Critics like Peter Thiel, who is not a signatory, have derided the Giving Pledge initiative as an “Epstein-adjacent, fake Boomer club” and privately urged fellow billionaires — including Elon Musk — to abandon the pledge, according to the New York Times.

Thiel told Musk that he should pull out of the initiative because his money would go “to left-wing nonprofits that will be chosen by Bill Gates,” the Times reported, citing a recent speech that Thiel gave.

Bill Gates co-founded the Giving Pledge in 2010 alongside Warren Buffett and Melinda French Gates, urging the world’s wealthiest individuals to donate the majority of their fortunes to charity. AFP via Getty Images

Gates has come under fire in recent weeks after he admitted to cheating on his then-wife, Melinda French Gates, with two Russian women that he met through the late Epstein.

The pledge has also drawn criticism from some tech investors who argue that modern philanthropy has become intertwined with progressive politics.

Critics say many of the nonprofits and foundations favored by major donors — particularly those tied to global health, climate initiatives and diversity programs — reflect left-leaning priorities, fueling claims that the Giving Pledge has become associated with “woke” causes rather than politically neutral charity.

Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen has argued that philanthropy once functioned as a kind of reputational bargain for billionaires — allowing them to “wash away all of your sins” and be recast as virtuous donors.

Since then, however, that social contract has broken down as criticism of the tech sector has intensified.

Bill Gates has faced scrutiny over his past meetings with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, a controversy that later emerged as a factor in the breakdown of his marriage to Melinda French Gates. DOJ

Peter Thiel, who never signed the Giving Pledge, has mocked the initiative as an “Epstein-adjacent, fake Boomer club” and urged fellow billionaires to reconsider their participation. Getty Images for The Cambridge Union

Brian Armstrong, the billionaire founder of Coinbase, quietly exited the initiative in 2024 — removing his name from the pledge’s website five years after signing on, the Times reported.

Even some early supporters are said to be rethinking their commitments.

Larry Ellison, the Oracle co-founder and one of the original signatories, said last year he was “amending” his pledge to focus more heavily on for-profit research ventures, the Times reported.

Critics have argued the undertaking lacks teeth, noting it carries no enforcement mechanism and does not track how much money signatories actually donate — allowing billionaires to fulfill the promise decades later through their estates.

Larry Ellison, an original Giving Pledge signatory and Oracle co-founder, said last year he was “amending” his pledge to focus more heavily on for-profit research ventures. Getty Images

Skeptics also note that much of the pledged wealth is routed into private foundations or donor-advised funds, vehicles that can allow billions to sit for years before reaching operating charities, the Times reported.

Taryn Jensen, the interim head of The Giving Pledge, defended the initiative, telling The Post in a statement that debate over philanthropy is “inevitable and welcome” and noting the campaign now includes more than 250 donors across 30 countries — many of whom “have already met their commitments or are steadily working toward them.”

Jensen added the goal is to keep “building a culture where giving is the norm” while helping signatories turn their pledges “into action.”

Launched in 2010 by Bill Gates, Melinda French Gates and Warren Buffett, the pledge asks the world’s wealthiest people to commit to giving away the majority of their fortunes to charity either during their lifetimes or after death.

Warren Buffett, who launched the Giving Pledge with Bill and Melinda French Gates in 2010, said he still considers the initiative “quite a success.” REUTERS

Bill Gates has said Epstein — who died by suicide in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges — was one of the factors behind his split from his wife of 27 years.

Gates has acknowledged meeting Epstein several times after the latter’s 2008 conviction for soliciting sex from a minor, saying he regretted the encounters.

French Gates stepped away from the foundation that administers the Giving Pledge in 2024, three years after the divorce.

Brian Armstrong, the billionaire founder of Coinbase, quietly exited the Giving Pledge in 2024 after signing the initiative five years earlier. AFP via Getty Images

“I firmly believe in the Giving Pledge and consider it quite a success, though my physical limitations have eliminated my participation in the annual get-together,” the 95-year-old Buffett, who recently stepped down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, told the Times.

“I have continued to contact possible members but only on a minor scale in recent years. Bill Gates has continued major efforts.”

French Gates has acknowledged that the results of the pledge have been uneven. She recently told Wired that some participants have donated at a “massive scale,” while others have moved more slowly.

Bill Gates and Melinda French Gates co-founded the Giving Pledge with Warren Buffett to encourage billionaires to give away most of their wealth during their lifetimes or through their estates. AP

“Some are doing it, and some are trying or aren’t ready to,” she said.

French Gates added that the initiative has not progressed as far as she once hoped.

“I wish we had been even more successful with the Pledge than we have been to date,” she said. “It’s a problem to continue working on.”

The Post has sought comment from Gates, French Gates, Thiel, Ellison, Armstrong and Buffett.

The post Billionaires bolt from Bill Gates’ scandal-scarred Giving Pledge as critics brand it ‘Epstein-adjacent’ appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Over 300 writers, scholars, and public intellectuals have pledged to not contribute to the New York Times’ Opinion section until three demands have been met. The demands address the anti-Palestinian bias in the paper’s op-ed pages, which have been a frequent target of criticism during Israel’s genocide and war. The writers are withholding their labor until the Opinion pages take “accountability for its biased coverage and commits to truthfully and ethically reporting on the U.S.-Israeli war on Gaza.”

The group of “writers of conscience” include Rima Hassan, Rashida Tlaib, Kaveh Akbar, Sally Rooney, Tareq Baconi, Viet Thanh Nguyenm, Greta Thunberg, Elia Suleiman, Plestia Alaqad, Hannah Einbinder, Andreas Malm, Isabella Hammad, Mohammed El-Kurd, Rupi Kaur, Jia Tolentino, Alana Hadidm, China Miéville, Ghassan Abu-Sittah, and many more.

Lit Hub’s Jonny Diamond and Dan Sheehan are among those who signed this collective commitment as well.

Almost 150 past Times contributors have signed the pledge, and the coalition also includes a number of Palestinian solidarity groups like Writers Against the War on Gaza (WAWOG), the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), and the Palestinian Feminist Collective (PFC).

The pledge condemns the “paper’s decades-long practice of acting as a bullhorn for the Israeli government and military,” its “anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian biases,” and makes three demands:

1. The newsroom must conduct a review of anti-Palestinian bias and produce new editorial standards for Palestine coverage.

2. The newsroom must retract the widely debunked investigation “Screams Without Words.”

3. The Editorial Board must call for a U.S. arms embargo on Israel.

There is more detail in the group’s longer statement. 

For Palestinians, the consequences of Western media bias can be lethal. The pledge’s statement opens with a quote from Palestinian journalist Hossam Shabat, who wrote, “Language makes genocide justifiable. A reason why we are still being bombed after 243 days is because of The New York Times and most Western media.” Shabat was assassinated by Israel months after writing this.

“We owe it to the journalists and writers of Palestine to refuse complicity with the Times,” the statement concludes, “and to demand that the paper account for its failures, such that it can never again manufacture consent for mass slaughter, torture, and displacement.”

The full statement and list of signatories are on boycottdivestunsubscribe.com.

Like this:

Like Loading…

The post » 300+ pledge to boycott the New York Times’ op-ed page over their anti-Palestinian bias. appeared first on Our Story Insight.

According to InGame, a letter from the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation was sent to various California tribal leaders at an unknown date, seeming to criticize the ‘YES Pledge’ for expanding gambling under the authority of Sports Betting Alliance (SBA) Tribal Advisory Council members.

The correspondence argues that “the future of tribal government gaming in California is at risk” and claims that the proposed commercial gambling expansion “will provide large profits for them, while undermining the fabric of Indian Gaming in California.”

Opinions are split on the issue, as Jeff Grubbe, the current SBA tribal advisor and former Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians chair, responded to the letter publicly on LinkedIn at the end of September. He claimed that it relies on “opinions, assumptions, and speculative outcomes – not verifiable facts.”

What is the YES Pledge?

Dividing those in the community, the YES Pledge first began circulating in September. It aims to encourage tribes to “commit to working together to secure voter or legislative approval of a tribally governed framework for online sports betting.”

However, it has failed to gain the support of the biggest tribal association in the state, the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA), of which San Manuel is a member. Betting giants including Bet365, BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics Sportsbook, and FanDuel are all members of the SBA.

This issue is one of many at stake for tribes in California, as the news came earlier this week that California tribes have been blocked from suing cardrooms over exclusive gambling rights. The YES Pledge is also part of the bigger picture around the competition for controlling sports betting across the state, which some tribes argue also encroaches on their exclusivity, as determined by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) and compacts.

Featured image: Unsplash

The post Debate around the California tribal ‘YES Pledge’ continues appeared first on Our Story Insight.