You are hereBlogs / H2otown's blog / Astroturf Reloaded? Controversy Surrounds Pre-Election Letters
Astroturf Reloaded? Controversy Surrounds Pre-Election Letters
Only a few weeks after the Watertown TAB's SpeakOut section was engulfed in a controversy, this time it looks like the Letters section has been hacked. In other papers across the country, coordinated campaigns have been run to generate Letters to the Editor and ghostwritten op-eds to give the false impression to readers of widespread support for a particular candidate or political party. Is this happening in Watertown?
Bob Erickson, Watertown's veterans' service officer, is a friend of Aiello's, and has the following to say:
During the 2004 presidential campaign, dozens of big-city newspapers nationwide were found to have printed letters to the editor from people that did not exist -- letters that supported particular candidates or political positions. Other letters had signers who were local residents, but were told that their signature was being put on a letter for a different campaign or issue. These campaigns were coordinated to make anyone reading the Letters section believe that there was widespread support for those positions and candidates among their neighbors. Most were not discovered to be fraudulent until after the election (Link)
Dave Mastio, a onetime Letters editor for USA Today, points out that Astroturf, in addition to concealing the true force behind a given letter from the readers -- making it look like a local resident rather than a political campaign doing the writing -- is really an unpaid political ad:
Anthony Aiello just alerted us at Rachel Kaprielian's campaign that he has faxed this letter-to-the-editor to the Tab:
Dear Watertown Tab Editors,
I never allowed Republican Keith Mercurio's campaign
to sign my name to a letter in support of him. I was told the letter was for increased benefits for veterans, but the letter appearing in last week's Tab was entitled, "Voting for Mercurio."
I am voting for Rachel Kaprielian because she has experience and integrity, and she understands what Watertown needs. I wish I could say the same for her opponent. I would like Mr. Mercurio's campaign to publicly apologize for using my name inappropriately. I hope this didn't happen to others.
I am a Veteran and I support Rachel Kaprielian and her 100% voting record on Veterans' issues.
Yours Truly,
Anthony Aiello
Bob Erickson, Watertown's veterans' service officer, is a friend of Aiello's, and has the following to say:
Tony Aiello is one of many distinguished World War Two veterans in Watertown and a good friend of mine. His integrity, love of country, concern for veterans and civic involvement is of the highest order. I cannot fully express in words my dismay and disgust at his having been deceived into thinking that the letter he signed was for increased benefits for veterans, yet in reality, the letter appeared under the heading in last week's Tab as "Voting for Mercurio".
I join with Mr. Aiello in asking Mr. Mercurio's campaign to publicly apologize to him for having used his name inappropriately, with an assurance that tactics such as this will not continue. Hopefully, other Watertown veterans have not been manipulated in this way.
During the 2004 presidential campaign, dozens of big-city newspapers nationwide were found to have printed letters to the editor from people that did not exist -- letters that supported particular candidates or political positions. Other letters had signers who were local residents, but were told that their signature was being put on a letter for a different campaign or issue. These campaigns were coordinated to make anyone reading the Letters section believe that there was widespread support for those positions and candidates among their neighbors. Most were not discovered to be fraudulent until after the election (Link)
The practice of creating a fake grassroots campaign is known as "astroturf," and it has been employed by groups on all sides of political debate, mainly to create an organized groundswell of support for an issue or candidate with the hope that the organizational apparatus won't show through. But Republicans struck astroturf gold in 2003, with a letter on Bush "demonstrating genuine leadership" running in more than 100 newspapers including The Boston Globe and USA Today. That was one of many form letters generated by the GOPTeamLeader.com site, where volunteers earn "points" (redeemed for merchandise) for getting letters printed. -- Mark Glaser, who now writes for PBS's MediaShift
Dave Mastio, a onetime Letters editor for USA Today, points out that Astroturf, in addition to concealing the true force behind a given letter from the readers -- making it look like a local resident rather than a political campaign doing the writing -- is really an unpaid political ad:
Another idea that I’m kicking around, and I’m going to have lunch with lawyers this week, is to get the newspapers to put up a letters policy that states that any organization that does this kind of stuff has really bought an ad, and start billing them. Almost all these places who do [astroturf] also buy newspaper ads. So you can say to them, ‘You can buy a full page ad for the election next week, as soon as you pay for the six letters that you got in for free. Here’s a bill for $6,000.” There is an element of business fraud in this, and I want to talk to someone who knows commercial law. This is a valuable piece of property that’s been stolen.(See more of Mastio's comments here.
Previously: H2otown on Astroturf
Tags
There are a couple of group letters supporting Mercurio in this week's paper if they weren't written by the people who signed them then who wrote them?
Regarding the issue of the Veterans endorsement of Keith Mercurio, this serves as an official statement from the Committee to Elect Keith Mercurio.
We have a situation where two distinguished Veterans, Tony Aiello and Gordon Brown (who procured Mr. Aiello’s signature) have conflicting accounts regarding Aiello’s consent in an endorsement of Keith Mercurio. Therefore, it’s only reasonable to look at the corroborating evidence:
1) Mr. Aiello did indeed sign the back of the letter which clearly states at the top,
Veterans for Mercurio.
2) We submitted the letter with the phone numbers of each signatory, fully expecting the
TAB to verify their participation in the endorsement. Therefore, it makes no sense to
assume that we would include Mr. Aiello’s name, if there were any doubt that he
knowingly signed the letter with his informed consent. Especially since the TAB
policy only allows for 5 names and there were plenty of other Veterans who had
agreed to add their name to the endorsement.
3) None of the other Veterans who signed the letter have said anything remotely similar
to Mr. Aiello’s story.
4) The letter to the editor from Tony Aiello, which appears on the H2Otown blog, in our
estimation clearly indicates that the Kaprielian campaign is exploiting an honorable
Veteran who is still grieving. In the letter, Mr. Aiello goes out of his way to
pejoratively identify Mr. Mercurio as a Republican. This makes no sense since Mr.
Aiello is a long-time Republican who served on the Republican Town Committee up
until recently. We view this as blatant attempt by the incumbent to smear Mr.
Mercurio’s name at this late date. Kaprielian’s time would be better spent accounting
for her 12 years of truant representation of the 29th Middlesex District.
5) If Mr. Aiello wishes to withdraw his support for Keith Mercurio, it is his right as an
American. We respect that right as we do his distinguished service. However, neither
Keith Mercurio nor his campaign knowingly attempted to use his name or anyone else’s
without their informed consent in any endorsement.
Very truly yours,
Louis L. Fabrizio
Campaign Chairman
Committee to Elect Keith Mercurio
I don't live in Watertown (though I do visit the diner frequently), and I'm no political expert, but does Louis's defense sound a lot like the way Republicans tried to turn the tables on the Mark Foley scandal to anyone else?
I mean, there was obviously a mixup - why not just admit it, say you're sorry, it won't happen again, and then move on Mr. Fabrizio?
Why does everything have to be an opportunity to attack a Democrat with you guys?
Anyway, Louis is the one with the fancy title, I suppose he knows how to play hardball, but to me it just seems mean spirited to attack instead of just apologize.
P.S. Try the mac and cheese in Coolidge Square
"In the letter, Mr. Aiello goes out of his way to pejoratively identify Mr. Mercurio as a Republican."
The only place the word "Republican" appears in the letter, is here: "I never allowed Republican Keith Mercurio's campaign to sign my name to a letter [...]" That doesn't sound like going out of his way, or to "pejoratively" identify Mercurio as a Republican. Unless you think that "Republican" is inherently a pejorative - which, these days, I agree, it is. But I wouldn't expect a Republican candidate's campaign to say so.
Remember, he'll be "pejoritavely identified as a Republican" on the ballot, too. Is that a smear?
Post new comment