"Paid protesters are real," writes the Los Angeles Times, after a lawsuit filed by a Czech investor against a business rival spotlighted the seedy, and very real business of people hired to express fake outrage, support, and everything in between.
According to a lawsuit filed by investor Zdenek Bakala, Prague-based investment manager Pavol Krupa hired Beverly hills company Crowds on Demand (COD) to stage a protest near Bakala's home in Hilton Head, SC.
In the Bakala case, Crowds on Demand is accused of spreading misinformation through a website, putting on protests and organizing a phone and email campaign targeting several U.S. institutions with ties to Bakala, who got an MBA from Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business and had an estimated net worth topping $1 billion earlier this decade, according to Forbes. -LA Times
Crowds on Demand provides pop-up "protests, rallies, flash mobs, paparazzi events and other inventive PR stunts," according to its website.--
--In 2014, ABC's "Nightline" reported that a group backed by the beverage industry was hiring people to protest a soda tax measure - posting ads on Craigslist for paid protesters at $13 an hour.
https://archive.is/pX4GT/0752d2d777d62023a88599435a9582bc653f45c1.jpg
[^ advertisement for paid anti-Trump protest: "STOP TRUMP - up to $1500/week"]
During the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, many noted what appeared to be a man, Vinay Krishnan - who works for progressive activist organization Center for Popular Democracy, paying a woman named Vickie Lampron who was later seen in the Kavanaugh hearing.
Proof the protestors were paid off in line. #Kavanaugh #ConfirmKavanaugh #ActivismInAction pic.twitter.com/hMLpP4zWPn
— Adam W. Schindler (\@AdamSchindler) September 4, 2018
Krishnan said that the money was given to people to pay fines in case they were arrested.
As the Times notes, paid protesters aren't a recent phenomenon.
Longtime California political consultant Garry South, who was a campaign strategist for California Gov. Gray Davis, said it’s long been common for campaigns and political parties to pay people a few bucks or perhaps provide a meal in exchange for attending a rally. He recalled a 2002 rally in San Francisco where he said that tactic was used.
“It turns out, the San Francisco Democratic Party, to bolster the crowd, had basically gone down to skid row and paid people $5 or something to tromp up to Union Square,” South said.
But he sees a big difference between that kind of activity and the paid protests allegedly organized by Crowds on Demand.
“What’s different is the commercialization of the process,” he said. “It just contributes to the air of unreality that exists in this day and age with essentially not being able to believe your own eyes or ears. I don’t think it’s particularly healthy. But it probably inevitably was going to come to this.” -LA Times
Crowds on Demand, meanwhile, shamelessly boasts on their website that they were hired by a business rival to "cripple the operations" of a manufacturing business owned by a convicted child molester, which resulted in the hiring company buying the molester-owned business for "5 percent of its previous value."
14624085? ago
Could the first amendment rights of the employee protesters be violated, if they are protesting on public property?
If I worked for a protest company, and I were ordered (by my employer) to be silent about my personal convictions, and promote opinions I am personally opposed to, on public property, is that considered a violation of my 1A rights? The key point being that it is being done on public property.
14609455? ago
This is just so fucking sad, where the hell is our DOJ to protect us from bullshit like this. Fucking sucks being the minority voter against the NPC fucktards we call liberals.
14607332? ago
Professional harassment.
14606516? ago
OP here, when you read this article you can see that these companies are engaging in blatant extortion and need to be prosecuted.
14606550? ago
Hey, thanks again for sharing the article.
Fits in nicely with the recent news about Soros(Explosive device found near his home).
You're absolutely right they need to be prosecuted - the hard part is finding a way to do it; defining the crime they've committed is difficult, so far as I can tell.
That said... if Charles Manson can be charged and then jailed for life over allegedly inciting the Tate(et al) murderers, perhaps something can be said for those who incite(and pay) crowds to disturb the peace, disrupt due process, vandalize/riot/loot/harass/assault, etc...
14606338? ago
I’m not sure how this is legal. Paying a mob to protest should go somewhere under vandalism.
14610231? ago
or disturbing the peace.
14607903? ago
Safe to say, we should gas the kikes and stupid subversive counter productive shit like this would fade away
14607858? ago
It exposes the organizer to law suits if anything goes wrong. If the paid person is offered incentive to commit a crime (like assault or vandalism), then a prosecutor would probably pursue charges against the organizer because inciting crime is unlawful. Here is what hasn't been tested or considered. The new breed of law about stalking, criminal harassment, that swept the world in the 90s and 00s, problematizes and pretty much criminalizes even the mildest actions paid protestors are doing when the target is (arguably) a person instead of group. If I were to make a company offering paid campaigns of harassment in order to get someone to commit suicide, I would expect to be charged criminally under statutes that cover inciting/provoking/hiring crimes (criminal harassment if not murder). I would not expect free speech protections to apply especially if mine and my employees' motive is obviously profit.
14607647? ago
Commercial rather than political speech. WAY less Constitutional protections.
BTW the payments for potential fines? Totally bogus. You can REIMBURSE, but up front its a payment. Sic the IRS on this. "1099 employees" that are likely not paying a lick of taxes....
14607623? ago
Inciting a riot
14607569? ago
Agreed, if Fake News is removed from Facebook then this should go as well.
14606711? ago
If it is indeed legal, then we need to push for legislation. Not sure I see how this is different than any other mafioso tactic of extortion. We encourage protests, but they must be real and genuine.
14607601? ago
And peaceful
14606485? ago
I'm sure there's a few things it could theoretically fall under.
Depending on the nature of the protest in question and those splashing money around, some of these situations could very well be considered seditious. I've got no background in the legal profession, though, so I'm speculating at best there.
14607359? ago
One could argue the intent of these protests are known based on what we know of Soros' history as well as from his own words.