Ad group suspends GARM after of X, Elon Musk’s antitrust lawsuit

A global advertising group has suspended the operations of a unit focused on brand safety days after Elon Musk’s X sued the association for allegedly leading an illegal ad boycott.

The World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) confirmed on Thursday that it would halt its Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) non-profit initiative. The project was started in 2019 in part to help advertisers avoid having their promotions show up alongside content they deem harmful.

Business insider first reported that GARM was being shuttered.

X, formerly Twitter, filed a federal lawsuit earlier this week against WFA and member companies, including Unilever, Mars and CVS Health. The suit alleged that the WFA engaged in anticompetitive behavior and organized an advertising boycott that ultimately damaged X’s financial health.

In the lawsuit, filed in the Northern District of Texas, X’s attorneys referenced previous allegations made by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee against GARM that claimed the group’s activities “rob consumers of choices” and are “likely illegal under the antitrust laws.”

Russell Dye, a spokesperson for the House Judiciary panel, called the disbanding of GARM “a big win for the first amendment and a big win for Chairman Jordan’s oversight work.”

Following Musk’s $44 billion acquisition of Twitter in 2022, a number of advertisers paused their campaigns due to what civil rights and other groups found to be an increase in hate speech and problematic content on the platform.

Musk told advertisers during a public interview last November to “Go f—yourself” if they were attempting to “blackmail” him by pausing their X ad spending.

“The whole world will know that those advertisers killed the company and we will document it in great detail,” Musk said at the time.

X has since sued various watchdog organizations like Media Matters and the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which published reports about the rise of hate speech and homophobic, conspiratorial and other inflammatory content on the site.

In March, a California judge dismissed X’s lawsuit against the CCDH, writing “This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech.”

Ruben Schreurs, chief strategy officer at media marketing group Ebiquity, called X’s lawsuit against WFA an example of “weaponized litigation” that “simply serves as a vehicle to stifle those voices and to cripple the organizations” that are trying to make the web safer, particularly for children.

Brands are finding themselves wrapped up in a political battle, Schreurs said. The House Committee said in March that it obtained evidence that GARM members illegally colluded to “demonetize conservative platforms and voices.”

Schreurs said X’s lawsuit against the WFA will likely be dismissed. Still, he’s concerned about the aggressive moves against advertisers and said the legal actions “are more political in nature than fact based.”

X didn’t respond to a request for comment.

WATCH: SpaceX plans to move headquarters from California to Texas