- ‹ previous
- 3371 of 8795
- next ›
Astroturf Axelrod?
You've probably never heard of ASK Public Strategies. It is the highly secretive, private sector-focused twin to David Alexrod's political consulting firm AKP&D Message & Media. Axelrod, of course, is Barack Obama's chief strategist. Through ASK, Axelrod "discreetly plots strategy and advertising campaigns for corporate clients to tilt public opinion their way," according to a new BusinessWeek investigation.
Lots of political consultants do private sector work. Hillary Clinton's top strategist, Mark Penn, is worldwide CEO of a massive PR firm called Burson-Marsteller which is infamous for working with nasty corporate clients (Blackwater, for example) and for pioneering the use of "pseudo-grassroots front groups, known as "astroturfing," according to a 2007 Nation article.
Looks like astroturfing is Axelrod's stock-in-trade, too. According to BusinessWeek, here's a description of the work his company has done for electrical company ComEd:
The Chicago-based utility says ASK has been an adviser since at least 2002. ASK's workload picked up in 2005, as the Exelon subsidiary was nearing the end of a 10-year rate freeze and preparing to ask state regulators for higher electricity prices. Based on ASK's advice, ComEd formed Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity (CORE) to win support.
One TV commercial, penned by ASK, warned of a ComEd bankruptcy and blackouts without a rate hike: "A few years ago, California politicians seized control of electric rates. They held rates down, but the true cost of energy kept rising. Soon the electric company went bust; the lights went out. Consumers had to pay for the mess. Now, some people in Illinois are playing the same game." CORE, which describes itself on its Web site as "a coalition of individuals, businesses and organizations," was identified as the ad's sponsor. After a complaint was filed with state regulators, ComEd acknowledged that it had bankrolled the entire $15 million effort.
And does all this touch Obama? It does. According to the article, "Illinois employees of the utility and its parent, Exelon, have contributed $181,711 to Obama's presidential bid—more than workers at any other company in the state."
Funny that the ad didn't mention the bust "electric company"'s name. Probably wouldn't have tugged on the ol' heart strings so much.
It's important for voters to be aware of the advertising campaigns and to respond cool-headedly, analytically, responsibly. One of the best antidotes to the campaigns is to look at the records of the candidates. But -- in this case -- it might also be wise to look into the record of Axelrod's other client, Massachusetts Governor Patrick. Compare the 2006 rhetoric with the record since his election.
Of course, those early contributions have been absolutely dwarfed by the small donations of over a million middle class supporters. When it comes to getting reelected, Obama will just need to setup a website again and poof, the money will appear so long as he has pleased middle class America.
Perhaps besides requiring advertisers to reveal the name of their newly made up astroturf group, the ads should include anyone who has provided more than 5% of the funding. At least corporate special interests will have to go to more work to hide their involvement.
Makes sense, the Obama campaign is the perfect Astro Turf campaign. Artificial candidate and artificial grass rootiness.
I'm curious to find out who Stella is supporting. I hope HRC does not cross thy tounge. There's no green grass "roots" to be found on that side either. So what do we do?
I think it's important, when these kind of terms like "astroturfing" get thrown around, that we think about what they mean, if they're applied accurately, and if the perception we have of them is accurate.
If you think about a company that wants to influence the political process, there are two options: you can hire lobbyists to directly donate to and negotiate with politicians, or you can run these campaigns where you try to convince the public (rightly or wrongly) to be on your side.
I'd have to say I much prefer the latter approach; it can be disingenuous, but ultimately it relies on voters as an intermediary rather than unaccountable lobbyists. Also, in the astroturf case, it's easy to convince people if the ads are blatantly deceptive and to make the company's strategy ineffective--we have no such defense from lobbyists.
The Corporate Strategy of "astroturfing" is facilitated by "public relations" entities who make "donations" to community leaders such as church ministers to influence their followers to protest and lobby on behalf of corporate interests - and often against their own personal interests. This is clearly lobbying by a proxy and made possible by the public affairs firm's willingness to serve as a third party conduit for the transfer of vast amounts of corporate funds to a few well connected ringleaders in a given community. Clearly, this type of activity should require the firm and its members to register as lobbyists and the dollar amounts being funneled to generate faux community support of the particular corporate position or interest needs to be fully disclosed. This is a very shameful and underhanded practice that will wither on the vine if the light of day is ever shined upon it.
I hope HRC does not cross
I hope HRC does not cross thy tounge. There's no green grass "roots" to be found.
Hey Brandon, groups like ASK
Hey Brandon, groups like ASK are not convincing people to be on their side. They simply create the perception that average people believe what the ads say even though they are not funded or conceived by average people but by political hacks. Besides, groups like ASK pay people to be publicly supportive and attend rallies, protests, and write op eds. Astroturfing is not just disingenuous, it is electioneering and a violation of many state and federal campaign laws. Obama was elected on just this kind of deceit.