X filed a lawsuit today against a group of immense advertisers who allegedly conspired to stop the flow of advertising dollars to the social media platform, which has been seen as more prone to hosting controversial content since it was taken over by Elon Musk.
The lawsuit, filed in Texas federal court, says dozens of advertisers have heeded the recommendation of a key advertising coalition, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), to boycott ad buys on X since Musk bought the company. The lawsuit says that turn of events has cost the company billions of dollars in revenue. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for violating U.S. antitrust law.
The right-wing video site Rumble, founded more than a decade ago as an alternative to YouTube and positioned as a platform that is “proof against cancel culture,” announced Tuesday that filed a similar lawsuit“GARM was a conspiracy to boycott Rumble and other ads, and that is illegal,” the company said. published on his X account.
The U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, controlled by Republicans and raised concerns about censorship of right-wing views on social media, investigated GARM. preliminary report in July, the committee found that “the extent to which GARM has organized its trade association and coordinates activities that deprive consumers of choice is likely to be inconsistent with antitrust law and to threaten fundamental American freedoms.” X’s lawsuit relies largely on internal GARM emails reviewed by the congressional committee.
IN video shared XX CEO Linda Yaccarino said she was “shocked” by evidence uncovered by the House Judiciary Committee that there had been a “systematic illegal boycott of X.” Yaccarino attempted to rally X users by referencing free speech in her statement. Pointing directly at the camera, she accused advertisers of “attacking our company and you, our users” and “threatening your global city.”
“People get offended when the marketplace of ideas is limited,” Yaccarino said.
The Brussels-based World Federation of Advertisers, which oversees GARM, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuits. X’s lawsuit also names Unilever, Mars, CVS and a Danish energy company as defendants, while Rumble’s lawsuit additionally names ad agency WPP. Neither company immediately responded to a request for comment.
X’s lawsuit claims that advertisers historically had to individually enter into agreements with social media companies to set boundaries on the types of content they would sponsor. With GARM, advertisers could aggregate their power, set industry standards for content moderation and enforce them. X argues that GARM now has too much say in what content social media platforms can allow.
“In a competitive market, each social media platform would set brand safety standards that are optimal for that platform and its users, and advertisers would unilaterally choose which platforms to advertise on.” the complaint states“However, collective action by competing advertisers to dictate the brand safety standards to be applied by social media platforms shortens the competitive process and allows the collective views of a group of advertisers with market power to prevail over the interests of consumers.”