Tech Companies' Poor Communication, Not Foreign Interference, Is Fueling Data Center Backlash
Source: Larsen Jensen. "Tech Firms Brought Data Center Hate Upon Themselves." September 2, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that tech companies are causing their own PR disaster over data centers by treating legitimate public worries about power bills and water use as either stupid or foreign-manufactured, instead of actually listening and negotiating. He says the fix is simple: companies need to sit down with local communities before building, pay for the infrastructure costs they create, and make real, accountable investments in those towns—not just run better ad campaigns.
Conclusion
Tech companies must stop dismissing public opposition to data centers as manufactured or ignorant, and instead genuinely listen to, negotiate with, and financially commit to the communities where they build, or they will continue to lose public trust and stall necessary AI infrastructure development.
Premises
- Tech industry leaders respond to legitimate public concerns about power bills, water usage, and job security with a dismissive 'trust us, we know better' attitude rather than substantive answers.
- When X disclosed ~200,000 suspected Chinese fake accounts (with only 200 related to data center messaging), the industry wrongly used this to claim the backlash was manufactured by foreign interference rather than genuine.
- China did not create American anger over data centers; it merely exploited pre-existing, legitimate concerns about utility costs, water scarcity, and non-transparent decision-making.
- Rural and small-town communities have historical reasons to distrust outside investors and developers, based on being burned by industrial-age promises before.
- The industry's response to backlash has been to spend more money on top-down messaging (polling, tested language, ad buys) rather than genuine listening, which misreads the actual problem.
- Communities bear real risks (higher utility bills, water shortages) while companies capture the financial upside, which is fundamentally unfair unless companies pay their own way (new power generation, transmission costs, water infrastructure).
- Genuine trust-building requires concrete, binding local investment (hiring, apprenticeships, funding schools/emergency services) formalized in community agreements with public accountability milestones, not just listening sessions.
Assumptions
- Public opposition to data centers is primarily rooted in legitimate, rational economic concerns (bills, water, jobs) rather than ideology, misinformation, or NIMBYism unrelated to fairness.
- Better communication and community investment strategies would substantially reduce opposition to data center projects.
- Communities and companies can reach mutually agreeable terms if companies are willing to negotiate in good faith.
- The current political messaging approach (polling, ad buys, top-down campaigns) is inherently incapable of addressing the real sources of public distrust.
- Winning the 'AI race' against China requires broad public buy-in for domestic data center construction rather than alternative paths (e.g., federal preemption, eminent domain, or siting on already-industrial land).
- The author's framework of 'community agreements with public milestones' is scalable and enforceable across diverse local contexts.