How the American Humanist Association is empowering a new wave of atheist content creators

A quiet experiment could redefine how secular voices reach millions online and revive a movement that’s lost momentum

This newsletter is free and goes out to over 23,000 subscribers, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe or use my usual Patreon page!

---

This is a different kind of post than the ones I usually write, but I think it’s one of the most important things I’ve published. I hope you’ll read it.

A few months ago, I was given the Humanist Media Award from the American Humanist Association. Rather than speak directly about my own work, I used my time to highlight a growing concern I’ve had about the broader atheism movement.

Here was my argument in a nutshell: Church/state separation is obviously under serious attack right now by the forces of Christian Nationalism. Scientific research is being defunded while prominent voices in the Republican-dominated government perpetuate pseudoscience and the whitewashing of history. Public education is being replaced with religious indoctrination. We don’t even have shared facts anymore. There’s never been a greater need for rational, evidence-based thinkers. That used to be our thing!

But books about godlessness, which helped spur the “New Atheism” movement decades ago, don’t get much attention anymore, no matter who’s writing them… and many of the most famous atheists in the country—Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, etc.—have a host of problems in their own right.

We don’t have many prominent atheists these days who can capture attention for the right reasons. The ones who can break out of our bubble and speak to new audiences about the importance of a secular nation, and how church/state separation is good for believers and non-believers alike, and why religion itself is not a virtue. The ones who can push back against the daily assaults by conservative Christians on civil rights and women’s rights and LGBTQ rights—effectively and memorably. Even when those people exist, they’re doing it themselves, not as part of a larger movement.

And while the larger atheist organizations do excellent work, they aren’t necessarily drawing in newer, younger members. They’re doing many of the same things they’ve done for decades even though that playbook has run its course. Their focus (sometimes by necessity!) is playing defense—by filing lawsuits—leaving them with fewer opportunities to inspire people to ditch religion and fight for our shared causes. That’s not a knock on those groups! The work they do is essential. I sure as hell rely on their work. But I’d bet good money that younger people—even younger atheists—are largely unfamiliar with the groups meant to represent them.

In fact, the AHA acknowledges that concern. The group’s communications director Court Beyer told me visibility and connection are among their biggest challenges. Too many people, Beyer said, “who already live by humanist values have never heard the word ‘humanism’ before or realized there’s a movement that addresses them.” Meanwhile, “the loudest voices shaping public discourse around morality and meaning” are often people who oppose Humanist values—think Peter Thiel.

At the same time, many of the strongest non-theistic communicators we have—YouTubers, hosts of call-in shows, podcasters, social media personalities, writers, etc.—don’t get much institutional support at all. Most do it as a hobby when they could be reaching so many more people if they could dedicate themselves full-time to this kind of work. And it is work. (Contrary to what many people believe, having a lot of followers on any kind of social media site doesn’t necessarily translate to making a lot of money. Atheist “influencers” also don’t get the kind of brand partnerships reserved for fashion and makeup promoters.)

My pitch to the American Humanist Association was simple: They needed to do more to support content creators who advance their mission.

That may sound self-serving. I am, after all, one of those content creators. But I’m lucky enough to already do this work full-time, largely thanks to people who read this newsletter, listen to my podcast, or watch my YouTube channel.

What about the people who aren’t as fortunate? The ones who reach different audiences than old-school atheist groups? The ones who have more credibility with younger viewers, including women and people of color and those who aren’t from Christian families, and the ones who may never have picked up a Dawkins book? The ones who are already influential and have a base that our largest organizations simply cannot tap into?

What sort of future could we create if groups with the kind of financial resources available to the AHA directly supported the people who advanced their beliefs without even knowing it? What if the AHA could push those people to talk even more directly about why they’re Humanists and why that’s so essential? What would happen if the next generation of prominent atheists had the freedom to promote their views, using their own kind of digital expertise, without having to worry about where their next paycheck was coming from?

This is quite literally a problem that liberals have struggled with for years now. Conservative groups and media outlets get launched with the help of billionaire donors, but left-wing creators routinely struggle for money and attention (though some groups are actively working to change that).

The day after my talk, I found out that someone wanted to take me up on that offer.

That anonymous donor pledged to fund a program—through the AHA—to directly support content creators advancing the AHA’s mission. Details about how to distribute the funds would be left for the organization to decide.

The American Humanist Association soft-launched this program in September. They paid certain content creators to make videos talking about current news stories or their own paths to Humanism. They didn’t announce this because they were working out the kinks, figuring out what the best practices ought to be, etc.

Now that they’re on the verge of taking the next steps, I’m excited to share the details with you.

You can see this program in action in the following video from YouTuber Alyssa Grenfell, an ex-Mormon with over 525,000 subscribers. She recently posted about how she discovered she was an atheist—and about six minutes in, she mentions how the AHA sponsored the video:

That video received over 100,000 views in the first week and includes a link to a page on the AHA’s website tailored specifically to her fans.

There’s also this video from Darante’ LaMar, a former pastor who now deconstructs the Bible for his 60,000+ subscribers, all about how people can be good without God. He gives a shout-out to the AHA around the 2:10 mark and has his own personal link to the AHA’s website.

The program also includes Apostate Aladdin, an ex-Muslim with over 50,000 subscribers.

The most popular creator in this initial phase of the AHA’s program is Drew McCoy, who goes by Genetically Modified Skeptic. With over 800,000 subscribers, he routinely gets hundreds of thousands of views on each of his long, thoughtful videos. (He’s also a regular collaborator with other popular non-theistic YouTubers. I collaborated with him on a recent video.)

Drew McCoy filming a video (submitted)

In the video below, about Trump’s task force to “eradicate anti-Christian bias,” the AHA gets mentioned about five minutes in:

These are the kinds of videos and creators the AHA is currently sponsoring, with plans to expand into Instagram and TikTok and writing platforms in the months ahead.

In a pitch to potential donors, which I was able to see, the AHA says they want to help creators “grow their their impact while bringing humanism into more conversations.” To that end, they’re backing influencers with “loyal, engaged audiences” so that their message is delivered to viewers by “inspired, brave voices they already follow.”

So how does this program actually work?

For now, the AHA is hand-selecting the people they want to work with to test things out. They have a budget of $10,000 per month to work with thanks to that donor, and creators are given a share of it based on how many views their videos get in a 30-day period, with more views earning a higher payout (up to a point). The two sides discuss possible topics until they come to an agreement on which video topic is best for the ad placement.

Each person also receives a percentage of earnings based on any AHA-affiliated merchandise sold through their customized pages, and they have access to the AHA’s staff (including lawyers) to assist with research or appear for collaborations.

I believe this is much more effective than what many of these groups have done in the past. For example, they spend thousands of dollars—sometimes tens of thousands of dollars—on scholarships to students who write essays supporting church/state separation or why they’re atheists. Those essays might be very good, but the students are not necessarily activists, and (let’s be honest) no one reads them. The pieces may appear in a newsletter, then they disappear into the void. It’s a waste of money if the goal is advancing the group’s views. The same could be said of full-page ads in prominent newspapers—they barely make a splash and most young people aren’t reading physical copies of the New York Times. (Or anything, really, but that’s a different problem.)

Even groups that have offered large scholarships to video creators promoting science are throwing money at young people who make low-effort, barely seen videos that never move the needle. If the goal is advancing appreciation for science, why not put that money in the hands of those who are already doing that work effectively?!

These groups need to meet younger potential supporters where they’re at. That’s online—and not through digital ads but through the voices of people they already trust.

I asked Drew McCoy how this program is working for him so far since he’s had a lot of experience dealing with other sponsors, and he told me this is the best version of this kind of partnership he’s seen so far, saying they “offer more flexibility and collaboration than any other video sponsor I’ve ever worked with.”

As good as this is for creators, it’s also important for the AHA.

Over the first year of this project, they’re hoping these videos receive about 15 million views across all channels and lead to around 700 new members. In the long-term, they’d like to work with “micro-influencers”—people who may have smaller audiences but reach an audience that others aren’t tapping into. The AHA is also connecting these creators with local groups in order to give them more speaking opportunities.

There are, of course, some risks involved in a program like this.

What happens if content creators, when making their other videos, express opinions that go against what the AHA promotes? Would the collaborations just end? And what if the creators want to criticize the AHA? Would they be muzzled and censored or pressured to just go along with it?

There are no easy answers to that, but that’s not unique to the AHA at all. That’s just the risk you run when working with people outside your organization. You understand that you won’t align on everything while focusing on the values where there’s clear overlap. When I asked Beyer about that, they said, “if we can’t give our partners the latitude to think for themselves, or even criticize us when we get things wrong, then we’re not living our values—which begs the question why we do any of this to begin with.”

For now, though, the AHA’s risk is minimal. These initial collabs are all being done on a video-to-video basis, though it’s been working well enough so far that all the creators I mentioned are already on their second or third videos with the AHA’s backing. The two sides agree on a topic and scope in advance, so the AHA knows in general what to expect. It also gives both sides leeway to try new things.

Incidentally, both the Freedom From Religion Foundation and American Atheists are already exploring similar kinds of programs, though neither has done it as formally as the AHA’s program just yet. (FFRF has already sponsored one of McCoy’s videos.)

If we want our non-religious, humanistic values to reach wider audiences, I believe this is one of the best ways to make it happen. The program won’t be perfect but there’s never been a better opportunity and more important time to be heard. It’s about damn time we supported the people who spread our beliefs in effective, thoughtful ways.

---