Over the past four or five months, I’ve noticed that a group of commenters to blog posts related to network neutrality tend to say the same things over and over again. What’s interesting is that there’s a core group of the same commenters that show up time and again saying the same things (although not always phrased the same way) repeatedly. These commenters use the following names: Paulaner01, pkp646, lessgov, oldhats, John Rice and AJ Carey.
Here’s what this group typically says in one form or another: we don’t need network neutrality regulations because there is no evidence of abuse and in any event government intervention in the Internet marketplace will mess everything up.
Now, along comes another commenter, sagecast, who tells us that this group is an organized tag-team of industry representatives, semi-sock puppets if you will, who troll the Internet making such comments to give the false impression of broad-based support of industry-friendly positions.
Here’s what sagecast has to say (check out the first comment posted here)
Readers of this comment thread should know that Paulaner01, pkp646, lessgov and oldhats are part of a tag-team of industry shills who invade blog comments on net neutrality to argue against any government regulation of the Internet. Other names who run with this crowd are John Rice and AJ Carey. (Google any of these names in combination and you’ll see how their game works).
By tag-teaming the blogs, this small handful of individuals gives the false impression of broad popular support for an industry-friendly position.
What they fail to point out is that Net Neutrality has been the rule that has governed access to the Internet since its inception. It’s the reason that the Internet has become such a dynamic force for new ideas, economic innovation and free speech. What they really want is for Congress to radically re-write our telecommunications laws so that companies like AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth can swoop in and become gatekeepers to Internet content — in a way that benefits no one except the largest ISPs.
I’d like these people to tell us how it is that they appear together (usually one after the other) praising one another’s comments and spouting identical industry talking points across the blogosphere.
What gives fellas? Are you being paid to do this? And by whom?
Sure enough, the Internet is populated with strings of comments by the same posse of commenters. This blog post at MediaCitizen, for example, shows comments by paulaner01, oldhats, John Rice, AJ Carey and lessgov. Same thing at this post at The Deal’s Tech Confidential blog.
I’m not sure what to make of this. It sure seems like organized blog commenting to me. But is this kind of coordinated commenting wrong?
The answer has to be no, if the coordination is simply like-minded individuals who get roused by the same posts, all know each other and are compulsive writers. On the other hand, if these are paid industry representatives, they have every moral obligation to state that fact when posting comments so that we all at least know which side their bread is buttered on.
It’s fine to hold the opinions that this tag-team obviously does and it’s fine to express those opinions in a coordinated fashion. What I find unseemly is the prospect that these commenters are paid by the cable and phone companies to make these comments and aren’t disclosing it.
Come on guys, identify yourselves and tell us if you are getting paid to make these comments.
Cynthia Brumfield at 9:39 AM|Comments(10)
I too have been hit by this. What bothered me is that one individual was clearly trying to pass himself off as three people.
Posted by: Discussion at January 29, 2008 4:00 PM
to answer the question:
Do Broadband Providers Employ Blog Comment Shills?
yes and alot of other companies and image conscious celebs do.
Sometimes called counter blogging. I know of certain companies employed to monitor the web heavily and if something is posted bad for the client they will comment it out or counter it.
Posted by: Steve at December 8, 2007 8:30 PM
My experience has been that most (but not all) of these commenters tend to repeat superficial "talking points" and ideological beliefs, and rarely back them up with fact-based arguments.
Posted by: haberler at October 26, 2007 7:26 AM
My respons has ben to ask them for facts or substantive arguments to bck up their positions. A few have, and I've learned something from them and have come to respct them. Most haven't.
Posted by: Online Education at October 23, 2006 1:32 PM
I'm a real person. I'm vehemently opposed to net neutrality and I have a specific problem with your post.
What they fail to point out is that Net Neutrality has been the rule that has governed access to the Internet since its inception. It’s the reason that the Internet has become such a dynamic force for new ideas, economic innovation and free speech. What they really want is for Congress to radically re-write our telecommunications laws..
Net Neutrality was not the law of the land for 60% of the Internet subscribers.
That reference is used to describe the common carrier provisions that apply to telephone lines and, by extension, DSL lines that ran on top of them.
It did not apply to cable connections - all 26 million of them (compared to about 18.5 million DSL lines).
Cable grew precisely because it didn't have regulation. Cable was able to surpass DSL because it was allowed to set its own path. The "law of the land" was lifted as a mechanism to create a level playing field between telcos and cable.
This is one of the disingenuous arguments made by the proponents of this poorly conceived legislation.
Posted by: Michael Turk at June 1, 2006 4:14 PM
Thank you Tim and Cynthia for bringing these posts to light. They have hit my blog too (http://tinyurl.com/kpk23). After they posted to my blog I sent both 'lessgov' and 'oldhats' a personal e-mail inviting them to post on my blog and expand upon their comments. That was on May 3rd and I never heard back from either of them.
If what Tim is saying is true then it will just be another example of astroturfing in my town. I'm pretty sure both of you saw my blog post about how my Mayor called out Verizon on an astroturfing operation in Red Bank:
http://redbanktv.org/blog/2006/04/faking_the_count.html
I'd love to have more info on who 'lessgov' and 'oldhats' are so I can bring this up to my town council.
Thanks for the tip Tim -- Tom
Posted by: Tom at May 22, 2006 9:00 AM
Here are some more examples fo their handiwork:
FreedomWorks, which is itself an astroturf industry front group
There are hundreds more.
Posted by: sagecast at May 22, 2006 6:38 AM
Thanks for picking this up Cynthia. Since this is essentially about full disclosure, I should mention that sagecast is me. I am Tim Karr. I blog as MediaCitizen, whom you mention in your piece, and who was the target of a coordinated raid by these pro-industry commenters.
Since coming out with a position in favor of network neutrality, I and a number of other bloggers have noticed pkp646, tpwk, oldhats, lessgov, Paulaner01 commenting in defense of telephone companies on our posts.
When I dug a little further, I noticed that they have been spreading industry talking points in comment threads across the blogosphere (more than one hundred blogs have comment by at least three of these individuals; more than two hundred by at least two). They often comment in sequence, praising one another's positions with openers such as "I agree with oldhats..." or "pkp646 is right..."
In reading their posts I was reminded of a bizarre call I received six months back. It was from a blogger friend who wanted to arrange a tele-conference between me and a Verizon employee "who had insider information" on the telephone company's plan to pass a New Jersey-wide video franchising bill. I went for the bait and joined the call with some local bloggers. The Verizon "insider" turned out to be a company-hired PR flack. He wanted to recruit bloggers to write comments in favor of pro-Verizon legislation moving through the Trenton statehouse. I read them the riot act for selling out to a deceptive corporate campaign and got off the call.
That was the last I had thought of this until now. Paulaner01, tpwk, pkp646 and Oldhats have also been active commenting in favor of Verizon's FIOS and franchising initiatives in New Jersey. Check out their act here.
Could they be tied to that blogger-for-hire scam Verizon attempted to sell me on? Did some bloggers take the bait? Are they now being paid to mob comment threads on Net Neutrality and spout industry talking points?
Posted by: sagecast at May 22, 2006 6:09 AM
I too have been hit by this. What bothered me is that one individual was clearly trying to pass himself off as three people.
http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2006/05/10/astroturfing-on-my-site/
I wouldn't be the least surprised to see this same nonsense happening on the other side of the debate. People are just less likely to look there.
Posted by: Andrew Schmitt at May 21, 2006 10:22 PM
I hate to use the term "fair and balanced," given that its been co-opted by Fox News, but it applies, as usual to Cynthia's post. The issue is not whether these folks are coordinating their posts, but whether they're being paid to submit blog comments by companies on one side of the debate and not disclosing that. My guess (and hope) is that they're not, but I really have no idea.
My experience has been that most (but not all) of these commenters tend to repeat superficial "talking points" and ideological beliefs, and rarely back them up with fact-based arguments.
My response has been to ask them for facts or substantive arguments to back up their positions. A few have, and I've learned something from them and have come to respect them. Most haven't.
It's easy to spout off an opinion (I know, because I do it too), but its more challenging (and more helpful) to dig below the surface of comfortable, well-worn opinions, and see if they really hold up in the face of reality.
One of the things I appreciate about Cynthia's posts are that she tends to raise questions that dig below the surface of positions on either side of policy debates. When we discuss and debate the issues, I always learn something new, see things a bit differently than I did before, and have more appreciation for perspectives different than my own.
Posted by: Mitch Shapiro at May 21, 2006 2:59 PM
Blogs We Read
