Front Groups

Third party groups, coalitions, special interest groups, and trade associations formed and structured to advocate an explicit policy interest have become part of the U.S. political and economic landscape. Such groups derive their power from their size (individuals or groups represented) and the credibility attached to those numbers and the ethical standing of those who comprise the coalition. Their power depends on their ability to pressure policy makers and affect discourse and behavioral outcomes related to public policy decisions.

A 20th-century outgrowth of these organizations is the controversial tool called front groups. These groups involve deliberate financial, source, membership, and informational misrepresentations designed to persuade in a purportedly open communication context where interests are at stake for the advantage of undisclosed special interest or commercial purpose. They may be transient, reflecting their often single-issue focus. According to Kathy Fitzpatrick and Michael J. Palenchar (2006), front groups are a controversial public relations techniques used by organizations [Page 368]to influence public opinion and public policy on behalf of undisclosed special interests. The groups are created to pursue public policy objectives for organizations that disguise their connection (e.g., financial support) with the effort while attempting to appear independent. The typical objective of front groups is to convince public policy makers that citizen support skews in a particular direction or to influence outcomes in local, state, and national elections. (p. 203)

Many front groups operate out of public relations agencies whose employees act as directors and managers and even the membership of the group. Front groups usually are given high-values laden, noble-sounding names such as “Citizens for [Something Good].” Other tactics include use of scientific sounding names such as the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology or names that suggest a concern for the public interest such as the National Wetlands Coalition. Michael Pfau, Michel M. Haigh, Jeanetta Sims and Shelley Wigley (2007) used the term front-group stealth campaigns to describe this public relations endeavor.

Modern history of front groups suggests that use of deceptive third-party techniques was initiated by Edward Bernays and advanced by Carl Byoir. For example, Byoir's firm created a front group called the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors that helped lead to the veto of some trucking legislations (Cutlip, 1994). Although corporations are the most frequent targets of criticism, religious and other nonprofit organizations also use front groups.

Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) code addresses the use of front groups under a provision that outlines what members shall do: “reveal the sponsors for causes and interests represented” and “avoid deceptive practices” (2000). In August 2004, PRSA issued Professional Standards Advisory PS-3 entitled Front Groups: “Members should recognize that assisting front groups that represent undisclosed sponsorships and/or deceptive or misleading descriptions of goals, causes, tactics, sponsors or participants constitutes improper conduct under the PRSA Member Code of Ethics and should be avoided” (p. 2).