In Defence of Astroturfing

Major Hollywood studios have concocted astroturfing campaigns to protect their interests.  CBS, NBC, FOX and Warner Bros. were just some of the studios behind the “CreativeAmerica” astroturf campaign. Universal Music Group created a faux- grassroots campaign called “MusicRightsNow”. The main purpose of both of these was to create support for the passing of the PROTECT IP censorship bill.  

TechDirt puts forward a particularly persuasive argument on the laziness and laughability of these campaigns. But there are two sides to every story. Such companies are losing huge amounts of revenue due to the subversive activities of the general public. Hollywood corporations have started to fight fire with fire. 

TechDirt argues that there is more music than ever. No one can disagree with the fact that the internet is a huge platform for emerging artists. But I know that I’ve spent less money on music and movies since I’ve had access to broadband. I suspect you’re the same. We're consuming more entertainment than ever, but we're paying almost nothing for it.

Justin talked about the 'Four Minute Men' in his blog post. You can liken astroturfing to a virtual version of Brand Power.

"Under the guise of being an independent body, they take cash from brands and ad agencies and produce  infomercials but pretend to be “editorial” (i.e. not associated with the brand, and are there to empower consumers through customer advocacy)."

Good astroturfing, like cash for comment and product placement, requires an attuned eye to be able spot. If you have enough web literacy  to download a movie illegally online, do you deserve to be subjected to astroturfing by the film companies you exploit?

I don’t think so, but it’s good to get into that headspace, and consider alternative attitudes towards astroturfing. Are there times when it can justified?