Crowds on Demand, a company specializing in paid protests, has seen a 400% spike in requests for hired demonstrators in 2025, fueled by tensions over Donald Trump’s federal takeover of Washington, D.C.’s police force.
Fox News reported that CEO Adam Swart’s revelations pull back the curtain on a growing industry that thrives on America’s polarized passions. Crowds on Demand, a business that orchestrates rallies, flash mobs, and corporate PR stunts, reported a massive uptick in demand for paid protesters this year.
The surge aligns with heated opposition to Trump’s policies, particularly his immigration crackdown and the arrest of a prominent California labor union leader. The company insists its protests remain peaceful, focused on persuasion rather than chaos.
Swart claims his protesters genuinely believe in the causes they champion, whether conservative or liberal. “They genuinely share these beliefs,” he said, arguing most wouldn’t protest for causes they oppose, even for cash. But let’s be real—money talks louder than conviction in a polarized nation where every rally needs a crowd.
Payment for these hired hands varies widely, from low hundreds to a few hundred dollars per gig. Factors like location, event duration, and even weather conditions dictate the rates.
A conservative rally in liberal Brooklyn or a left-wing march in rural Mississippi commands premium pay due to the “tense environment,” Swart noted.
“It depends on the location, the duration, and any challenges, like cold weather or early morning,” Swart told Fox & Friends.
Early mornings cost more, as do protests in hostile territory—think MAGA hats in Williamsburg or progressives in deep-red country. It’s a clever business model, capitalizing on the discomfort of ideological fish out of water.
The company’s flexibility in serving both sides of the political spectrum raises eyebrows. While Swart insists they work for “common sense” and the “underdog,” the reality is less noble—cash flow drives the operation. Hiring protesters who already lean toward the cause just makes the optics more convincing.
Crowds on Demand thrives on political opposition, with Democrats currently driving most federal-level requests. “We tend to be hired by the oppositional party,” Swart admitted, citing the current anti-Trump sentiment. In liberal strongholds like California, however, conservatives turn to the company for an “outside-the-box” strategy to amplify their voice.
Hundreds of protesters recently flooded Washington, D.C., decrying Trump’s immigration policies and demanding the release of a detained labor union leader.
These demonstrations, likely boosted by paid participants, highlight the growing role of manufactured outrage in modern politics. It’s a stark reminder that even the loudest voices on the street might have a paycheck behind them.
Swart’s operation doesn’t discriminate by ideology, serving both left and right with equal enthusiasm. In blue states, conservatives use the service to counter progressive dominance, while liberals hire them to push back against federal policies. The irony? Both sides claim authenticity while padding their crowds with paid actors.
Swart boldly claims there’s no such thing as a truly organic protest. “Everybody has a reason for being somewhere, whether they’re flexing on Instagram, flexing for politics, staffer, or being compensated,” he said. This cynical take exposes the performative nature of modern activism, where social media clout and cash incentives blur the line between principle and opportunism.
“There’s no such thing as a truly organic protest,” Swart doubled down. His words sting because they ring true—today’s protests often feel more like staged events than spontaneous uprisings. The progressive left and MAGA right alike may bristle at this, but the data backs him up: paid crowds are shaping the narrative.
The company’s business model hinges on exploiting this reality, offering a ready-made mob for any cause with enough cash. Protesters may believe in their signs, but the extra few hundred dollars ensure they show up on time. It’s a transactional twist on democracy that leaves purists on both sides uneasy.
Swart defends his company’s bipartisan approach, noting that conservatives often need the extra push in liberal areas. “Conservatives are more likely to have jobs and families, so actually they require a little bit more of an incentive,” he said. This subtle jab at “hippies with a trust fund” protesting for free reveals a pragmatic truth about turnout.
In places like California, conservative clients rely on Crowds on Demand to level the playing field against well-funded progressive movements. The company’s ability to muster believers-for-hire ensures no cause goes unrepresented, even in hostile territory. It’s a strange equalizer in a fractured political landscape.
Yet the 400% surge in demand signals something deeper: a nation so divided that even protests are outsourced. While Swart’s business thrives, it underscores a troubling trend—authentic grassroots movements are being drowned out by choreographed spectacles. For conservatives, this is a wake-up call to reclaim the streets with real conviction, not just hired hands.
