Save Access

Astroturf: it's like "grassroots" organizing, but fake, and it's the new promotion vehicle of choice for corporations with a message. Consumers have long since learned that when a Fortune 500 company shows up at a regulatory hearing and insists that some new plan is "better for consumers," it usually turns out to be better for the company. When a "neutral," non-corporate research and advocacy group pitches the same idea, it can sound a whole lot better. That's why plenty of large companies have founded or sponsored such groups, a fact that gets surprisingly little mention in the media. Bruce Kushnick calls out journalists for their shoddy reporting of such astroturf groups in a new piece in the Nieman Watchdog, a publication of Harvard's Nieman Foundation for Journalism, and illustrates exactly why we need to pay closer attention.

Kushnick attended a recent meeting of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on the question of implementing a statewide video franchise for Verizon, which is unhappy about having to negotiate rights-of-way issues and build-out requirements with every municipality in the state. At the hearing, Kushnick noted plenty of speakers for Verizon but few or no journalists. Then he saw the guys at the back of the room.

"Three guys are standing in the back by the exit door and they keep shaking the hands of the speakers," he says, "most of whom testified that Verizon should get a new, statewide franchise to offer cable services. ... I later learn that the three men in the back of the room, Moe, Larry and Curly, work for Verizon, and it is clear by the smiles and handshakes that a room of witnesses have been brought by Verizon to testify on its behalf. Not one mentioned that Verizon gives their organization money or other support."

For Kushnick, the lesson is obvious: journalists covering these issues need to ask harder questions about the motivations and funding sources of advocacy groups, especially when the group is new. "You would think it would be embarrassing for the press and media to quote astroturf and co-opted groups as 'authentic'—but most press simply are asleep at the wheel. In many cases, as with the Newark Star Ledger, op-ed pages run pieces by astroturf or co-opted groups while news coverage seldom questions why various non-profits have come forward to support a corporate position."

Astroturf: like real grass, it's spreading

The Star Ledger isn't the only paper that does this, of course; Illinois newspapers have run op-eds castigating local communities for trying to impose conditions on AT&T's U-verse build-out plans (written by apparent front groups for AT&T), and every other state could provide a similar example. It's gotten so bad and so brazen that these groups even appear before Congress, ready to offer their "impartial advice" to House and Senate committees.

In one example that we've quoted before at Ars, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) took a shot at exposing the situation when Julia Johnson appeared before Congress to testify about telecommunications issues.

Markey: Is your organization financially supported by the Bell [telephone] companies in any way?
Johnson: No, we’re not.
Markey: At all.

Johnson: Yes, and let me elaborate upon that too. We’re a relatively new organization.
Markey: No, that's OK. I can go along with that answer. That’s fine. Thank you. And are you compensated in any way by the Bell companies?
Johnson: I have a consulting firm that works for a variety of companies, generally in the regulatory space.
Markey: But are the Bell companies amongst those companies that pay you?
Johnson: Yes.

Journalists do cover these events, and politicians do try to expose them (see the post linked above for the Naperville City Council's attempt to dig up the funding sources of a "group" [in reality, a single person] who appeared at their meeting), but the practice is simply so common and so exhausting that fatigue sets in. Covering every instance of astroturf, even in a single industry, could take all of one's time. Common Cause has issued reports on astroturf in the telecom sector (PDF), but the issue isn't limited to any particular industry. The state of Illinois, for instance, recently investigated a ComEd front group that was petitioning the government to allow the utility to raise electricity rates.

Digging up the connections between astroturf groups and their sponsors can also be difficult because such groups rarely reveal funding sources. Our own investigation of AT&T's battle to wire Chicago with fiber revealed advocacy groups with close ties to the company, groups that parroted marketing materials with the ceaseless determination of a PR flack. When pressed on funding, neither AT&T nor the groups would discuss funding sources, making the links difficult to prove without more digging.

We've done our best to highlight the issue, covering everything from journo-lobbying to network neutrality astroturfing. This is different from industry-backed groups like "Hands off the Internet" which espouse a particular point of view and aren't afraid to name their sponsors. Corporations may have plenty of good points to make, but they need to make them fairly, rather than engaging in "point of view laundering."

When these groups are caught astroturfing, how many consumers are willing to vote with their cash in order to show these companies what they think of the practice? Not many, not if it means inconvenience (I still subscribe to AT&T's DSL, for instance, because switching is expensive and a hassle). And, of course, where would you go? Most of the massive companies that provide telecommunications and Internet services appear to be involved in the practice.

As Kushnick's piece points out, the real issue isn't that that astroturfing doesn't get covered. He covers it, we cover it, Common Cause covers it, Sourcewatch covers it—in most cases, the information is out there. The problem is that the money is all on the side of the corporations, and consumers don't seem to care enough about the issue to fund representatives who will attend the boring but important committee meetings and regulatory hearings on their behalf.

For most people without the time to delve deep into the issues themselves, there's a simpler way to vote with your wallet: support the groups—especially local groups—that truly are grassroots, citizen-sponsored initiatives.