The upstairs room. People of different ages, genders, and ethnicities are gathered around tables writing messages. The back wall is filled with reflective and/or angry notes from visitors. Additional notes have been attached to metal pillars in the room.
The upstairs room. People of different ages, genders, and ethnicities are gathered around tables writing messages. The back wall is filled with reflective and/or angry notes from visitors. Additional notes have been attached to metal pillars in the room.
The upstairs room. People of different ages, genders, and ethnicities are gathered around tables writing messages. The back wall is filled with reflective and/or angry notes from visitors. Additional notes have been attached to metal pillars in the room.
The upstairs room. People of different ages, genders, and ethnicities are gathered around tables writing messages. The back wall is filled with reflective and/or angry notes from visitors. Additional notes have been attached to metal pillars in the room.
Text from article:
 Then, of course, there are billionaires and their heirs. D’Souza believes that “many journalists are more powerful than billionaires,” explaining, “I can’t tell you how many billionaires and CEOs have called me in absolute tears about their lives being destroyed by one article.” He notes that most of them “have no media skill whatsoever” and have “never sought the spotlight,” so he contends that “there’s a massive power asymmetry.”

To D’Souza, such “quiet, boring,” super-rich clients in fact aren’t resourced enough — which is why they need Objection. “Someone who is our ideal customer, it’s not Elon [Musk], who has hundreds of millions of combined social media followers, and has the distribution apparatus itself,” referring to his ownership of the networking platform X. “It’s not Peter Thiel, who’s sophisticated and has high distribution. It’s someone like Michael [Sackler], who has low distribution but high wealth.”
Text from article: Then, of course, there are billionaires and their heirs. D’Souza believes that “many journalists are more powerful than billionaires,” explaining, “I can’t tell you how many billionaires and CEOs have called me in absolute tears about their lives being destroyed by one article.” He notes that most of them “have no media skill whatsoever” and have “never sought the spotlight,” so he contends that “there’s a massive power asymmetry.” To D’Souza, such “quiet, boring,” super-rich clients in fact aren’t resourced enough — which is why they need Objection. “Someone who is our ideal customer, it’s not Elon [Musk], who has hundreds of millions of combined social media followers, and has the distribution apparatus itself,” referring to his ownership of the networking platform X. “It’s not Peter Thiel, who’s sophisticated and has high distribution. It’s someone like Michael [Sackler], who has low distribution but high wealth.”
Text from article:
 Objection assigns a human investigator — at the $2,000 price tier, a college graduate; for $10,000, a former CIA or FBI agent — to gather evidence, which is displayed as exhibits. In my case, just about all of it appeared to be extraneous documentation, like incorporation paperwork for Sackler’s firm, which seemed irrelevant to the matter at hand. Then it prompts a group of AI models (including the name-brand ones such as Claude, ChatGPT and Grok) to act as its jury, analyzing the evidence. D’Souza promises that conclusions will be transparent: “We expose all the math that underpins what we do.”

Once Objection issues an adjudication, satisfied clients can pay an extra fee to promote the finding “so it engages with the disinformation as it spreads through social media,” D’Souza says. “What I know from the Gawker litigation, having dealt with not just Hulk Hogan but dozens of other parties who felt like they were aggrieved by the media, is that they actually don’t want a financial remedy. What they want is a moral victory. Most of them just want a PDF that they can send to their investors and their family which says, ‘I did not go to Epstein Island.’ “
Text from article: Objection assigns a human investigator — at the $2,000 price tier, a college graduate; for $10,000, a former CIA or FBI agent — to gather evidence, which is displayed as exhibits. In my case, just about all of it appeared to be extraneous documentation, like incorporation paperwork for Sackler’s firm, which seemed irrelevant to the matter at hand. Then it prompts a group of AI models (including the name-brand ones such as Claude, ChatGPT and Grok) to act as its jury, analyzing the evidence. D’Souza promises that conclusions will be transparent: “We expose all the math that underpins what we do.” Once Objection issues an adjudication, satisfied clients can pay an extra fee to promote the finding “so it engages with the disinformation as it spreads through social media,” D’Souza says. “What I know from the Gawker litigation, having dealt with not just Hulk Hogan but dozens of other parties who felt like they were aggrieved by the media, is that they actually don’t want a financial remedy. What they want is a moral victory. Most of them just want a PDF that they can send to their investors and their family which says, ‘I did not go to Epstein Island.’ “
4