FTC settles with ad giants
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission reached settlements with WPP, Publicis and Dentsu over alleged coordination on ad restrictions tied to political viewpoints. Regulators argued the firms' industry standards produced a de facto boycott of conservative sites and the settlement requires the companies to stop the alleged coordinated restrictions. (nytimes.com) (adweek.com)
The Federal Trade Commission and eight Republican-led states sued WPP, Publicis and Dentsu on April 15, then announced settlements the same day that would bar the agencies from coordinating ad restrictions tied to political or ideological content. (ftc.gov) The Federal Trade Commission said the case centers on “brand safety,” the ad industry’s system for keeping a company’s ads away from content it sees as risky, including violence, pornography or false claims. Regulators alleged that, starting in 2018, the agencies used shared standards instead of competing with one another on their own rules. (ftc.gov) (wfanet.org) According to the complaint described by the Federal Trade Commission, WPP, Publicis and Dentsu worked through the World Federation of Advertisers’ Global Alliance for Responsible Media and the American Association of Advertising Agencies’ Advertiser Protection Bureau. The agency said Omnicom and Interpublic also helped establish a common “Brand Safety Floor,” but the April 15 settlements covered only WPP, Publicis and Dentsu. (ftc.gov) The Federal Trade Commission said those common standards became a de facto blacklist for publishers and platforms tagged as “misinformation,” including outlets with conservative viewpoints. Reuters reported that the agency accused the firms of steering clients’ ad dollars away from platforms carrying “disfavored” political content. (ftc.gov) (finance.yahoo.com) The case turns an argument about online speech into an antitrust case about ad-buying services. Chairman Andrew Ferguson said the agencies reduced competition by replacing rival brand-safety offerings with one shared floor that advertisers could not easily escape. (ftc.gov) That approach also fits the Federal Trade Commission’s broader scrutiny of advertiser boycotts after Elon Musk’s X sued the World Federation of Advertisers and Global Alliance for Responsible Media in 2024. The trade group shut down Global Alliance for Responsible Media on August 9, 2024, saying the lawsuit and related allegations had drained its resources. (nytimes.com) (wfanet.org) The World Federation of Advertisers had described Global Alliance for Responsible Media as a voluntary initiative created in 2019 after the Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand, when brands were alarmed that ads could appear next to terrorist or other illegal content. The group said its tools were meant to help advertisers make their own decisions, not impose a political test. (wfanet.org) The settling companies did not admit wrongdoing, according to Reuters and UPI. The proposed orders now go to a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas, where the Federal Trade Commission and the states filed the case on April 15. (finance.yahoo.com) (upi.com) (ago.nebraska.gov) If the court approves the deals, the immediate change is narrow but concrete: WPP, Publicis and Dentsu would have to stop entering agreements that set common brand-safety standards or restrict advertising based on shared political or ideological criteria. The larger fight over who gets ad revenue online is still moving through courts, regulators and the ad business itself. (ftc.gov) (ago.nebraska.gov)
