Everybody lost their minds when the Independent Commission Against Corruption heard that a lobbying firm invented a fake administrative assistant named Jessica. The pearl-clutching across the media was deafening. Editorial boards wailed about deception, forged identities, and the erosion of democratic norms. Lawmakers rushed to microphones to express deep shock that the dark arts of influence could sink to creating phantom clerical workers.
They are lying to you. Discover more on a related issue: this related article.
Or worse, they are profoundly naive. I have watched corporate affairs and government relations operations from the inside for over a decade. I have seen firms burn millions on strategies that make a fictional administrative assistant look like amateur hour. The entire scandal misses the structural reality of how modern advocacy actually functions. Focusing on a made-up employee named Jessica is like getting outraged that a magician used a trick thumb. You are looking at the prop while the real sleight of hand happens right out in the open.
Let us define terms before the outrage mob takes over. Lobbying is not about backroom cigar smoke or shady bribes delivered in manila envelopes. In the twenty-first century, professional advocacy is about information asymmetry, narrative engineering, and administrative access. Companies hire lobbying shops because lawmakers and bureaucrats are drowning in complex technical details. A politician cannot possibly understand the minutiae of spectrum allocation, tax code loopholes, or pharmaceutical supply chains. They rely on external stakeholders to do the cognitive heavy lifting. Further journalism by Associated Press highlights related views on the subject.
When a firm creates a fake persona to secure a meeting, schedule a briefing, or manage an administrative bottleneck, it is a symptom of a much deeper institutional failure. The system is designed with so many bureaucratic gatekeepers, compliance hurdles, and red tape that normal, transparent communication has become nearly impossible. Organizations do not invent a Jessica because they enjoy committing corporate fraud. They do it because the front door is barricaded by endless administrative friction.
Think about how standard stakeholder outreach operates. You submit a formal inquiry to a government department. It disappears into a black hole of civil service inertia. Weeks pass. Deadlines approach. Policy decisions get finalized without your input, damaging your sector, your employees, and your stakeholders. The institutional incentives heavily reward speed and access over rigid bureaucratic purity. When the formal pathways are paralyzed by bureaucracy, clever operators find workarounds.
Does that excuse creating a fake identity? No. It is legally dubious, ethically messy, and frankly, sloppy execution. But pretending that this is a shocking descent into unprecedented corruption is pure theatre.
Look at the broader ecosystem of influence. Think about the revolving door between ministerial offices and major consulting firms. Think about sponsored policy papers written by corporate lawyers and published under the names of independent think tanks. Think about multi-million-dollar advertising campaigns designed to manufacture grassroots public support for corporate tax cuts, a phenomenon known as astroturfing.
Compared to institutionalized lobbying practices that are entirely legal, a fake administrative assistant named Jessica is a rounding error. Astroturfing manufactures thousands of fake citizens to flood consultation portals with identical talking points. That happens every single day, completely within the bounds of current legislation. Yet the media fixates on one rogue firm and one imaginary employee because individual human drama sells clicks better than systemic regulatory analysis.
The lazy consensus says we just need tougher enforcement, stricter badge rules at Parliament House, and more ethics training for consultants. More rules will not fix a broken incentive structure. When the stakes of a government decision involve billions of dollars in regulatory compliance or subsidies, participants will push every boundary available. Adding another layer of compliance paperwork just creates more incentive for clever intermediaries to find workarounds.
If we genuinely want to clean up the advocacy market, we have to do the opposite of what the political class proposes. We need to radically simplify the regulatory state, automate transparent public consultations, and make government decision-making entirely open source. When information flows freely and power is decentralized, paying an agency thousands of dollars to navigate administrative bottlenecks becomes obsolete.
Until we fix the underlying complexity that makes gatekeepers so powerful, fictional assistants will be the least of our worries. Stop screaming about Jessica and start dismantling the bureaucratic fortress that required her existence in the first place.
