In a weird move, X CEO Linda Yaccarino announced Tuesday that the platform has filed an antitrust lawsuit against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA). According to Yaccarino, these organizations, along with major members CVS Health, Mars, Orsted, and Unilever, have been orchestrating a "systematic illegal boycott" against X, formerly known as Twitter.
The suit draws on a July report from the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, which accused GARM of orchestrating boycotts and other coordinated actions to demonetize platforms and limit the diversity of content available to consumers. "GARM and its members directly organized boycotts and used other indirect tactics to target disfavored platforms, content creators, and news organizations in an effort to demonetize and, in effect, limit
certain choices for consumers," the report stated.
Yaccarino didn't hold back in her public condemnation. “These actions were all against the unilateral self-interest of the advertisers; they made economic sense only in furtherance of a conspiracy performed in the confidence that competing advertisers were doing the same,” the complaint reads. She further argued that GARM's tactics have cost X billions of dollars and continue
to harm the platform despite its compliance with brand safety standards that rival GARM's own.
Not content to go it alone, X has teamed up with Rumble, a platform notorious for its controversial content, to file the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Rumble's involvement underscores the broad coalition of digital platforms feeling the squeeze from what they see as GARM's overreach. The lawsuit
alleges that GARM's standards, far from being about brand safety, are actually a cover for an advertiser boycott aimed at stifling competition and silencing dissenting voices.
This isn't X's first brush with legal battles over advertising practices. Last year, X sued the progressive watchdog group Media Matters for defamation, accusing it of misrepresenting the prevalence of hate speech on the platform. That case is set for
trial next year. X also took on the Center for Countering Digital Hate, though a judge dismissed that case.
The broader context here is a growing conservative backlash against what they see as corporate censorship. Last month, conservative media firms like the Daily Wire aired their grievances in a Capitol Hill hearing, accusing GARM and ad-buying giant GroupM of conspiring to limit advertising on right-wing sites.
Yaccarino's lawsuit is not just about damages. “This case is about more than damages - we have to fix a broken ecosystem that allows this illegal activity to occur,” she wrote in an open letter to advertisers, describing GARM's behavior as "a stain on a great industry."
The irony of this lawsuit is palpable. Just over a month ago, X rejoined GARM to signal its
commitment to brand safety, a move now looking like strategic posturing. This dramatic flip-flop highlights the tension between Musk's vision for X and the advertising industry's demands for brand safety and compliance with GARM's standards.
This legal showdown is set to be a landmark case, as it pits a tech giant against an influential industry group. The outcome could reshape the landscape of digital advertising, determining
how far companies can go in coordinating their ad spends and how platforms can protect their revenue streams.
With the lawsuit's filing, the stage is set for a fierce battle over the future of digital media, brand safety, and the balance of power between platforms and advertisers. Stay tuned, because this saga is just getting started.
