Markovich: The Harris campaign and the biggest case of political ‘astroturfing’ yet

The postmortem on the Harris campaign is underway, and here’s a number that stands out.

According to The Washington Examiner, nearly $4 million went to a firm called Village Marketing. Their mission? Pay thousands of social media influencers to hype up Harris and tear down Trump. Now, at that point, can we still call them influencers or paid propagandists?

And when all is tallied, this election might go down as the biggest case of political astroturfing yet, nope, not on a soccer field.

More Matt Markovich: How much will new Seattle Transportation Levy cost homeowners?

In politics, astroturfing is the fine art of hiding who’s behind a message, making it look like it grew organically from the grassroots. But here’s the kicker: it’s as fake as the turf on a stadium floor.

Here’s the root of the real problem: influencers aren’t required to disclose a campaign is paying them.

Imagine if a brand did that—the FTC could slap them with a $16,000 fine per day. But for the Harris campaign? No penalties. There are no disclosures you would see in an endorsement ad –  It’s the Wild West out there.

Markovich: Seattle council member jumps on capital gains bandwagon, proposes one for city residents

So, next time you see a familiar face praising a candidate on TikTok, Facebook, or Instagram, remember: they might be getting paid, and their so-called ‘reach’ could be boosted by thousands of bots faking their numbers.

These days, campaigns don’t need organic support—they can just roll it out like turf. And for us viewers, it’s nearly impossible to tell if the green grass we’re seeing is real or synthetic.

Matt Markovich covers politics and public affairs for MyNorthwest and KIRO Newsradio.

 

Follow @https://twitter.com/mattmarkovich