Which high-profile events or clients have used Crowds on Demand services?
Executive summary
Crowds on Demand has marketed itself as a national provider of hired audiences for PR stunts, corporate activations and political advocacy, and reporting and public records identify a handful of high-profile or politically consequential engagements—most notably alleged work for Anthony Weiner’s 2013 mayoral bid, public records tying the firm to the Six Californias campaign, and a 2024 Texas Observer report linking hotelier Monty Bennett to efforts in Dallas—while the company maintains it usually does not disclose clients, leaving many claims opaque [1] [2] [3].
1. The Anthony Weiner allegation and its limits
The most widely cited political allegation is that actors from Crowds on Demand attended Anthony Weiner’s 2013 New York mayoral events; that claim appears in contemporary press and is repeated on Wikipedia, but reporting around the claim relies on secondary media accounts rather than an explicit Crowds on Demand client roster, and the company’s practice of keeping clients confidential complicates independent verification [1] [3].
2. Documented campaign work: Six Californias and public records
Foundational reporting and public records identify the Six Californias initiative as a paying client of Crowds on Demand, supporting the company founder’s broader statement that the firm worked with state-level campaigns and presidential contenders while usually declining to name names for client-retention reasons [1] [2].
3. 2024 Texas Observer reporting: Monty Bennett and local influence networks
A 2024 Texas Observer investigation reported that Republican donor and hotelier Monty Bennett hired Crowds on Demand to help construct a network of advocacy groups in Dallas aimed at shaping local politics, a rare contemporary example where a named political donor is publicly linked to the firm’s organizing services [1].
4. Corporate case studies and entertainment activations from company materials
Crowds on Demand’s own promotional materials and case studies describe work for a range of corporate and consumer clients—examples include arranging brand ambassadors at Advertising Week in New York, logo-bearing greeters at SFO for a technology company, a start-up vodka brand rollouts, and paparazzi-style celebrity experiences—none of which in the company materials are identified by major brand name, but they illustrate the firm’s client mix across tech, entertainment and consumer marketing [4] [5] [6].
5. International and controversial assignments claimed on the company site
The firm’s website asserts it has handled more politically sensitive assignments, including being hired by “a foreign government” to stage favorable receptions at the U.N. General Assembly and by corporate clients to stage recurring protests against business rivals; these are presented as case studies on the company site but lack independent corroboration in mainstream press reporting cited in these sources [7].
6. Why the public record is patchy: non-disclosure, astroturfing concerns, and journalistic probes
InfluenceWatch and investigative profiles emphasize that Crowds on Demand is generally nonpartisan and usually does not reveal clients, a business choice that both protects commercial relationships and fuels accusations of astroturfing; investigative pieces like the California Sunday Magazine profile document pricing, operational practices and ethical questions but also note that the firm serves many anonymous clients, which produces an uneven public record of “high-profile” users [3] [2].
7. Bottom line: known, alleged, and company-claimed high-profile users
Concretely documented or widely reported high-profile connections include the Six Californias campaign (public records), the Anthony Weiner allegation (press reporting), and the Texas Observer’s 2024 reporting on Monty Bennett; otherwise the firm’s public case studies show corporate and entertainment activations but rarely name marquee brands publicly, and the company’s own claims about foreign-government work and aggressive advocacy campaigns remain uncorroborated in independent sources cited here [1] [2] [4] [7] [3].