How Much Did Committees Report Paying for Podcasts?
Federal committees itemized $976,760.08 in 198 payments that name podcasts between January 2, 2025 and October 3, 2026, by our count. We pulled every Schedule B record, the FEC’s list of itemized disbursements, for the 2025-26 two-year period whose purpose text contains “podcast,” using the commission’s public OpenFEC API on the morning of November 5, two days after Election Day (OpenFEC API). The search returned 202 records. Four are memo entries, which repeat detail about money already reported in another line, so we removed them to avoid counting the same dollars twice.
The payments are small and lopsided. The median payment is $1,048.36, and 91 of the 198, or 46%, are $1,000 or less. The money, by contrast, is concentrated: 38 committees made the payments, to 46 named payees, but the four largest payers account for $904,949.62, or 92.6% of the total. Payments dated 2025 make up $699,698.98 and payments dated 2026 make up $277,061.10, though the 2026 figure is the less complete of the two for the reasons set out in our methodology.
For scale, AdImpact counted $11.21 billion in political ad spending and bookings for the cycle as of October 26 (TheWrap). Podcast-labeled FEC payments equal about 0.009% of that, by our arithmetic. The two figures measure different things, since AdImpact tracks state and local races and ad bookings, but the gap is large enough to make the main point: almost none of the cycle’s podcast spending is visible under its own name. Our explainer on where the record midterm ad money went covers the AdImpact figures.
Who Paid, and Who Was Paid?
Four PACs paid most of the podcast-labeled money, and one payment stream, from Vote Save America to Crooked Media, Inc., is more than half of it. The table lists every committee that reported at least $9,000 in podcast-labeled payments. The FEC records no party affiliation for the four largest, which are PACs rather than party or candidate committees, so we list them by the committee type the FEC assigns.
| Committee (FEC type) | Payments | Total | Main payees and stated purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vote Save America (PAC) | 12 | $514,624.62 | Crooked Media, Inc.: “podcast advertising” |
| Occupy Democrats Election Fund (hybrid PAC) | 21 | $172,900.00 | Lower West Terrace ($144,900), Syndicate Entertainment ($14,000), Jason Kull ($14,000): “podcast hosting; IE only account” |
| The Lincoln Project (hybrid PAC) | 46 | $127,175.00 | David Perozzi ($92,000), RiversideFM, Inc. ($25,175), Voxtopica ($10,000): “podcast production” |
| Campaign for Democracy PAC (PAC) | 1 | $90,250.00 | Markham LLC: “podcast studio expenses” |
| Indivisible Action (hybrid PAC) | 19 | $12,900.00 | Indivisible Project: podcast production reimbursements and in-kind podcast appearances for candidates |
| Democratic Party of Orange County Fed PAC (party) | 1 | $9,700.00 | Arda Campaigns |
| All other committees (32) | 98 | $49,210.46 | Mostly hosting, software, equipment and small ad buys |
The payees show what the line items are. RiversideFM is the remote recording platform we compare in Riverside vs Zencastr; iHeart appears twice, for $8,213.41 and $3,001.00 in podcast ads bought by two House campaigns; and AdsWizz, an audio ad platform, received four payments totaling $1,750.00 from a super PAC. Nothing in a filing says whether a payee also produces or hosts the show it is paid for, and we do not infer it.
What Were the Payments For?
About 54% of the podcast-labeled money bought advertising on podcasts, and most of the rest paid for committees’ own shows: production, recording, studios, hosting, equipment and software. We sorted every payment into one of five groups by the words in its reported purpose, such as “podcast advertising,” “podcast production” or “equipment for podcast.”
$ (sum of itemized payments, memo entries excluded)
Source: Media Morpheus Research analysis of FEC Schedule B itemized disbursements through the OpenFEC API, two-year period 2026, purpose text containing “podcast,” pulled November 5, 2026, 9:15 a.m. ET.
The categories are ours, assigned from each payment’s reported purpose. “Hosting” can mean a hosting platform or paying the people who host a show; the filings do not say which. The latest payment date in the data is October 3, 2026.
The chart shows that a little over half of the podcast-labeled money bought advertising, and most of the rest paid for committees’ own shows.
The advertising slice is itself concentrated. Of $531,869.03 in payments described as podcast advertising, podcast ads or podcast commercials, $514,624.62, or 96.8%, is the Vote Save America stream. The other 10 advertising payments total $17,244.41 and include a state party’s “primary vote reminder” commercials on a podcast. The smallest group, in-kind podcast appearances, is mostly one PAC recording the value of booking candidates onto a show as a contribution to their campaigns.
How Do Candidates’ Own Podcast Payments Compare?
Candidates’ own committees spent very little under a podcast label, $34,743.04 in 57 payments, and Republican candidates filed more of those payments than Democratic candidates. The table splits the 198 payments by the committee type and party the FEC records.
| Committee group | Payments | Total | Share of total |
|---|---|---|---|
| PACs and super PACs | 121 | $929,340.51 | 95.1% |
| Candidate committees, all | 57 | $34,743.04 | 3.6% |
| Republican candidates | 31 | $21,970.64 | 2.2% |
| Democratic candidates | 15 | $12,201.72 | 1.2% |
| Independent, Libertarian and other candidates | 11 | $570.68 | 0.1% |
| Party committees | 20 | $12,676.53 | 1.3% |
| Total | 198 | $976,760.08 | 100% |
No party should be read as spending more or less on podcasts from this table. The candidate rows are tiny, most podcast money in politics flows through PACs that carry no party label in FEC data, and, as the next section explains, the filings leave out most of what any side spent.
Why Do the Filings Miss Most Podcast and Creator Spending?
Because FEC rules ask for a purpose that is specific enough, not one that names the medium, and they do not require a committee to list the shows a media firm buys on its behalf. The commission says a purpose is “a brief but specific description of why the disbursement was made,” and the test is whether “a person who is not associated with the committee could easily discern why the disbursement was made” (FEC). Its list of adequate purposes includes “Media,” “Advertising - Radio, TV, Newspaper, or Print” and “Digital Consulting.” A campaign that buys spots on a dozen podcasts can therefore report one payment for “media” to its buyer and comply.
The itemization rules leave a second gap. Committees itemize each payee whose payments aggregate “more than $200 per calendar year (or per election cycle for authorized committees),” and the FEC’s 2013 interpretive rule on ultimate payees covers “three specific situations”: reimbursed personal spending, credit-card payments and unreimbursed candidate spending (FEC). A media firm that buys podcast inventory for a client is not one of the three, so the show that ran the ad does not have to appear in the filing.
The word counts show the effect. In the same 2025-26 Schedule B search, by our count, “podcast” appears in 202 records, “newsletter” in 138, “radio” in 1,054 and “digital advertising” in 9,168. “Influencer” appears in 13, and only 6 of those are payments rather than memo entries, worth $14,556.48 in all. Creator and podcast deals that were publicly reported during the cycle are, in other words, largely invisible as such in the commission’s data.
What Has to Be Disclosed on the Podcast Itself?
A political ad placed on a podcast for a fee is a public communication under FEC rules and needs a disclaimer saying who paid for it. The commission defines public communications to include material “placed or promoted for a fee on another person’s website, digital device, application, or advertising platform” (FEC). For audio, its guidance says a candidate-authorized ad needs the candidate’s own statement of approval, and an ad not authorized by a candidate needs a statement that the paying committee “is responsible for the content of this advertising” (FEC). The same page notes that it has not been updated for the Supreme Court’s June 30, 2026 decision on coordinated party spending limits and will be revised when the commission regains a quorum.
That makes the ad itself a better record than the filing. A listener hears who paid; a researcher reading the FEC data may see only “media.” Our guide to looking up political ads shows where broadcast and platform ads are logged; podcasts have no equivalent public file.
What This Means for Anyone Buying a Placement
- Do not use FEC totals to size the podcast market. Under $1 million in podcast-labeled payments is a measure of reporting habits, not of demand. For the commercial market, see our comparison of podcast guesting and podcast advertising.
- Expect political and issue sponsors next to you in election years. The largest stream in our data is a PAC buying advertising from a podcast company. Brands that care about adjacency should ask a show for its political ad policy before booking, our recommendation rather than any platform rule.
- Disclose paid spots plainly. Political ads carry statutory disclaimers; commercial sponsorships carry FTC disclosure duties instead, covered in what the FTC requires for paid placement. Neither buys editorial coverage.
- Read filings for what they can show. Schedule B is good at revealing a committee’s own show, studio or software. It is poor at revealing which shows carried its ads.
Methodology and Limitations
We queried the FEC’s Schedule B endpoint for the 2026 two-year transaction period with the purpose search term “podcast,” sorted by amount, and downloaded all 202 results; we repeated the search for “influencer” (13 results) and recorded result counts for “radio,” “newsletter” and “digital advertising.” Anyone can repeat the podcast search on the commission’s disbursements page. Four limits apply. First, these are processed records: the latest payment date in our pull is October 3, 2026, so pre-general and post-general reports covering October and November are largely missing. Second, the search matches purpose text, so a payment described as “media” or “advertising” is excluded even if it bought podcast ads. Third, our five categories are our reading of each purpose line, and “hosting” is ambiguous. Fourth, the data cover federal committees only, not state campaigns or issue groups that do not file with the FEC.
Conclusion
The record shows a cycle in which podcasts were everywhere in campaign strategy and almost nowhere in the federal spending data under their own name. By our count, $976,760 is labeled as podcast spending, and most of it is four PACs paying for advertising or their own shows. The real number is higher by an amount the filings cannot tell anyone. For a buyer, the practical lesson is to judge a show by its own ad policies and disclosures, not by what campaign filings appear to say about the market.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much did 2026 campaigns spend on podcasts?
By our count of FEC itemized disbursements, federal committees reported 198 payments totaling $976,760.08 with “podcast” in the stated purpose for the 2025-26 cycle, through October 3, 2026. That is a floor, because podcast buys can be reported as “media” or paid through a media firm.
Which committee spent the most on podcasts in FEC filings?
Vote Save America, a PAC, reported 12 payments totaling $514,624.62 to Crooked Media, Inc. for podcast advertising, 52.7% of the podcast-labeled total in our pull of FEC data.
Do campaigns have to report which podcasts they advertise on?
Not necessarily. The FEC accepts purposes such as “Media,” and its ultimate-payee rule covers reimbursements, credit-card charges and unreimbursed candidate spending, not a media firm’s purchases for a client. This is not legal advice.
Do political podcast ads need a paid-for-by disclaimer?
Yes. FEC guidance treats ads placed for a fee on another person’s website, application or advertising platform as public communications, and audio ads need a spoken statement of who approved or is responsible for them. This is not legal advice.
Can I search FEC data for podcast spending myself?
Yes. On fec.gov, open Disbursements, choose the 2025-2026 period and type “podcast” in the purpose field. The OpenFEC API returns the same records for download.
How much did campaigns report paying influencers?
Very little under that word. The FEC Schedule B search for “influencer” in the 2025-26 cycle returns 13 records, of which 6 are payments totaling $14,556.48, by our count.
Sources and Methodology
This explainer is built from our own pull of FEC Schedule B data through the OpenFEC API on November 5, 2026, at about 9:15 a.m. ET, and from the FEC’s published guidance on purposes, itemization and disclaimers, read the same day. All counts, sums, shares and categories are our arithmetic from the downloaded records; the five spending categories are our classification, not the FEC’s. We did not search raw electronic filings, state campaign-finance systems or ad-tracking databases, and we did not contact any committee or payee.
- data Federal Election Commission, OpenFEC API: Schedule B itemized disbursements. Source of all 202 podcast and 13 influencer records, counts for radio, newsletter and digital advertising, payers, payees, dates and amounts. Read November 5, 2026.
- data Federal Election Commission, Disbursements, 2025-2026, purpose contains “podcast”. Public search page that reproduces our query. Read November 5, 2026.
- regulator Federal Election Commission, Purposes of disbursement. Purpose definition, the discernibility test, adequate and inadequate purpose examples. Read November 5, 2026.
- regulator Federal Election Commission, Interpretive rule on reporting ultimate payees of political committee disbursements. $200 itemization thresholds; the three situations covered; June 27, 2013 approval. Read November 5, 2026.
- regulator Federal Election Commission, Advertising and disclaimers. Public communication definition including paid internet placements, audio disclaimer wording, quorum note. Read November 5, 2026.
- trade press TheWrap, Midterm political ad spending hits record $11.21 billion. AdImpact’s $11.21 billion count as of October 26, 2026, used for scale only. Read November 5, 2026.