Hard to Tell the Grass from the Astroturf These Days
Reason magazine contributing editor Julian Sanchez has some interesting observations re: distinguishing true grassroots activism from illegitimate professionally ginned up astroturf in the health care debate context:
I'm trying to figure out what to make of claims that angry folks showing up at townhall-style events on health care reform are mere "astroturf" activists. If it's true, it seems like it must be some spectacularly bad astroturfing: My experience is that when seasoned political professionals are really in charge of stage-managing an event, it tends to look rather more… well… professional. Which is to say, more printed signs than crudely hand-lettered ones riddled with misspelled and vaguely embarrassing slogans, and polished talking points rather than crazed ramblings that make ordinary people think your side is a bit unhinged. Manifestly, there are groups like FreedomWorks trying to catalyze or corral opposition to Obama's policies, but it hardly sounds as though they're in control—at most, it seems like they're providing focal points for the kind of genuine, strong sentiment you can't fake… and that I'd think few political operatives would want to fake.
That said, I think the sharp line between "grassroots" and "astroturf" will probably make less and less sense in the emerging media environment. The Platonic form of a grassroots campaign is, say, a bunch of ordinary parents in Peoria, largely unconnected with and certainly undirected by any larger political entity, banding together to agitate for some change or other. And the Platonic form of astroturf is when Peoria Parents for a Brighter Future turns out to be three bachelors in a K Street office with some letterhead and a fat check from McDonalds or something. But the lines between local and national politics are much blurrier when all the organizing and reporting are taking place online…. Think of what it took to effectively fake a concerned citizens group circa 1988 versus, say, what it would take to fake the current birther movement.
Any "astroturf" campaign on the modern media landscape is going to require actually ginning up some broad-based activism if it's going to be effective. And any genuinely spontaneous, bottom-up action that seems even moderately interesting and resonant with national issues is going to find a whole lot of political professionals eager to promote, guide, replicate, or co-opt it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
With the crowd manipulation our current community organizer president has exhibited it's not hard to understand why he projected such actions on the protesters in the recent situation.
I know this will offend some people, but I just think some people have remembered (and others haven't forgotten) that This Is America. HR 3200 was basically a WTF moment for a great many people. I hope they are not easily distracted or induced.
The buyers remorse stories are starting to eek out. I look forward to more and we can go from evangelical nutjob to progressive nutjob.
I'm getting sea sick on this pendulum swinging, back, and forth, and back, and forth and back...
Good job! Great to hear from a former Cato employee (intern?) at a website that's part of the Kochtopus and that's promoted a Kochtopus-linked group that stage... er, I mean, helped "facilitate" the TeaParties (AFP). And, they all agree: those aren't Kochtopus tentacles, no siree!
P.S. Sanchez deleted a couple comments I left on his site, both containing links to this group.
P.P.S. Here's my extensive coverage of the "Birthers" issue. So far, not even one person has been able to find not even one false, misleading, or illogical thing at that or any of the linked pages.
P.P.S. Here's my extensive coverage of the "Birthers" issue. So far, not even one person has been able to find not even one false, misleading, or illogical thing at that or any of the linked pages.
I'm trying to figure out what to make of claims that angry folks showing up at townhall-style events on health care reform are mere "astroturf" activists.
I'm curious. How long could critics on the right get away with labeling a leftwing movement as "tea bagging" before being roundly excoriated as homophobic, dismissed with a wave of the hand and sent to the kid's table with 24AheadDotCom?
The better question would be, how long before Olberman's head would explode on live television ?? Not to single anyone out on msnbc, of course...just seems like his noggin would explode more quickly.
Dissent is encouraged...unless your cause differs from the agenda listing that I have
Cato's pushing the tea parties? I gotta remember to send them a check...
My experience is that when seasoned political professionals are really in charge of stage-managing an event, it tends to look rather more? well? professional.
Maybe they took a guerilla marketing 101 course. You used to be able to say the same about professional advertising. Eventually, they figured out that people tuned out slick, packaged marketing, so they started making it look more authentic, by cheapening up. The Derelique of marketing campaigns. After I donated to Ron Paul, I started getting mail from every two bit conservative campaign out there, including the tea parties. Now, just because it's organized by a professional political organization, doesn't mean it's not legit and the gripes aren't real, but the line between grass and astroturf are going to be even harder to suss out. This isn't just because of technology, but because of knowing their customers. People don't respond to slick politics as much any more. The "Get a brain, morans!" signs are seen as more authentic.
swillfredo,
The "teabagging" moniker came from the people in the group first as they had signs that said things like, "Teabag Obama!" unironically. I look forward to the gorilla mask movement.
It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad how groups like Reason can't figure out how to undercut people like RachelMaddow. Instead, they play right into their hands.
Grassroots or Astroturf?
For fuck's sake aren't we old enough to be beyond this nonsense. Jokes and slurs are not always appropriate in every circumstance. Understanding how and why is part of being a member of a society with pretty rudimentary socialization skills. Not being able to say faggot in the company of gay men is not an oppression on you. It's called manners. Calling insane people with teabags hanging from their heads in the service of making a point about something they can't even articulate teabaggers? Funny!
I look forward to the gorilla mask movement.
Well, that's gonna be a problem. I laser. It's like a turtle shell down there.
Grassroots or Astroturf?
George Sr.
The leftists/democrats have been pulling this nonsense for years. College kids, union members, professional protesters...They'll bus in anyone. Our chicken-hawk in chief's probably done a great deal of it in his life as community organizer.
Just another case of guilty projection.
Same goes for radical behavior. The democrats have been using their fellow whackos on the left as an icebreaker for their policies for decades.
"Hey, look over there!"
Here's a great little primer on how to spot astroturfers:
http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2009/08/pelosi-astroturf-healthcare/
Hint: Holding up professionally printed yard signs with the wire stands still attached does not exude an air of spontaneity.
P.P.S. Here's my extensive coverage of the "Birthers" issue. So far, not even one person has been able to find not even one false, misleading, or illogical thing at that or any of the linked pages.
Look, we don't want to click on links to your stupid website, OK. STFU, Lonewacko.
Seems kinda bigoted, Tony.
The Left thinks that pharmacy and health insurance companies working for a profit is the reason medicine is the way it is. To them, then, no thinking have-not can possibly want anything less than what the 1000-plus page manifesto privileges us with. Therefore, any resistence is manufactured by said companies to protect their immoral profits. To them, it's a vast conspiracy on the part of the oligarchy of evil patent holders against the working man with the poor three-branch Democrat party caught in the middle, going "hey man! it's not worth fighting, let's all chill and take a toke, yo".
The rest of us know that the reason health insurance is attached to employer, rates paid by insurance companies are so low that the non-insurance rate is sky-high, and malpractice insurance is so expensive is because government mandated it (in the latter case, apparently judges ignore the contract that you sign before a procedure) -- the government has provided rent-seeking openings, at best, and declared the state of the medicine market by fiat, at worst, by the power of the state, backed with taxes and guns.
There's nothing more to it. One side believes that government is not responsible for any failures except for not caring enough to force doctors to work for maximum wage; the other wants the fuck out.
Troll Tony is finally right about something. Insults should be about calling people what they aren't. Calling a gay guy a fag isn't funny. Calling a straight guy a breeder isn't funny. You have to reverse the situation.
For example:
Tony is a thoughtful commenter and a valued member of the H&R community and everyone should pay attention to what he says.
For example:
Tony is a thoughtful commenter and a valued member of the H&R community and everyone should pay attention to what he says.
Ok, let me try:
Tony's a breeder. I mean, he is way into chicks and hates getting in bed with gay men.
strike through16 years agovaguely embarrassing slogans...crazed ramblings
But we love you anyway, Nancy Pelosi.
Democrats complaining that the right is "Astroturfing" is bit like the Kelly era Bills bitching that the Dolphins were running a no huddle offense against them.
Here's a good example of a perfectly orchestrated "astroturf" movement. The right has some learnin' to do.
"It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad how groups like Reason can't figure out how to undercut people like RachelMaddow."
Why bother with someone who's audience share on any given day could fit into an old fashioned phone booth with plenty of room to spare?
There was a town hall meeting on campus yesterday. There were a lot of people outside holding up stupid signs like 2 MILLION GREEN JOBS NOW! and screeching at each other like baboons, but the true heroes were the Larouchites who were holding up a giant poster that had Obama with a Hitler moustache and the caption I'VE CHANGED. Those dudes invented griefing.
Also: please continue writing, Lonewacko. Your suggestions are invaluable and your insights are incisive.
"The leftists/democrats have been pulling this nonsense for years. College kids, union members, professional protesters...They'll bus in anyone. Our chicken-hawk in chief's probably done a great deal of it in his life as community organizer.
Just another case of guilty projection."
That's exactly right.
It is axiomatic that liberals are alwauys guility of that which they accuse their opponents.
The AFL_CIO, UAW, SEIU, Acorn and other assorted groups have been "astroturfing" for years.
The Dems are just mad that the prostetors are spoiling their show. The standard operating procedure with Obama's and the Dems so-called "town hall" meetings have always been to pre-pack the place with their own supporters to begin with.
strike through16 years agoBut...but...some of them are carrying guns !
OMG! O! M! GEEE!
Those guys are morons. If the caption to that poster said "Godwin", though, that'd be kind of clever.
Lonewacko's right about one thing, though. The proper way to defeat these lion-towing propagandists is to make their surnames and given names some sort of compound name. RachelMaddow. Or better yet, make it a portmanteau. Raddow. Take that, woman!
All of this stuff is a result of the adversarial relationship that has evolved in politics. This is a direct result of the two-party system. It's what happens in court rooms across the country everyday. No one cares about the truth, only about maximizing their position through any means available. It's getting to the point where there is little room for open, honest debate about anything. And it all seems to be driven by fear, hate, anger and distrust.
It's been said that Americans love a good fight. If this keeps up much longer, we'll have one; a real one. I say we should just split up the country now.
Raddow. Take that, woman!
Rachel Maddow is a woman?
Sorry.
For fuck's sake aren't we old enough to be beyond this nonsense.
You missed the point Tony. I would be hard pressed to care less about people using "tea bag" as a noun, verb or an adjective. But in a society where a poster of Obama looking like the Joker or a political cartoon of a violent chimpanzee being shot have members of the media practically apoplectic with rage that the Klan is coming back it is an entertaining double standard.
Here's a good example of a perfectly orchestrated "astroturf" movement.
Thanks for the nice video, Tricky (7:31am). I wonder if healthcare reform will help with restroom visits while cuffed.
Anyway, so what if stuff *is* "astroturf"? Isn't the country into reasoned debate now, beyond ad homs?
beyond ad homs?
Careful! You'll concede some points and show your childish anti-intellectual nature.
Astroturf is the wrong term.
These people are, for the most part, honestly angry.
Many, many of them (on both sides), however, are angry about things that they've been told by professional partisans. Things that are untrue, but targeted to create anger in a specific group.
So, is the anger authentic if it is the result of dishonest manipulation?
Are the people who show up to a town hall ever representative of the general population?
Neu,
If they knew the truth, consumed the bill as written and had it explained to them in neutral terms, what percentage would still be angry?
Sugarfree,
Hard to tell.
But it would be nice to know.
How long until we get to reverse astroturf where the Democrat activists dress up in overalls and Nascar caps with signs that say "Jesus Hates You Negro Obama"?
If they knew the truth, consumed the bill as written and had it explained to them in neutral terms, what percentage would still be angry?
Probably about the same, assuming that knowing the truth includes letting them know such details as how many new federal employees will be hired to administer this thing, how much doctor and hospital pay will be cut and how many will likely leave the field, what taxes will be raised to pay for it, etc.
Get a job lobbying for Obama!
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lac/npo/1320138750.html
RC Dean,
Somehow your comment makes me think of the "what is unknowable" versus "what is unknown" discussion from the other day.
Although the debate about particular proposed bills is important. I do think people also need to be having a debate more on this level...
http://finance.senate.gov/healthreform2009/finalwhitepaper.pdf
You can't, imho, debate the proposed solution without think pretty carefully about the issue more generally.
It doesn't just come down to a list like RC Dean's. Without the context, those numbers would be pretty meaningless.
This looks like a nifty tool.
http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm
"astroturfing" = "these Negroes are being manipulated by outside agitators, probably Communists". Some people just cannot believe that their opponents are real people with real concerns, no matter what the issue is.
Neu, do you have any idea if any of the Democratic bills do anything to make geriatric medicine more attractive to doctors? As far as I can tell, they are putting $10 million into training and recruitment and that's about it. How will that accomplish anything if you don't reform incentives?
thanks very http://www.yuregininsesi.com http://www.yuregininsesi.net
thanks very sesli chat