Former FTC Official Claims Musk’s Twitter ‘Boycott’ Lawsuit Is a ‘Hideous Joke’

By: Stephanie Bontorin | Published: Aug 08, 2024

When Elon Musk first purchased and took over Twitter, creating the new X Corp, he immediately began fighting with advertisers who wanted to pull their content from the changing platform. Now, the EV and spaceship entrepreneur and billionaire has filed a lawsuit to mitigate the financial damage from lost ads.

When he first shooed away corporate sponsors, he used some less-than-polite language to kick them to the curb. However, it seems that the financial losses have gotten to Musk’s company, and he is now attempting to drag them back through what is being called a “frivolous” lawsuit.

What Is the Lawsuit?

Musk’s lawsuit against former advertisers accuses them of impetuously withdrawing financial backing and placing ads that caused the site and the parent company to lose revenue.

Advertisement
A photograph of Elon Musk

Source: Wikimedia

Several groups are on the receiving end of Musk’s fury this week. A global advertising alliance and companies like Mars and CVS Health are all named in the suit.

Musk's Tirade Pushed Corporate Sponsors Away

In the early days of Musk’s Twitter takeover, advertisers were quick to criticize the changes being made to user agreements, such as relaxed freedoms of speech and expanded options to purchase a blue check mark account.

Advertisement
Elon Musk talking wearing a suit in 2023.

Source: UK Government/Wikimedia Commons

At the time, Musk saw fit to tell the advertisers to “Go f*** yourself” while being interviewed at a business conference less than a year ago.

X Executive Speaks Out

Linda Yaccarino, an X CEO, shared an open letter and a video explaining the reasoning behind the lawsuit to X users and advertisers.

Advertisement
A woman with shirt brown hair, black glasses, black girt, gold bracelets speaks to the camera

Source: @mattleys/X

She claims that X is accusing the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) of orchestrating an “illegal boycott” of X and other companies. GARM works to reduce the monetization of harmful or illegal digital content.

Twitter Now Allows Offensive Content

Since Musk’s big takeover and official switch to calling the platform X, the site has seen a flurry of new content.

Advertisement

Source: Alex Green/Pexels

The reduction in censure that Musk was so fond of in the early days of owning the social media company ensured that troubling new information, slurs, and photos were being shared on the site. Now, it’s easy to stumble across election misinformation and pornography while scrolling on X.

Other Social Media Sites Have Had Advertisers Pulled

A similar issue occurred with the social media site Rumble, a video streaming site that became the new favorite spot for far-right conspiracy theorists to share their ideas, hate speech, and misinformation.

Advertisement
A cell phone screen with the blue Twitter logo sitting on a cardboard box

Source: Ravi Sharma/Unsplash

The company recently announced that it would be jumping onto X’s lawsuit to maintain some of its previous advertisers, such as Unilever, CVS Health, Mars, and Ørsted, a Danish energy company.

Advertisement

Musk Had Some Grand Words for Business Partners

As posted on X, Musk made a typical grandiose call, stating, “We tried peace for 2 years, now it is war,” while sharing Yaccarino’s comments on the situation.

Advertisement
Elon Musk with small facial hair wearing a black suit

Source: @_wake_up_USA/X

He also shared, “Everyone who has been boycotted should file a lawsuit in every country they’ve been boycotted,” in response to Rumble jumping onto the lawsuit bandwagon.

Advertisement

Previous Suits on the Matter Are Deemed Bogus

When Musk first took over the site in early 2022, several major corporate sponsors pulled their content from it, citing the proliferation of new right-wing extremist content.

Advertisement
A woman with silver jewelry holding her phone

Source: Priscilla Du Preez/Unsplash

He attempted swift legal action against watchdog groups that took note of the toxic atmosphere on the web. One particularly frivolous lawsuit targeted the Center for Countering Digital Hate, which had plenty of files on the newly branded X platform. The case was quickly dismissed in March, and the judge cited that Musk could not punish groups for partaking in free speech by pulling their support.

Advertisement

Paid Ads Want Nothing To Do With X Content

Another bogus suit was filed against Media Matters for America. The group created a report showing how corporate-sponsored ads were appearing next to X posts from known neo-Nazis and white nationalists.

Advertisement
A man wearing a black suit speaking into a microphone standing in front of an American flag

Source: @thedailytexan/X

The case was quickly laughed at and called bogus by legal commentators and fell to District Judge Reed O’Connor, who is expected to decide in April 2025 on the matter.

Advertisement

Conspiracy or Freedom of Speech?

The hefty lawsuit filed by Musk alleges that GARM and large advertisers are committing a “conspiracy” against Musk to “collectively withhold billions of dollars in advertising revenue” from the company.

Advertisement
Starlink rocket in the sky with Elon Musk

Source: Mario Tama/Getty Images; JD Lasica/Wikimedia Commons

The filings also allege that GARM and WFA colluded to “demonetize disfavored content” in a way that “is likely illegal under the antitrust laws and threatens fundamental American freedoms.” However, as Musk points out, as a proponent of freedom of speech, companies are well within their right to support the information they align with and kick out what they do not.

Advertisement

Is the Advertising Boycott Illegal?

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) actually uses antitrust laws that can enforce illegal boycotting from large groups. This is exactly what the X Corp lawyers are complaining is being done to them.

Advertisement
A large stone building with large round columns at the front

Source: Harrison Keely/Wikipedia Commons

However, the agency notes: “A business can always unilaterally choose its business partners.” In certain cases, the FTC can intervene in situations where large companies or a collection of companies collude to harm competition. For example, they often intervene when several companies work together to price-fix certain products.

Advertisement

Not Completely Frivolous

Robert Freund, a Los Angeles-based attorney who works with brands and social media advertising, says, “From a legal perspective, the complaint isn’t frivolous — group boycotts can violate antitrust law, and the complaint does a decent job of laying out specific communications and actions that suggest coordination intended to hurt X’s businesses.”

Advertisement
Man using a smart phone at night with only his face illuminated

Source: KristopherK/Pixabay

Musk may have a case. However, it does not consider that the changes on X violate pre-agreed contracts imposed by the companies. For now, the issues must happen in long-drawn-out litigation with attorneys.

Advertisement