FTC intensifies antitrust probe against advocacy groups and advertising coalitions over alleged collusion against X platform

• The FTC is investigating advocacy groups and ad coalitions (e.g., WFA, GARM) for potential illegal collusion to boycott X (formerly Twitter) by orchestrating advertiser withdrawals, violating antitrust laws.
• X Corp’s lawsuit claims Media Matters “manufactured” evidence showing ads alongside extremist content, manipulating algorithms to trigger a mass advertiser exodus (e.g., Disney, IBM), slashing X’s revenue by 90 percent.
• The FTC is examining whether watchdog groups coordinated behind the scenes to enforce “brand safety” standards, potentially crossing into illegal suppression of X.
• Media Matters denies wrongdoing, calling its reporting legitimate and suing Musk for retaliation. Its president accused the FTC of political bias, linking the probe to Trump-era “bullying” tactics.
• Organizations like Ad Fontes Media criticized the FTC’s demands as “intrusive,” asserting their activities are lawful and protected by the First Amendment, complicating the legal battle.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has intensified its antitrust investigation against advocacy groups and advertising coalitions for allegedly engaging in illegal collusion to isolate Elon Musk’s X platform through orchestrated advertiser boycotts.

On May 20, the FTC initially issued a formal request to nearly a dozen organizations for an inquiry into “possible collusion.” The probe centers on whether these groups violated antitrust laws by leveraging economic power to impose content moderation standards on X after Musk acquired it in 2022.

According to the X Corp, which filed a defamation lawsuit against Media Matters for America in November 2023, the left-leaning non-profit “manufactured” evidence that ads from major brands appeared alongside antisemitic content. Musk accused Media Matters of manipulating his platform’s algorithm to create false associations, triggering an exodus of advertisers, including Apple, Disney, IBM and Paramount, that slashed X’s ad revenue by an estimated 90 percent.

In line with this, the FTC has expanded the investigation beyond initial concerns over antitrust violations, now examining the broader mechanics of how advocacy networks influence online discourse through advertiser withdrawals. The FTC is demanding that Media Matters for America disclose communications with entities like the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) and the now-defunct Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), probing whether these groups coordinated a systematic boycott of X.

This escalation raises critical legal questions: Did efforts to enforce “brand safety” standards cross into illegal coordination under the Sherman Act? The letter suggests investigators are assessing whether watchdog groups evaluating “misinformation” and “hate speech” engaged in behind-the-scenes alliances to suppress the ad revenue of X.

Media Matters denies any wrongdoing, accuses FTC of political bias

Media Matters has denied wrongdoing, insisting its reporting exposed legitimate brand safety concerns. The group countersued Musk in California, accusing him of retaliating against investigative journalism. Additionally, Media Matters President Angelo Carusone accused the FTC of political bias. (Related: Media Matters assembled $13.4M budget for 34-person team focused on destroying, discrediting the independent media.)

“The Trump administration has been defined by naming right-wing media figures to key posts and abusing the power of the federal government to bully perceived opponents and silence critics. It’s clear that’s exactly what’s happening here,” he said.

Ad Fontes Media CEO Vanessa Otero, one of the organizations that received a formal request, echoed a similar statement. Otero criticized the inquiry of the FTC, calling it an “intrusive demand” and asserting that the activities of her company are lawful and constitutionally protected.

“No matter what the possible claim the FTC is investigating, we are confident that Ad Fontes Media’s business activities are not only proper and lawful, but constitutionally protected,” Otero said. “So we are dismayed to even receive such a broad and intrusive demand letter in the first place.”

Check out Censorship.news to read more news on speech suppression measures pushed on social media and tech giant firms.

Watch Emerald Robinson talk about X Corp.’s lawsuit against Media Matters below.

This video is from The Absolute Truth w/ Emerald channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

THE IRONY: Elon Musk threatens to file defamation case against Anti-Defamation League for waging advertiser boycotts against X (Twitter).

Twitter parent company X Corp sues Center for Countering Digital Hate over “scare campaign” that drove away advertisers.

Censorship defenders finally admit they hate First Amendment, want free speech curtailed as policy of “national interest.”

Rumble CEO accuses Media Matters of misrepresenting Rumble in an effort to target free expression online.

Twitter filing LAWSUIT against pro-censorship operatives including Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

Sources include:

ReclaimtheNet.org

Bloomberg.com

Brighteon.com