FTC Commissioner Andrew Ferguson has issued a warning against what he describes as pro-censorship advertising cartels, suggesting they may be in violation of US antitrust laws. In a pointed statement, Ferguson expressed his hope that the Trump-era Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would investigate these cartels for potentially suppressing competition and free speech.
In an interview with Natalie Winters of Bannon’s War Room, Ferguson said: “So generally, under our antitrust laws, private companies can sort of decide what they’d like to do with their own resources. But one of the most important things the antitrust laws forbid is people getting in a room and agreeing we’re not going to compete.” He elaborated that if advertisers are “getting in a room together and saying, hey, let’s all agree not to advertise on this platform because we don’t like that they have free speech on that platform,” then these actions could potentially violate antitrust laws.
Ferguson also addressed the issue of government interference with content on tech platforms. “When the government picks up the phone and calls X or YouTube or Instagram or whatever and says, I need you to take this thing down, the government can forbid its own officials from doing that,” he stated, urging the Trump administration to enact direct orders to halt such practices.
Highlighting the fundamental need for free speech, Ferguson noted, “And it is never in the interest of the American people to censor their speech. This country depends on all of us being able to share our ideas. And bad speech doesn’t go away because of censorship. The only way to counter misinformation is real information.”
The Commissioner’s statements underline a critical call to action for both governmental and advertising entities to reconsider their practices and ensure they align with the principles of competition and free speech.
The recent re-engagement with the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) and the intensifying scrutiny from the US Congress have thrown this World Economic Forum-affiliated initiative back into the spotlight. GARM, established by the World Federation of Advertisers, claims to safeguard “brand safety” for over 150 of the world’s largest brands and more than 60 advertiser associations. However, the initiative is now facing serious accusations from various sectors, suggesting that GARM’s activities might extend beyond simple brand protection to encompass the suppression of certain viewpoints through financial pressures such as demonetization and boycotts.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, a vocal critic of the practices within GARM, has escalated his efforts to investigate these allegations. After initial inquiries were reportedly disregarded last year, the Committee resorted to issuing subpoenas to several key members of the GARM Steering Team, including prominent figures from Unilever and GroupM. The inquiries aim to uncover evidence of bias that could contravene antitrust laws, specifically targeting how these corporations may be colluding to censor and financially harm creators and media outlets that express disfavored views.
