CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

UCampaign

web development company

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 31, 2026
Entity authorityQ57546885
Source-derived summary

uCampaign, the operating name of Political Social Media LLC, is a Washington-based web development startup that produces apps for United States Republican campaigns. The company has produced apps for dozens of right-wing campaigns and organizations, including: Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, the Republican National Committee, the Family Research Council, the National Rifle Association, and Senator Rand Paul. uCampaign produced similar apps for President Donald Trump (known as America First) and the primary campaign of Senator Ted Cruz. News organizations raised privacy concerns over how the apps collected broad user data beyond the apps' stated purpose. Outside of the United States, their apps are used by conservative political parties and anti-abortion groups in Australia, Canada, and Europe, including an app in support of Brexit. uCampaign charges a single fee for the base app and monthly maintenance thereafter.

Their apps use concepts from video games to induce users towards specific actions with badges, points, and social recognition as rewards, a concept known as gamification. For example, in uCampaign's National Rifle Association app, the player is awarded points for sending messages to elected officials.

The company's chief executive, Thomas Peters, is a Catholic blogger and former web developer. He founded the company in 2014 from his earlier experiences working as a conservative activist in 2012 and frustrations at the success of the Obama campaign's digital campaigning.

Editorial summary

“UCampaign” enters the record as web development company. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what UCampaign, development and company can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2014, 2012—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around UCampaign, development and company.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“UCampaign” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, UCampaign, development and company provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 31, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q57546885. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2014 and 2012.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “UCampaign”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow UCampaign primary sources, UCampaign archive and UCampaign research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “UCampaign”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from UCampaign” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.