EDITORIAL: David Sacks deserves praise for his public service, not smears from the press
Why David Sacks deserves our thanks for using his private sector skills to help the American government and American people.
The New York Times took aim at President Trump’s AI and Crypto Czar, David Sacks this week, claiming conflicts of interest without producing any real evidence to back up the charge. As an objective media outlet, we support fair scrutiny of anyone who steps into a senior advisory role. Conflict questions are appropriate. But nothing in the Times story substantiated wrongdoing by Sacks. In fact, the piece reads like the Times originally thought it had a blockbuster hit piece, only to watch each claim fall apart with basic fact checking. But rather than scrap the premise or write a simple feature on Sacks’s work on AI, the paper ran with an extremely damning and unfair headline anyway.
The strongest claim the Times attempted to surface was that Sacks may have used his visibility to promote his podcast, All In. Give us a break. That is not corruption. On a corruption scale from 0 being Mother Teresa, to 100 being Hunter Biden’s escapades, promoting a podcast is about a 2, at most. The Times framed it as controversial because it had nothing else to point to. Who can forget former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D., Calif.) prolific day trades outperforming the stock market by millions? But yes, a podcast is a real problem.
Sacks is serving at the request of President Donald Trump. Sacks would almost certainly be making a lot more money if he were still in the private sector and not spending his time in the government. Does anyone really think David Sacks is doing this to make money? The Times may, but where is its evidence?
In fact, one member of the Reporter’s editorial team watched Sacks brief senators directly. He was effective and was well received, even by lawmakers who disagreed with him on policy. That is what responsible public engagement looks like.
The fact is that Sacks is a remarkable business executive; he’s an expert in this critical sector, and that experience is an asset for the country, not a liability.
It is also worth remembering what the AI sector has meant for our economy. We can quibble that the stock market is too dependent on a few AI stocks, but every American with exposure to the S&P 500 has benefited from this boom. This has led to good-paying data center jobs for American workers. It also includes pensions, retirement accounts, and 401Ks for working class families. Having someone who understands the mechanics of this growth advising the federal government is good for everyone.
The Washington Reporter has covered the major debates surrounding AI regulation, including the arguments for and against an AI moratorium. Republicans are split on whether we should block California from regulating AI at the expense of stopping states like Arkansas from having a say. These are serious policy choices. Sacks is an optimist about the potential of AI. He makes his case clearly and consistently. That is fair. Policymakers deserve to hear from experts, including those who view innovation as more positive than negative.
Reasonable people can debate AI regulation and can push back on Sacks’s optimism. But Sacks doesn’t deserve to be smeared, and certainly not smeared with no evidence.
David Sacks deserves our thanks for using his private sector skills to help the American government and American people.