Just when we think we have found the perfect sources of news and expert opinions to form strong beliefs with…
Imagine a scenario where some person, Jane, is ranting on social media about a new major controversial development project slated near her property.
Social media erupts with messages from “local” grassroots groups either opposing or supporting the plan. These posts feature emotional testimonials and selective facts, appearing authentic and deeply convincing.
However, Jane soon learns that many accounts in her chat group are bots, or are connected to hidden corporate and political interests. Conflicting claims, orchestrated hashtags, and disputed “news” reports and “scientific preprints” flood the conversation, making it almost impossible to find clear truth or consensus.
This astroturfing-fueled confusion fractures Jane’s community and stalls genuine dialog, revealing how such campaigns exploit social tensions to manipulate opinion. Worse, the opinions are so unshakeable once formed, because most social media members in her group are not inclined to research every claim or assertion deeply: The more authoritative a member’s post, the more people will tend to cling to their own confirmation biases or react to the “appeal to authority” fallacy.
Amid massive increases in such astroturfing campaigns worldwide, generative AI has been implicated in making divisive social media posts even more convincing and irrepressible. Welcome to the landmine of chaos called “astroturfing”!
Astroturfing on steroids
This phenomenon refers to the deceptive practice where organized actors — often corporations, political groups, or state-backed operatives — create the false impression of genuine grassroots support or opposition for ideas, products, or people.
Unlike straightforward fake news, astroturfing often mixes truth with half-truths and authentic (or generative AI bot-generated) voices, flooding social media with coordinated content to simulate consensus or legitimacy.
The term derives from “AstroTurf” fake grass, symbolizing manufactured “grassroots” movements. This tactic exploits the human tendency to trust popular opinion, leveraging the appearance of widespread support to manipulate perceptions and decisions.
With generative AI making the creation of astroturfing campaigns easier, cheaper and more convincing, the age of information wars has truly descended to new lows.
More dangerous than fake news
Unlike simple falsehoods, which can eventually be proven false or questionable, astroturfing produces a façade of authenticity, making it harder to detect and debunk. Some key points:
- Not always illegal: Most laws target false advertising or undisclosed sponsorship, leaving astroturfing often in legal gray zones, especially political ones. This legal ambiguity gives astroturfers a permissive environment.
- Manufactured credibility: By simulating mass support, astroturfing can sway undecided people, pressure institutions, and create real-world consequences based on false perceptions.
- It blurs truth and opinion: Astroturfing mixes genuine facts, partial truths, and highly emotional appeals, making critical judgment tough.
- Amplifies manipulation: It can drown out authentic grassroots voices, distort public sentiment, and undermine democratic processes and informed discourse.
Astroturfing and groupthink: inherent in social media
While organized astroturfing is a major concern, the inherent tendency for social media to promote spontaneous astroturfing by participants is a root issue. Such environments, when not properly administered, tend to amplify confirmation bias and echo chambers: the tendency to accept information confirming pre-existing beliefs and suppress critical thinking.
Echo chambers often lead to groupthink, where the desire for conformity and harmony in the group suppresses dissenting opinions and rational debate. This amplifies misinformation and deepens polarization, making social media groups fertile ground for astroturfing campaigns to gain traction and appear organic. Also:
- People in echo chambers develop strong emotional bonds and trust primarily content shared by their peers, increasing resistance to outside information that challenges their group viewpoints.
- Algorithmic filtering on large scale social media platforms prioritizes content aligned with users’ preferences, reinforcing resistant echo chambers.
- Misinformation, including astroturfed content, goes viral more easily in these homogeneous groups, as critical scrutiny diminishes.
