Before I start, I want to make it clear that I do not have an opinion on this particular case at this stage due to not being able to locate the material in question (despite my best internet trawling efforts). I still however,  feel the issue of astroturfing is an important one to cover.

But. As reported this week, this is the story of astroturfing: the agency, the competitors and the apology.

First appearing in the West Australian news on 10 November 2009, this  advertisement is pretty full on. (click for larger view)

It’s pretty clear that Midland Bricks (a subsidiary of Boral) are admitting their role in creating a faux DVD and engaging with lobbyists to sway a political and community consultative decision process in which its competitor, BGC Australia, were engaged in to build a new (and competing) brickworks at Perth Airport.

The story is pretty sordid. Basically, BGC Australia were buying bricks from Midland to keep up with their demand, and wanted to build a brickworks on Commonwealth land adjacent to Perth Airport so that they could obviously save money, and stop the reliance on Midland. But Midland, with established brickworks in WA didn’t want to lose their source of income from BGC and end up with a competitor.

In 2006, Midland Brick faced legal action over a campaign to block BGC’s planned $A100m Perth brick plant. The ‘campaign’ was fronted  by a well-known WA environmental lobbyist Rob Greenwood and included a DVD titled ‘A Brickwork in the wrong place’ as well as leaflets and letters to politicians. BGC secured an order from the Supreme Court of Western Australia requiring Professional Public Relations to disclose who funded a DVD which the court agreed contained misleading information about BGC’s brickworks proposal for land at Perth Airport, and could have defamed the company.

Sidenote: read the order. It’s fascinating but also sets grounds for legal precedent that if you are considering any form of astroturfing, you will be required to disclose the client.

The Astroturfing

Although relatively uncommon in Australia, astroturfing is a scourge on public relations. It is defined as:

The goal of such a campaign is to disguise the efforts of a political or commercial entity as an independent public reaction to some political entity—a politician, political group, product, service or event. Astroturfers attempt to orchestrate the actions of apparently diverse and geographically distributed individuals, by both overt (“outreach”, “awareness”, etc.) and covert (disinformation) means. Astroturfing may be undertaken by an individual pushing a personal agenda or highly organized professional groups with financial backing from large corporations, unions, non-profits, or activist organizations. Very often the efforts are conducted by political consultants who also specialize in opposition research.

Now, astroturfing can actually appear in a few forms including, with the advent of online forums, digital misrepresentation and comments being posted under false pretenses. A recent example (albeit not as sinister) is stacking over at the mUmBRELLA comment thread.

But our professional association, the Public Relations Institute of Association – PRIA – has a pretty clear position on it. It’s not welcome. You can read their position here.

They also have a registered consultancy list, where public relations consultancies can receive reputational benefits and increased referrals by agreeing to abide by the Code of Practice. Among the various ethical and conduct guides is:

Accepts a positive duty to observe the highest standards in its business practice and in the practice of public relations; promote the benefits of good public relations practice in all dealings; and improve the general understanding of professional public relations practice.

The Agency:

Professional Public Relations (PPR) is a registered consultancy of the PRIA. They are also a highly respected, and successful large public relations agency in the WPP family. They have a history of achievement in mitigating contentious and complex issues-based communications including winning a Golden World Award from the International Public Relations Association for an Agricultural Chemical Manufacture Issue Management campaign for Bayer Australia.

PPR are pretty upfront with the values that guide their operations: accountability and Integrity are listed as what they stride for.

The fall out:

It’s still pretty hazy and I haven’t located the DVD or leaflets yet. But I’ve found council minutes, a Commonwealth Government hansard and speech and various media releases, media stories and articles covering the issue from mid- 2005 through to 2006. It looks like the campaign, its messaging (children will die tone) and its tools (the DVD and letters) were pretty wide-spread and adopted by political and community heavy-weights.

It seems to me, that the issue and the community action would have naturally evolved what with such a passionate and agitated local residents group, and the ongoing issue of brickworks being placed in residential areas. Understanding as a lobbyist and as a consultancy, that this level of agitation would organically grow to a grass-roots campaign and not need propaganda funded by a competitor with business interests in the decision, is the lesson.

Oh, and if you have astroturfed or considering it as a course of action, you’re going to get caught out. People are too cynical and not at all trusting these days.

related posts

• No Related Post