Elon Musk and his social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, have launched a high-stakes lawsuit against several major advertisers, alleging an illegal boycott that has reportedly cost the company billions. This legal action follows a damning House Judiciary Committee report that exposed the activities of the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) and its subsidiary, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM).
The report, titled “GARM’s Harm,” accuses the WFA, which oversees 90% of global marketing spending, of orchestrating a boycott against X. The WFA represents some of the largest global companies, including Disney and Coca-Cola. According to the report, these coordinated efforts have significantly harmed X’s financial standing.
X CEO Linda Yaccarino announced the lawsuit on the platform, expressing her disbelief at the report’s findings. “I thought I had seen everything,” she stated. “The illegal behavior of these organizations and their executives cost X billions of dollars.” Yaccarino underscored the severity of the situation and the necessity of the legal action.
Musk, sharing Yaccarino’s post, declared, “We tried peace for 2 years, now it is war.” This statement reflects Musk’s determination to confront the alleged boycott head-on.
The lawsuit targets several prominent companies, including CVS Health, Mars, Orsted, Unilever, GARM, and the WFA. The House report detailed how GARM and its members used both direct and indirect methods to organize boycotts, demonetize platforms, and limit the reach of content creators and news organizations.
BlazeTV’s James Poulos commented on the ongoing conflict, suggesting that the actions of these advertisers reveal a deeper ideological battle. “Rather than mild-mannered normies afraid of controversial content on X, advertisers operate as a cartel of far-left propagandists, reaping profits from taxpayers on government contracts while conspiring to silence free speech at odds with their radical ideologies,” Poulos said.
The report also included internal emails from GARM head Robert Rakowitz, who allegedly boasted about X’s revenue being “80% below forecasts” due to the boycott. Rakowitz later claimed this was a “self-effacing joke.”
As the lawsuit progresses, it is set to shine a spotlight on the power dynamics between major tech platforms and the advertising industry. The outcome could have significant implications for corporate influence regulation and the future landscape of digital advertising.
