Speech influence scheme canceled after Musk, X file antitrust case
Group orchestrated boycotts of various targets based on their beliefs and messages facing legal action for its use of monopoly power
One of the world’s bigger speech influence schemes that has been operating now is calling it quits – after an antitrust lawsuit was filed against it by Elon Musk and X.
It is the World Federal of Advertisers that announced the end of its “Global Alliance for Responsible Media.”
A report at the Post-Millennial said the group that orchestrated boycotts of various targets based on their beliefs and messages was facing the legal action for its use of monopoly power.
#BREAKING: The “Global Alliance for Responsible Media” is discontinuing.
Big win for the First Amendment.
Big win for oversight.
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) August 8, 2024
Reminders:
1. We sent demand letters to over 40 companies about GARM’s collusive practices.
2. We also produced a major report on GARM’s harm, which can be read here: https://t.co/3TTNysFZkC
3. We also had an incredible hearing with @benshapiro on the subject.
Winning. https://t.co/bSPBx63BMs pic.twitter.com/nknS9DJJ5Q
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) August 8, 2024
BREAKING: The World Federation of Advertisers is shutting down GARM after Rumble and X filed suit against them.
What are they hiding?
— Chris Pavlovski (@chrispavlovski) August 8, 2024
The House Judiciary Committee, which had been looking into the manipulations being used by GARM said it was a “Big win for the First Amendment” and “for oversight.”
The advertisers’ special campaign would target those carrying messages the group did not like.
Rumble CEO Chris Pavlosvki still wondered, however, “What are they hiding?”
The WFA set up GARM specifically to help “police speech online using ad placement and the withholding of same,” the report said. That means those web organizations that failed to carry the correct political messaging, or carried something that was politically incorrect, might not get advertising revenue.
The Post-Millennial report noted WFA members were told of the decision Thursday in an email.
Pavloski explained what was going on. “They created a monopoly to basically tell all these advertisers how they should spend money based on certain speech.”
CEO Linda Yaccarino of X said, ‘I was shocked by the evidence uncovered by the House Judiciary Committee that a group of companies organized a systematic illegal boycott against X. It is just wrong. And that is why we are taking action.”
GARM had boasted of working with advertisers, “media agencies, media platforms and industry associations” to target what it determined was “harmful” content online.
But it didn’t define ‘harmful” meaning whatever it said was bad was bad.
Business Insider explained the lawsuit by X charged GARM “illegally colluded to ‘collectively withhold billions of dollars in advertising revenue’ from Twitter, now known as X.”
GARM claimed over its tenure that it was working on “hate speech, brand safety and misinformation.”
Online commenters said those trying to censor speech simply would re-emerge under another name and format.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
Originally Published at Daily Wire, World Net Daily, or The Blaze
What's Your Reaction?
