billionaire broligarchs, far right propagandists, and reactionary centrist journalists all on group chats radicalizing together and exerting coordinated narratives and influence on media and politics — www.semafor.com/article/04/2...
@evanurquhart Evan Urquhart on bluesky
Interesting that the story says the chats were created so elites could freely share views that would be censored on Twitter but, apart from the briefest of references to tech guys' annoyance with Black Lives Matter and trans rights we're just supposed to intuit what those views a…
@aaronhuertas Aaron Huertas on bluesky
Every time I see a Democratic member of Congress say something like we need to apologize for COVID lockdowns or we need to placate right wingers on trans rights, I'm just going to assume they're in a bunch of weird group chats with conservative tech bros. — www.semafor.com/arti…
@wafoli Jane Natoli on bluesky
They don't want free speech, they want freedom from consequences for said speech...like, sorry I think people should be able to say when you are full of shit! www.semafor.com/article/04/2... [image]
@cgallaher Carolyn Gallaher on bluesky
So many observations about this Semafor piece. — 1. People on the chat w/ Andreessen were amazed that he was always chatting. How did he have the time, they asked? My guess - Really rich guy syndrome. You pay someone to do ur work for you (at work & at home) and you too can …
@reckless Nilay Patel on bluesky
These geniuses built themselves a smoke-filled room without cigars and booze www.semafor.com/article/04/2...
@nathalievanraemdonck.com Nathalie Van Raemdonck on bluesky
I've always wondered where the 1% come to their consensus, couldn't just be X, makes sense they opt for Bounded Social Media Spaces like Whatsapp or Signal as they claim they have to go private in “a soft authoritarian age of social media shaming and censorship” — www.semafor.c…
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on bluesky
There are some eye-opening anecdotes in this story. I knew private Signal chats were big, but the bit about the Harpers Letter people is hilarious. When it came out, I had called out how some in the group were using others as human shields, and that seems clear from this... [e…
@twesq @twesq on bluesky
An utterly infuriating article about horrible people written by an obsequious dilettante. Author uses Thomas Chatterton Williams and Noah Smith for expert analysis quotes, both incredible morons themselves. www.semafor.com/article/04/2...
@kyledchurch Kyle on bluesky
Ben Horowitz of Andreesson Horowitz (whose business partner these conversations “primarily revolve around") met with Luxon in September 2024 and, as far as I'm aware, the NZ public STILL doesn't know what was discussed. — It is almost 100% the case NZ's rightwing also act like …
@hunterwalk.com @hunterwalk.com on bluesky
@mmasnick.bsky.social aren't things like this just huge risk factors during any litigation discovery? Like “don't put anything in email”? [embedded post]
@gaberivera Gabe Rivera on bluesky
Fun read on the hidden role of these chats, even if the prevailing ideas emerging from them still ended up posted in public by the participants...and even though Trump's election mainly hinged on factors like inflation and not who rich tech guys publicly supported. [embedded pos…
@donmoyn Don Moynihan on bluesky
Holy shit, when Richard Hanania is not far enough right for you. Would love to hear what US Senators and prominent bloggers doing appearances with Andreessen think. [image]
@protecttruth Eric Blair on bluesky
This is wild! ‼️ — “Chatham House, a giant and raucous Signal group...fueled a new alliance of tech and the US right. ... Lonsdale and the billionaire Mark Cuban sparred over affirmative action, and Cuban and Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro discussed...”
@donmoyn Don Moynihan on bluesky
So basically, there was a Signal chat with tech folks and some Harpers Letter writers, and the Harpers folk were chased out when Andreessen realized they would not go along with censorship. But the tech guys stuck with Chris Rufo. www.semafor.com/article/04/2... [images]
@originalist @originalist on bluesky
Leaked from way before the pandemic: “Thanks re 1488,” — “Please don't forward chains like that showing the sausage being made,” Yiannopoulos wrote back. “Everyone knows; but they don't have to be reminded” — White supremacist about Peter Thiel: — “He's fully enlightened, …
@peark.es George Pearkes on bluesky
Lots of stuff to pick at here but I'm struck by how much this story is just about one egg-like man's descent into radicalization and then his effort to drag as many fellow elites with him as he can.
@anildash.com Anil Dash on bluesky
They have been doing this for years, and this is how they radicalized themselves into deeply paranoid radical fascists completely detached from consensus reality, who routinely say insane things and pour their billions into attacking innocents. [embedded post]
@jamellebouie.net Jamelle on bluesky
the reason why these people believe in “the woke mind virus” and think of others as “NPCs” is because they have literally fried their brains in private group chats with people who share the same half dozen opinions [embedded post]
@greene.haus Greg Greene on bluesky
“It's much healthier to live in a society in which people are literally not scared of what they're saying,” Andreessen said: dude, a woman has spent weeks having asthma attacks in a detention center in Louisiana because she wrote _one_ (1!) op-ed for the paper at Tufts.
@davidklion David Klion on bluesky
While there are tons of specific details that are new to me, it's been clear since at least the pandemic that the big names on Twitter spend a lot more time talking to each other in private groups; some people are especially obvious about it. Not just on the right, either!
@davidklion David Klion on bluesky
Lots of great details in @semaforben.bsky.social's latest; extremely helpful for mapping out who is influencing whom on the right. Have been thinking for a while that private groupchats are at least as crazymaking as public social media, and much harder to study.
@balajis Balaji on x
The only thing journos do these days is write about group chats. In fact there's actually a journo writing about one right now. It's Ben Smith, the guy who published the fake Steele Dossier. He's writing about a 300+ person group chat that I sometimes post in, along with a bunch …
@mikeisaac Rat King on x
feel like the “MSM is bad” elite are gonna have to figure out a different way of frontrunning stories b/c this wasnt on my radar at all until they breathlessly warned abt it imo wasnt even that critical of them in the way they portrayed it, just an interesting look inside [image]
@levie Aaron Levie on x
@TossitRambles @balajis If the journalist is in the chat then it's an issue. If they're not then the issue here is with the leaker not the journalist.
@benryanwriter Benjamin Ryan on x
So it was a shadowy right-wing group chat that germinated the widespread distaste for Taylor Lorenz? [image]
@hissgoescobra John Jackson on x
Fascinating read, and it includes David Sacks getting mad and leaving the chat, which I enjoyed. Highly recommended. https://www.semafor.com/...
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
The central figure in this network is a16z's Marc Andressen. In 2020, a16z's @sriramk (now the White House AI adviser) set up an elite tech chat called “Build"for Andreessen, then dozens more in tech verticals. Other chats were more political, including some Signal chats
@richardhanania Richard Hanania on x
@Austen I wasn't even in that chat. I put my name to what I said in that article. I don't feel the need to hide or to make things up when I don't know what I'm talking about it, unlike you apparently.
@jordanschnyc Jordan Schneider on x
technology has self-lobotomized us [image]
@jtlonsdale Joe Lonsdale on x
@balajis Balaji and I have been friends for 20 years and we will always be on the same side against communists and lefty journalists (but I repeat myself).
@kathyf @kathyf on x
“The very pinnacle of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is posting” lol
@bigmeaninternet Malcolm Harris on x
Can't put my finger on what I don't like about the group chat form in general. I do think it's funny that these guys think we don't assume they're in group chats together https://www.semafor.com/...
@ktmboyle Katherine Boyle on x
Group chats are a relic of another era where friends could spar without worry. Where you could debate and work through complex ideas in a way that allows every corner of the argument to emerge. The good faith debate is healthy, and it's the 21st century model of this. Its
@nicknotned Nick Denton on x
@semaforben That's the most fascinating media story of the last few years. Explains so much. Especially, answers the question: where is Marc Andreessen? I like the characterization of these chats as the “dark matter” of US policy. Must be very tempting to trade on the info.
@taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x
Reading @semaforben's new blockbuster story and getting a jump scare at my name 😵‍💫. I don't even cover this man! https://www.semafor.com/... [image]
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
Don't quite see what the problem is here, or why he assumes I think his texts are a scandal, but appreciate the coming attractions plug [image]
@lessin @lessin on x
@levie ... i am not 100% sure but i am 99% sure that Ben isn't and hasn't ever been in the group. but it is quite large & generally the chatham house thing doesn't scale -/ especially digitally. trusting that it would / a group like that with things you don't want out seems like …
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
@JTLonsdale @balajis I genuinely don't understand why you're engaging this way with a polite request that goes out of its way to say that I don't think those texts reflect anything you wouldn't say in public, and inquires about an influential thing you've been part of. I guess - …
@richardhanania Richard Hanania on x
These guys have all the money in the world and their lives center around gossiping in chats all day and trying to impress anonymous racists. I wasn't even in the chat he's talking about, but I was quoted elsewhere in that article by name, which he would know if he read it.
@evanoconnell Evan O'Connell on x
I feel group chats on apps started earlier in 🇪🇺 because iPhones were less dominant (and there's no “green text bubble” stigma here) so we were on WhatsApp and Signal before 🇺🇸. But this is a good piece on Silicon Valley group chats: https://www.semafor.com/... via @semaforben
@tvietor08 Tommy Vietor on x
Had to read @semaforben's story and confirm this was real. Just perfect. [image]
@zichenwanghere Zichen Wang on x
“There's a big China-friendly group over on WeChat.” https://www.semafor.com/...
@bmeiselas Brett Meiselas on x
So you're telling me a small group of billionaire elites—let's call them a cabal—is coordinating through Signal chats to secretly control narratives and manipulate public opinion behind the scenes? Interesting.
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
I hope you'll check out my story tonight on the sprawling, private network of group chats that began in 2020 as a place for Silicon Valley leaders to talk candidly, away from progressive-leaning social media, and are now the dark matter that shapes American media and politics.
@antoniogm Antonio García Martínez on x
[image]
@richardhanania Richard Hanania on x
Good story on the history of groupchats, including one I was involved in, and how they radicalized Silicon Valley types. I ultimately came to find the dynamic unhealthy and now just say the things I want to say here.
@silvermanjacob Jacob Silverman on x
They don't know how journalism works and consider any questions about their activities or influence to be a personal outrage. That's why they publicly freak out whenever they get a question in their inbox from a prominent reporter. https://www.jacobsilverman.com/ ...
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
The last/biggest group is Chatham House, and the story includes some of the texture of that — in part, a forum for arguing with @mcuban — and the new strains amid growing skepticism of Trump, which led to David Sacks' outburst. [image]
@jefflonsdale Jeff Lonsdale on x
@eigenrobot The main takeaway from this article is that Hanania is a snake who is willing to talk to journalists about the group chats he was in.
@richardhanania Richard Hanania on x
He's now blatantly lying about what he said. Saving in case he deletes, but the decent thing would be to admit he's wrong and apologize. [image]
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
Sidebar: Nobody can believe how much time Andreessen spends on the chats: [image]
@teddyschleifer Teddy Schleifer on x
The Silicon Valley rightward shift that I cover is really a story about a group chat meeting a super PAC. From @semaforben https://www.semafor.com/...
@jessicalessin Jessica Lessin on x
This is a very good @semafor story. https://www.semafor.com/... And related to this from @abebrown716 @srimuppidi : https://www.theinformation.com/ ...
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
One chat include Harpers Letter liberals like Thomas Chatterton Williams. That one blew up in 2021 when he and Kmele Foster published an oped critical of the right's efforts to crack down on teaching critical race theory.
@oyhsu Oliver Hsu on x
@KTmBoyle My sense is that group chats playing this role is a distinctly millennial phenomenon, produced by particular set of cultural circumstances where ‘good faith debate’ is (1) valued and (2) difficult in public forums. Gen X had more public forums for debate, and Gen Z gene…
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
Andreessen in 2022 asked @RichardHanania to set up a group with smart conservatives, where Hanania says he saw Andreessen radicalize; Andreessen's friends say it was Hanania's politics that shifted. [image]
@davidklion David Klion on x
Lots of great details in @semaforben's latest; extremely helpful for mapping out who is influencing whom on the right. Have been thinking for a while that private groupchats are at least as crazymaking as public social media, and much harder to study. https://www.semafor.com/...
@semaforben Ben Smith on x
Does make me a bit sad the degree to which very smart tech figures sometimes just demonstrably misunderstand what reporters are trying to do. Not entirely unlike the way much of journalism has misread tech and entrepreneurs' worldview
@austen Austen Allred on x
Just so you all know, it's obvious from the article that the person who leaked everything for clout was Richard Hanania. There may be others, too.
@davidklion David Klion on x
While there are tons of specific details that are new to me, it's been clear since at least the pandemic that the big names on this platform spend a lot more time talking to each other in private groups; some people are especially obvious about it. Not just on the right, either!
@joshelman Josh Elman on x
@JTLonsdale @balajis It takes great friendship to have healthy debate. It absolutely sucks that someone else in the group doesn't have enough friends to recognize that and think they are sharing “sekrits”
@buccocapital @buccocapital on x
Can't stop laughing at this leaked groupchat screenshot. It's perfect. [image]
r/ezraklein r on reddit
The group chats that changed America
r/BetterOffline r on reddit
Why The Media Keeps Inflating Bubbles
r/billsimmons r on reddit
Funny to think of Bill being a part of group chats like this
r/neoliberal r on reddit
The group chats that changed America
r/politics r on reddit
The group chats that changed America
r/signal r on reddit
Another signal chat full of idiots with way too much power just dropped

Chronicles