X today filed a lawsuit against a group of major advertisers, alleging they conspired to block advertising revenue from the social media platform, which has been seen as a platform that can more easily host controversial content since its acquisition by Elon Musk.
The lawsuit, filed in a federal court in Texas, says dozens of advertisers followed the recommendation of a major advertising coalition, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), to boycott ad purchases on X after Musk bought the company. The lawsuit says the move has cost the company billions of dollars in revenue. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for violations of U.S. antitrust law.
Right-wing video site Rumble, founded more than a decade ago as an alternative to YouTube and positioned as a platform “immune to cancel culture,” announced Tuesday that it had filed a similar lawsuit. “GARM was a conspiracy to cause an advertiser boycott of Rumble and others, and that is illegal,” the company posted on its X account.
The Republican-controlled U.S. House Judiciary Committee, which has raised concerns about censorship of right-wing views on social media, has been investigating GARM. In a preliminary report in July, the committee concluded that “the extent to which GARM has organized its trade association and coordinated actions that deprive consumers of choice is likely illegal under antitrust law and threatens fundamental American freedoms.” X’s lawsuit is based largely on internal GARM emails that the congressional panel reviewed.
In a video shared with X, X CEO Linda Yaccarino said she was “appalled” by the evidence found by the House Judiciary Committee that there had been a “systematic illegal boycott of X.” Yaccarino attempted to mobilize X users by citing freedom of speech in her statement. Pointing directly to the camera, she claimed that advertisers were “targeting our company and you, our users,” and “threatening your global city square.”
“People get hurt 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 also targets advertising agency WPP. None of the companies immediately responded to requests for comment.
X’s lawsuit alleges that in the past, advertisers had to individually negotiate deals with social media companies to set limits on what types of content they would sponsor. Through GARM, advertisers have been able to pool their power, set industry standards for content moderation, and enforce them. X alleges that GARM now has too much say in what content social media platforms allow.
“In a competitive market, each social media platform would set the brand safety standards that are optimal for that platform and its users, and advertisers would unilaterally select the platforms on which they advertise,” the complaint reads. “But collective action among competing advertisers to dictate brand safety standards to be applied by social media platforms short-circuits the competitive process and allows the collective views of a group of advertisers with market power to override the interests of consumers.”
