Federal Antitrust Probe Escalates: “Woke Censorship Network” Accused of Economic Warfare Against X and YouTube
Our channel has learned that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is currently engaged in a massive antitrust investigation into what many are calling one of the modern era’s largest collusion scandals. This probe, which has significantly escalated, targets a network of advocacy and advertising groups. At the heart of the claims is the allegation that these organizations coordinated mass advertiser withdrawals from platforms like Elon Musk’s X and other media outlets to enforce their own ideological filters on online speech.
The FTC is demanding documents from nearly a dozen organizations, including global advertising watchdogs. The investigation seeks to determine if “brand safety” campaigns have crossed into illegal economic warfare, potentially violating the Sherman Act. We agree that such actions appear to be organized market manipulation.
Media Matters for America is a central focus of the probe, accused of working with allies to isolate X through organized ad withdrawals. This alleged pressure tactic is familiar, as similar actions were observed on YouTube during what was referred to as the “great ad apocalypse”. The investigation aims to uncover whether these groups overstepped legal boundaries by attempting to impose their content standards on platforms through economic pressure.
Key Entities Under Scrutiny:
- Ad Fontes Media confirmed to the New York Times that it received a formal request from the FTC on May 20th, part of an inquiry into “possible collusion”.
- The FTC has specifically demanded that Media Matters turn over all communications with groups such as the World Federation of Advertisers and the now-disbanded Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM).
- This request signifies a sharp escalation in the probe, raising critical questions about whether efforts to enforce “brand safety” standards have transitioned from advocacy to illegal coordination.
- Investigators are actively assessing whether groups evaluating “misinformation” and “hate speech” engaged in behind-the-scenes alliances that could violate the Sherman Act. We are certain they will find this level of collusion.
Our sources indicate that companies like YouTube and Twitch should be concerned, as internal emails and documents from these organizations may contain conversations about deplatforming or demonetizing individuals who hold “unconventional” or non-mainstream opinions. We observed similar patterns in the Twitter files, where organizations willingly worked to demonetize or deplatform individuals for their views.
Regarding X, the investigation is particularly focused on whether a collective boycott was orchestrated after Elon Musk’s 2022 takeover. Musk has openly accused watchdogs and industry alliances of conspiring to label X as an unsafe platform, thereby deterring major brands. He has also filed multiple lawsuits, including a 2023 defamation case against Media Matters, alleging they manufactured misleading evidence of ad placements next to offensive content.
Allegations Against Media Matters:
- X’s legal team claims that scenarios cited in Media Matters’ reports were “carefully staged” and misrepresented the actual user experience. This allegedly involved enabling cookies, specifically seeking out offensive posts, and refreshing them repeatedly until an ad displayed.
- A Media Matters report, which claimed corporate ads were appearing next to anti-Jewish posts, triggered an immediate response, leading companies such as Apple, Disney, IBM, and Paramount to quickly pull their ads from X.
- Media Matters denies all wrongdoing, asserting its reporting reflects legitimate brand concerns, and has filed its own lawsuit in California, alleging Musk is using the courts to retaliate against its journalism.
However, based on our analysis, we believe Media Matters does not engage in journalism; rather, it functions as a “bully organization”. Their sole purpose, in our view, is to push left-wing ideology and to defund or demonetize websites that do not conform. We believe their entire existence is dedicated to smearing individuals who are not just right-wing, but those who are unconventional or speak out against a dominant narrative, seeking to punish such speech. We find it noteworthy that they appear to focus selectively on ads on “wrong think” accounts, suggesting a lack of genuine concern for broader advertising standards.
The critical question now is whether charges will be brought forward. We believe these organizations have spent millions defending themselves and we hope they continue to do so. Elon Musk’s decision to sue them is significant, as challenging such well-funded entities requires substantial financial resources. We hope they lose this lawsuit and ultimately cease operations.
