Can Crowds on Demand's services be considered a form of astroturfing?
Executive summary
Crowds on Demand operates a paid crowd-and-stunt business that has repeatedly been cited in reporting and academic discussion as facilitating manufactured public support—a practice commonly labeled “astroturfing” [1] [2]. Multiple documented incidents, most prominently the Entergy/New Orleans case, show the company supplied paid participants and speakers to create the appearance of grassroots backing for a corporate project [3] [4].
1. What “astroturfing” means and why it matters
Astroturfing is the deliberate creation of a false appearance of grassroots support or opposition so that an audience perceives an issue as spontaneously popular; scholars emphasize its distinctive harm is conveying inauthentic crowd sentiment that leverages social conformity effects [2]. The term is used across journalism and advocacy to describe tactics that convert financial resources into the visible trappings of popular mobilization—rallies, speakers, letters, and coordinated messaging—which is precisely the set of services Crowds on Demand advertises and deploys [5] [1].
2. Documented incidents tying the company to astroturf-style activity
Investigations and reporting have linked Crowds on Demand to several high-profile episodes: Entergy’s subcontractor used the firm to supply actors and speakers at New Orleans public hearings, a revelation Entergy later acknowledged in its internal report [3]; reporting and advocacy sources also document allegations connecting the company to staged campaigns and paid protesters in other local fights and to a contested 2021 Dallas operation that included a hoax advocacy group [3] [6]. U.S. press coverage and academic observers have repeatedly cited Crowds on Demand as a prominent exemplar of paid-protester businesses [7] [8].
3. The company’s stated position and practical defense
Crowds on Demand’s CEO has publicly defended the business model by arguing paid participants can still hold genuine views and that publicity services are a form of marketing or lobbying; in the Entergy episode the CEO said the company pays people to show up and stay “on message,” asserting that does not preclude genuine support [3]. The firm’s website and marketing also frame its offerings as publicity, PR stunts, and “guerilla lobbying,” which is a self-description that complicates any clean separation between commercial event production and political persuasion [1].
4. Why the services meet key criteria for astroturfing
When the objective is to manufacture visible public support or dissent to influence decision‑makers or public perception, paying participants to simulate grassroots turnout or testimony aligns directly with academic and journalistic definitions of astroturfing: the manipulation lies in converting money into the signal of popular mobilization and thus potentially misleading observers and officials about genuine public sentiment [2] [4]. Documented cases where subcontractors used the firm to populate public hearings and produce scripted speakers show the company’s services have been used in precisely this manipulative manner [3].
5. Counterarguments, limits of evidence, and alternative framings
Not every paid crowd is identical in intent or effect; Crowds on Demand and some commentators argue such services are commercial publicity or event staffing rather than inherently deceptive political manipulation, and the company states it does not always hide client relationships or claim organic origins [3] [1]. Reporting also shows clients and subcontractors, not always the company itself, sometimes orchestrated specific deceptions [3], and lawsuits and denials (for example, disputes over extortion claims) complicate a single narrative of culpability [6] [7]. Available sources document instances where paid crowds were used to mislead, but they do not prove every use of the firm’s services was intended as covert astroturfing [3] [7].
6. Conclusion — a qualified yes with important caveats
Based on the firm’s business model, its public marketing, academic definitions of astroturfing, and multiple documented instances where its services created the appearance of grassroots support, Crowds on Demand’s offerings can reasonably be considered a form of astroturfing when used to simulate spontaneous public backing and deceive audiences or officials [1] [3] [4] [2]. That classification should be applied with nuance: the label fits practices and documented cases where paid participation was used to manufacture consent, but not every commercial event or publicity hire necessarily amounts to covert astroturfing—context, disclosure, and client intent matter and the record shows disputes and denials that complicate blanket judgments [3] [7].