Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Tech

Texas AG Ken Paxton investigates GARM ad cartel over boycott ‘conspiracy’

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton launched an investigation into a shadowy left-leaning advertising cabal over whether it participated in a “coordinated plan or conspiracy” to boycott “certain social media platforms,” his office said Thursday.

Paxton is probing whether the powerful World Federation of Advertising and its now-defunct nonprofit wing, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), pressured “advertisers not to purchase online advertising space” from sites that violated its “brand safety standards.”

GARM and its members faced intense scrutiny after a damning House Judiciary Committee report released in July accused them of a coordinated effort to suppress online free speech and restrict ads to a slew of media outlets, including The Post and Elon Musk’s X.

Texas attorney general Ken Paxton demanded documents from WFA and GARM. Jay Janner / American-Statesman / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

The Republican demanded documents and information from WFA and GARM as part of the civil investigation. Any evidence of a collusive boycott could violate state antitrust laws, according to Paxton.

“Trade organizations and companies cannot collude to block advertising revenue from entities they wish to undermine,” Paxton said in a statement. “Today’s document request is part of an ongoing investigation to hold WFA and its members accountable for any attempt to rig the system to harm organizations they might disagree with.”

The WFA did not immediately return a request for further comment.

Shortly after Paxton announced the WFA probe, Musk posted on X: “This is still a major problem.”

The House report cited evidence that included internal emails from GARM’s radical executive Robert Rakowitz, who appeared to brag X was “80% below revenue forecasts” after GARM targeted the social media app over brand safety issues.

GARM shut down in August.
Elon Musk’s X is currently suing GARM. Matteo Della Torre/NurPhoto/Shutterstock
Elon Musk’s X said the alleged boycott cost them billions of dollars. via REUTERS

In response to the revelations, Musk hit WFA, GARM and a handful of key advertisers with a federal antitrust lawsuit for allegedly organizing an ad boycott.

The boycott cost X “billions of dollars in advertising revenue,” according to the suit.

WFA and GARM have strenuously denied wrongdoing. However, GARM shut down in August, citing mounting legal costs of its fight against Musk.

In October, X announced that it had reached a settlement with one of the defendants, Unilever, which had plans for its brands to resume advertising on the platform.

The antitrust claims against the other defendants are still pending.

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button