A heated debate is unfolding across the United States concerning the rapid proliferation of data centers, essential infrastructure for our digital world and the burgeoning field of AI. Amidst growing local opposition to these developments, a new narrative has emerged from right-wing officials and data center investors: claims that protests are being bankrolled and influenced by the Chinese government.
This discourse gained traction recently with an OpenAI report detailing a cluster of Chinese-origin social media accounts spreading anti-data center messages. However, experts across various fields remain largely skeptical, suggesting that any foreign interference likely piggybacks on existing, genuine domestic concerns rather than creating them.
The Rising Tide of Data Center Opposition
Opposition to new data center construction has escalated significantly in recent months, reflecting a deeper public unease. A recent poll by climate outlet Heatmap revealed that over half of Americans support a moratorium on data center development, highlighting widespread reservations.
Further reinforcing this sentiment, early June polling from UK-based Public First indicated that public support for data centers in the US was the lowest among 15 countries surveyed. These findings underscore a genuine, grassroots movement driven by local communities concerned about the environmental and economic impacts of these facilities.
Despite these clear domestic sentiments, the narrative of foreign interference has gained considerable ground in Washington, D.C. Senator Tom Cotton, for example, penned a letter to the Acting Attorney General, urging an investigation into alleged foreign influence “led by the Chinese Communist Party” aiming to manipulate public opinion against data centers.
Similarly, Republican leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressed concerns to the White House and FBI about foreign campaigns targeting data center development. Even Interior Secretary Doug Burgum publicly claimed that areas attempting to build data centers are being “bombarded” with foreign propaganda.
Data center developers themselves have been quick to adopt this viewpoint. Notably, Canadian investor Kevin O’Leary, currently developing a controversial data center in Utah, utilized a graphic from a Bitcoin Policy Institute report to assert foreign influence was fueling opposition to his project.
Unpacking the Claims of Foreign Influence
While these claims circulate widely, direct evidence of organized foreign influence remains elusive according to independent analyses. Graphika, a social media analytics firm, has diligently tracked data center opposition across platforms like Facebook, Bluesky, and TikTok for the past year.
Dina Sadek, an analyst at Graphika, stated that her company has “not yet seen evidence of organized or scaled influence operations or campaigns that can be traced back to a foreign actor.” She noted two minor exceptions: a cross-platform network using AI-generated avatars for general social commentary and some Facebook pages, potentially based in Bangladesh, producing anti-data center images for monetization.
Crucially, Sadek emphasized, “Our ongoing research indicates that domestic US actors are leading the online anti-data center conversation.” This suggests that the primary drivers of opposition are local communities with legitimate grievances, not foreign state actors.
OpenAI’s report, while flagging Chinese-origin accounts, also presented a nuanced picture. It identified ChatGPT-generated anti-data center images used in a campaign to amplify existing public concerns about energy prices and local impacts. However, the report found “no evidence of meaningful breakout” of this messaging or significant impact on public opinion.
A key source for the right-wing claims about Chinese influence is the Bitcoin Policy Institute report, which alleges a complex web of nonprofit funding connecting anti-data center efforts to foreign funders, including the Chinese Communist Party. This report was also referenced by House Republicans in their letter to the White House.
The report cites Chinese state media coverage of anti-data center trends and rising energy costs as evidence of a campaign against US AI data centers. Yet, experts argue that these topics are widely covered by international outlets, making it a common journalistic practice, not necessarily an influence operation.
Expert Perspectives and Skepticism
Experts on China and AI have expressed significant skepticism regarding the report’s claims of direct, intentional Chinese involvement in US data center discourse. Kyle Chan, a fellow at the Brookings Institute, highlighted that high-level discussions between US and Chinese officials and experts on pressing global issues like AI and climate change are a normal part of international diplomacy.
Chan explained that prominent Chinese experts in AI are inherently connected to and advise their government, especially in academia. Therefore, their participation in international forums is natural and necessary for meaningful dialogue, rather than indicative of a “psyop” as some have claimed.
Graham Webster, a research scholar at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, pointed out that the Bitcoin Policy Institute report’s identified “signs” do not align with documented cases of known Chinese influence campaigns. He clarified that Chinese state media, like China Daily, often picks up and reports on storylines already present in US media, a standard practice for news wire services.
Both Chan and Webster acknowledge that Chinese actors have amplified genuine social grievances in the US in the past, such as protests related to the Gaza conflict, to portray the US in a negative light. Even Sam Lyman, the author of the Bitcoin Policy Institute report, concedes that local communities have “legitimate questions and concerns” about AI and data center development.
What Does This Mean for the Future?
While the current impact of foreign interference in the data center debate appears limited, the potential for escalation remains a concern. The OpenAI report itself noted the significance of these operations “not because the operation appears to have shifted public opinion, but because it shows PRC-origin influence operators testing narratives against AI infrastructure.”
This suggests that foreign actors are exploring effective messaging and tactics, even if they haven’t achieved widespread success yet. Kyle Chan of the Brookings Institute views the OpenAI report as part of a broader pattern where Chinese state media and connected actors amplify legitimate US social grievances.
This strategy aims to highlight US weaknesses and portray the country negatively on the global stage. Chan advises caution in overestimating the immediate impact of these efforts, but stresses that they are “something worth tracking” as the landscape of AI development and public opposition continues to evolve.
Source: Wired – AI
