I really agree with this. Researchers are in a unique position to advocate for their research interests to be funded and studied. In this way, they can serve as a bridge between the public, policy makers and the academic community; these entities often are "siloed" off from each other, which means that information is not disseminated to those who can potentially benefit from it. I don't think that advocacy in this sense creates a conflict of interest. This is where a vigorous peer review process, stringent and robust research methodologies, and ethical frameworks come in to play.