Controlling the Narrative: How Politicians May be Quietly “Rigging” Community Town Halls (Opinion)

The recent town hall hosted by Congressional Representative April McClain Delaney (D-MD) and lack of all subscribers receiving invites or event location suggests that some elected officials (in both parties) may be using digital tools and selective communication to engineer town hall events that appear public while maintaining significant control over who attends, what is asked, and how the narrative unfolds. By combining constituent surveys, curated invite lists, and moderated Q&A formats, the process may give the appearance of accessibility while filtering dissent and amplifying support. While we cannot without a doubt say that this strategy is being used by Delaney’s office, what we have observed is in line with these strategies.

We’re no strangers to email marketing here at RFHC, and have used multiple Customer Relationship Management (CRM) platforms such as Beehiiv or Mailchimp. Central to the approach used by politicians is the use of CRM systems designed for political uses, like Intranet Quorum (IQ), developed by Leidos Digital Solutions. IQ is widely adopted in the public sector, reportedly serving U.S. Congress and U.S. governors. The platform enables officials to manage communications, track constituent interactions, and organize events. Features include email campaigns, surveys, and social media integration, allowing for targeted outreach and engagement based on constituent data.

When hosting a town hall, officials may list the event as “public” online but withhold the location to ensure the officials have almost complete control over who attends. Registrants are required to sign up through platforms like Eventbrite. After registering, only a subset of constituents—often those with favorable engagement history—receive the location via email. Individuals who have disagreed in past surveys or who are not flagged as supporters may never receive the follow-up, effectively excluding them from the in-person event.

How does this process likely work?

1) Constituent Signs Up via Official Website
The constituent enters their information into an email signup form, often managed through a CRM system like IQConnect, commonly used by members of Congress.

2) Constituent Is Logged into IQConnect
Their contact information is stored in the database, allowing staff to track future engagement, survey responses, and geographic eligibility within the district.

3) Survey Emails Are Sent to Constituents
The office periodically sends yes/no surveys on various policy issues, typically reflecting the politician’s stances (e.g., support for legislation, positions on national issues).

4) Responses Are Collected and Analyzed
Each survey response is tied to the constituent’s profile in IQConnect. Over time, the data builds a record of whether the individual tends to agree, disagree, or offer no consistent pattern.

5) Constituents Are Segmented into Groups
Based on response history, constituents are sorted into:

• Strong supporters – frequent agreement
• Likely supporters – occasional agreement
• Mixed/unknown – inconsistent or insufficient data
• Frequent dissenters – regular disagreement

6) Town Hall Event Is Publicized Without Revealing the Location
The event is listed as “public” through social media or the politician’s website, but the location is omitted. Constituents must register via platforms like Eventbrite.

7) RSVPs Are Matched to CRM Data
After registration, each individual is cross-checked against IQConnect to determine their supporter classification based on past survey responses and engagement history.

8) Email Invitations with Location Are Sent to Selected Registrants
The office sends the location details only to:

• All strong and likely supporters
• A limited number of “mixed/unknown” constituents to maintain the appearance of balance and openness
• Frequent dissenters are typically excluded and receive no follow-up with the location

9) The Town Hall Is Conducted With a Curated Audience
Attendees arrive having passed an unseen ideological screening. During the event, questions are written on index cards and filtered by a moderator, further shaping the conversation to avoid difficult or oppositional exchanges.

This approach allows elected officials to maintain technical compliance with public accessibility standards, while discreetly managing political risk by controlling who attends and what issues are addressed. The selective inclusion of a small group of less predictable constituents serves as a buffer against accusations of overt bias. It also helps prevent people from organizing protests outside of the town hall location, if they don’t have details ahead of time.

At the town hall itself, additional mechanisms may be used to limit public participation. Instead of allowing attendees to ask questions directly, participants are given index cards to write down their inquiries. A moderator then selects which questions to read, creating a layer of control over which topics are addressed. This method can prevent spontaneous or confrontational exchanges, ensuring the event remains favorable to the host’s image.

Such strategies, while technically compliant with public engagement expectations, raise concerns about transparency and accessibility. By filtering access and managing messaging, the events become carefully curated experiences that can project an image of widespread support, while systematically muting dissenting voices. Constituents excluded from receiving town hall details or from meaningful participation may be left unaware that their elected representative’s engagement is increasingly selective.

How do we know this is possible? Our content manager Melissa has been subscribed to Delaney’s newsletter, but never responds to the surveys, which would put her in a different audience segment than those who did click “yes” to Delaney’s surveys. Examining the survey emails, as well as what was shared with us regarding the town hall, allowed us to piece together the strategy which is possibly being used by Delaney and others. Interestingly enough, while Melissa did not receive an invite to the town hall, she did receive an email from Delaney thanking her for attending the town hall, which we believe was sent out to all subscribers regardless of invite or attendance status.

We’d like to thank those who “called out” Radio Free Hub City for not attending Delaney’s town hall, as we would never have investigated this otherwise. Hopefully, if this is the strategy being used by Delaney’s office in organizing town halls, Delaney and other elected officials (regardless of party) will begin using more fair strategies to organize fair representation of all constituents, not just those that agree politically.

Article by Ken Buckler, President of RFHC. All opinions are his own and do not reflect those of our clients or sponsors.

Information based upon information from constituent feedback and public event registration listings

---