Crowds on Demand provides paid protesters
There was a time when protests meant something. People marched because they believed in a cause. They shouted because they were angry, passionate or fed up. Today? You can buy protesters like buying a pizza with your choice of toppings. Pay to protest? Yep!
It reminds me of the days I ran the City Club of Chicago and hosted two to four luncheons each month. To keep the luncheon program successful, I established a policy that no speaker would have fewer than 100 folks in the audience. Since not every speaker was a big draw, I had a deal with a group of mostly senior citizens who would provide “audience” for a free lunch. Everyone was happy. A few seniors got a free lunch. The speakers got a respectable audience. And the City Club had another successful event.
It never occurred to me that my little gambit could be commercialized on a grand scale. But it did occur to Adam Swart. In 2012, he founded Crowds on Demand – a company that took the idea of “grassroots activism” and asked, “What if we commercialize it?” He apparently looked at democracy and thought it would be better with casting calls. Crowds on Demand essentially rents out smiling or angry crowds, professional protesters and even phony gaggles of pretend paparazzi. (So, there is such a thing as “fake press.”)
Basically, if you need an audience that agrees with you or boosts your cause — and you are short on real people who do — Adam’s got you covered. He provides adoring “fans” for celebrity events, crowds for movie openings, television commercials and corporate events.
Most of us know that those who watch in awe as fried eggs slip effortlessly off the skillet are actors – or more accurately “props.” (My wife, two of my kids and I were such “props” – they called us “extras” — in the movie “Weatherman” with Nicholas Cage. It was filmed outside our downtown Chicago apartment. But I digress).
However, there is a more ominous service provided by Crowds on Demand. It is more surprising – and disturbing. Remember the accusations that some of those anti-Trump protestors were being paid. Hired hands with no real interest in the issues. Well, now we know. They probably were. It appears that hiring protestors is a standard operating procedure – and Swart’s company is among those who provide the bodies.
He says that Crowds on Demand is nonpartisan but concedes that most of his lucrative offers come from the left because progressives use public protest more often—and he operates mostly in urban Democrat controlled environments. (This goes along with an earlier commentary in which I pointed out that protests, civil unrest, AND riots are the trademarks of left-wing activism.)
To mount a protest in today’s political world, you do not need to win over the hearts and minds of people. All you need is a budget and a script. It is like hiring wedding guests who do not know the bride or groom—but somehow still cry during the vows.
Swart also confirmed in a television interview that a lot of the money comes from politically active billionaires whose names would be familiar to the public. Swart will not name names, however. His own client list remains a mystery largely because nobody wants to admit they hired strangers to pretend to be motivated by the cause.
If you think this is a marginal peanut business, think again. Business is booming. Adam’s company received more than 100 requests to support anti-Israel demonstrations on college campuses following the October 7 Hamas attack. Swart declined all, stating the issue was too divisive.
To get an idea how much money the left is willing to spend on phony protestors, consider this. In July 2025, Adam said he turned down a $20 million offer to stage a nationwide protest. The unidentified organizers were planning the mass movement opposing what they claimed was a civil rights rollback of the Trump administration. You may recall it as the one organized in the name of the late civil rights leader and Congressman John Lewis. It was “good trouble” to use Lewis’ coined terms – without Swart’s help in this case. I think it is safe to assume that the money he turned down found more accepting hands.
Swart said “no” — not because it was ethically murky or misleading, but because he feared the protest might be unsuccessful and would make his company look bad to future customers. At least that is his claim, and he is sticking with it.
Now, you might be wondering why most Americans have never heard of this. It is because this kind of real manipulation falls into a weird blind spot. It is legal. It is ignored. When the issue of paid demonstrators comes up, the Democrat left-wing establishment goes into full denial.
Paying for concocted public outrage turns constitutional democracy into improv theater. Politicians see a crowd and assume it is public will. News outlets see signs and think it is a movement. Voters see rallies and form opinions. But all they see are bodies hired by individuals and interest groups with big bucks. It is astroturfing at its finest (or its worst) — artificial grassroots movements, choreographed drama, emotions-for-hire. It is civic engagement by a casting director.
Crowds on Demand sells perception over reality – and in politics, perception creates its own reality. The company thrives where optics matter more than authenticity. When you can buy a protest, you can buy influence. And when influence is up for sale, democracy is not far behind. So, the next time you see a protest on the news, ask yourself, “Is this a revolution—or just a carefully crafted reality show?”
So, there ‘tis.
Hard to believe the author is so naive. Larry seems amazed that you can hire people to attend a protest. He then admits to doing the same for his own “performances” to make people feel better. (Rumor has it that he’s paying people to say they read his book and they like it. But I digress, wink-wink, nudge-nudge)
But on this one I say: BUSTED.
Imagine the author gathering people for his event. Now imagine you can communicate at speed of light across the nation, the globe. With everyone interconnected, the “work” here is creating a list that can be used over and over. As in the first time you do Chicago, will take time. The next time you already have a starting list. Add cities: not like you have to move to do that. Advertise — same thing, today it’s easy for anyone to look like a big established business on the internet. Makes things like this easily possible. I get so impressed by new small businesses going global, scaling up at the speed of light, with just a twist on an idea: socks that offer a free pair to the needy. Plastic goods from cleaning the ocean.
The author “had a deal with a group of mostly senior citizens who would provide “audience” for a free lunch.” Imagine using email, mailing lists, etc. to gather groups today and then create your own “audience” like the author did. You can scale this up, easy and fast.
What the author does not apparently know is that people been hiring people for performances, politics, protests, you name it since the early Greeks and Romans. At least. Nero did it with 5,000 of his soldiers at times. Today there’s even flavors for audiences like Astroturfing, Promourners, Tifosi, and more.
French poet, Jean Daurat, hired people to applaud for him in the 1500’s. In 1820, a Paris company offered these services to anyone who could pay. They called them “claqueurs” and even the Met in NYC had them at times. Sometimes it was extortion as performers had to pay to avoid being booed.
Today, there’s a lot of crowd competition: crowds on Demand, EasyCrowd, Crowds for Rent, Rent A Crowd, all sorts of companies doing what the author finds unique. Not to mention companies for mass letter-writing or email blasts, ghostwriting blog posts (maybe someone is paying me heh, heh), searching data for likely sympathizers or maybe creating whole new ‘front’ or ‘third party’ organizations to serve as a mouthpiece for the campaign’s funder.
Here’s where I wonder. The author claims to be a political expert, knows all things Trump but seemingly missed or forgot: in 2015 Trump paid people to cheer his announcement speech: $50 a head. *https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2015/0618/You-re-Hired!-Donald-Trump-paid-actors-to-attend-presidential-launch-says-Hollywood-Reporter* The casting notice may be part of the Epstein files, who knows…
The important part is who is buying. Hard to tell with private company, revenue estimates are $200K to $1M a year. The owner says they have doubled which is most often code word for smaller. They could be doubling, have been around $200 and now are approaching a million. In today’s internet world, they are everywhere, however, to pull this off, they need accessible talent, and even if not directly working full time for the company, still have to be knowable, available, reachable, etc. So, that’s really the business he’s in; creating mailing lists. As his lists grow, his costs go down, his prices can be more competitive, it’s an easily scalable model that does not need many in-house people to support. The market will be flooded with these folks and, who knows, that alone may be their demise. That and good ole reporting about when they are deployed. Pretty sure this is flash-in-the-pan stuff although will always be available: ask Trump. Or Nero.
One last thing, the author states about accusations about anti-Trump paid protestors: “Well, now we know. They probably were. It appears that hiring protestors is a standard operating procedure.” Except the author does not know. He has no proof and a Trump accusation being a complete fabrication is a very high probability. The man has even moved the path of a hurricane. The author often calls it “braggadocio.” We do know that the right often infiltrates liberal marches to wreak havoc and destroy property. We all saw them in action at the Capitol on 1/6/2021. Rumor has it they did all the violence in Portland. Just kidding, but it’s the same level of assumption as the author. Nah, neither the author and I can conclude that: rationally at least.
Guess along with fact checkers, political bias protectors, we now need crowd checkers to be sure it’s the real thing. Or maybe go back to the days when integrity mattered and whether you told a lie, biased a story, or attended an event as a fake crowd member —- you were punished by your peers, shunned in public, and not allowed to make millions telling everyone what you did.
Dunger you’re getting off the subject. You are suppose to convince us that we would be better served by democrats. I think you are embarrassed by the idiots in your party. Or the inability to select good candidates.
Uncle Tom: my fake name is not Dunger.
This difference is that the liberals are hire protesters to be terrorists.
Joe: Proof?
I have plenty of proof of the right infiltrating liberal protests to create havoc via violence.
You go first.
What a Merry-Go-Round.