Despite significant criticism, X’s lawsuit against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) appears to have achieved at least some of its goals.
The World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), which administers the GARM initiative, declared today that it will be “discontinuing” GARM for the time being.
Business Insider reported this:
“In an email to members, Stephan Loerke, CEO of the WFA, stated that the decision was ‘not made lightly,’ but that GARM is a non-profit organization with limited resources. Loerke stated that the WFA and GARM planned to dispute the claims in X’s suit in court and were sure that the outcome would ‘show our full adherence to competition regulations in all our activities.'”
So, while the WFA intends to contest X’s complaint, it is temporarily shutting back the GARM program while it considers its alternatives.
READ MORE: X (Twitter) Collaborates With Google Ad Manager
To summarize, earlier this week, X announced that it is suing GARM and the WFA for damages over charges that the group planned an advertiser boycott against X, ostensibly for ideological reasons.
The argument is based on a recent report given to the House Judiciary Committee, which alleges that GARM members “colluded to suppress voices and views disfavored by leading marketers.” Notably, the article claims that GARM has directed its members away from conservative-leaning outlets in order to stifle their individual revenue streams. According to the report, such action may violate the Sherman Act, which prohibits unjustifiable trade barriers.
The report explicitly mentioned Twitter/X, with GARM members being told to avoid advertising on the platform following Elon Musk’s acquisition of the service.
This is why Musk and company are now pursuing damages, saying that GARM’s advice cost them “billions of dollars.”
READ MORE: X Previously, Twitter Announced The Launch Of A Streaming Service To Compete With Twitch And YouTube
While legal experts appear to agree that X’s case would fail under inspection, the fact that X is pursuing costly legal action may be just as important as the outcome itself. Because, while Musk has practically unlimited resources to pursue such, GARM and other entities that X has targeted with legal threats are small, non-profit and/or research collectives that cannot afford legal representation.
As a result, they frequently shut down or scale back their activities, particularly their research of X, in order to avoid incurring more costs.
We’ve already seen X use this approach with various scientific organizations that have criticized its operations since Musk’s takeover.
Keep up with the story. Subscribe to Social Media Today’s free daily newsletter.
Last year, X sued the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) over allegations that hate speech had surged in the app. The judge eventually dismissed X’s suit. X is also suing Media Matters for a report it produced revealing that X displays adverts alongside objectionable content.
READ MORE: Microsoft Ads Now Offers AI-Powered Asset Recommendations For Video And Display Ads
In a parallel issue, the Stanford Internet Observatory project, which investigated the abuse and misuse of social networks for political impact, was shut down earlier this year due to rising legal expenditures as a result of conservative parties’ actions.
Essentially, these academics are being compelled to limit their analysis of such activities due to legal pressure, which will only end if they stop looking for problems on specific platforms.
That could be the case with X’s latest lawsuit against GARM, which is why the project’s cancellation could be the desired outcome.
However, X’s case appears to be very broad, especially given Musk’s continued dissemination of disinformation in various contexts.
Indeed, the same Center for Countering Digital Hate released a fresh research this week revealing that Elon has promoted confirmed misinformation or misleading claims 50 times this year alone, with those postings viewed by more than 1.2 billion people.
Also worth noting:
“None of the 50 posts by Musk displayed a ‘Community Note’ to correct his claims or add context, calling into question the effectiveness of X’s user-driven fact-checking system.”
According to the report, Musk and his company may return to court to address bad reports about X. However, cases like this demonstrate how Elon’s actions, rather than GARM or independent researchers, are driving advertisers away from the platform.
Musk’s increasingly contentious comments have alienated many potential advertising partners, who are concerned about his positions on nearly every hot-button issue. That has brought more than enough negative attention to the app, which Elon has acknowledged by both pledging that “I’ll say what I want and if the consequence of that is losing money, so be it,” and asking advertisers to “go f*** themselves” if they don’t like it.
Elon understands that his words and actions will cost him and X money. But now, he’s looking for someone else to blame while simultaneously attempting to recuperate expenditures as the platform’s ad revenue continues to fail.
At worst, legal action such as this may discourage more organizations from reporting on X for fear of legal repercussions, allowing X to attract more ad partners who are uninformed of the hazards.
As a result, while the case may not be a winner, the outcome, like GARM, may benefit Musk.
Radiant TV, offering to elevate your entertainment game! Movies, TV series, exclusive interviews, music, and more—download now on various devices, including iPhones, Androids, smart TVs, Apple TV, Fire Stick, and more.
