Do you want FTC to approve a merger? You just have to advertise the truth of Trump Social
The Federal Trade Commission examines a merger between two giant advertising agencies, Omnicom and Interpublic. Normally, this agreement is the kind of thing that would not generate a ton of attention outside of industry observers. But we live in the Trump era – where each action of a federal agency is dictated by the personal and political whims of Donald Trump. So now, this merger could be delivered with an absolutely wild and unconstitutional provision: the combined company cannot refuse To place the announcements of a customer based on the political content of media platforms.
The FTC supervises this as preventing advertising agencies from “boycotting” the platforms, but it extends the legal definition of “boycott” beyond recognition. Companies are prohibited from ending with each other to exclude competitors from their market, fixing prices or requiring the use of a particular supplier. “Boycott” does not mean that a company decides not to do business with another company, but the FTC really wants, really that it means that it can force advertisers to spend money for social social, X, and all that other Nazi underfect appear online.
THE Proposed orderAlready approved by the FTC commissioners, essentially allows the organization to control not only the place where Omnicom – the name of the merged company – places advertisements on behalf of the companies that work with them, but also to control the advertisers with which they choose to work. The merged company could not refuse to work with an advertiser either because of its political or ideological points of view. So when Stormfront is hitting, I have to work with them. Tremendous.
The company should also agree to submit annual reports and additional reports each time the FTC wants to request. Then, the FTC will determine if the company is in accordance. To do this, the FTC may require access to all Omnicom books, registers, accounts, correspondence and all that the FTC wants, when they wish, as long as they give the company for five days. Oh, and the company must pay all copying costs for all that the FTC wants to copy. The FTC can also question anyone in Omnicom.
In other words, it is not a unique agreement that IMNICOM has to sign and implement, although it would be quite bad. This is an agreement for continuous surveillance, and the government can choose their customers and social media platforms. It looks like a striking resemblance to the “agreements” that Trump concluded with the main law firms, which seem to grant Control of the administration on customers with customers who choose to work. It will probably work for both Omnicom and for these law firms, which are now bleeding customers And lose the best lawyers.
This decision is undoubtedly designed in part to force private companies to advertise on Truth Social, a company that Trump has and that which has just arrive Rely exclusively on ad sales and has failed to develop a large part of a user base. But the real subtext here obliges the placement of ads on X.
After Elon Musk transformed Twitter into a stupid Nazi bar with a stupid new name, advertisers left in. In one way or another, the musk strategy of Say to these advertisers “Going to kiss” when they left after having published an anti -Semitic message did not lead to manna new advertisements. It is Musk who is at the origin of the idea that it is an illegal boycott for companies to decide not to have their content alongside white supremacist garbage.
Indeed, even after the chaotic departure of Musk, the FTC always makes him a solid investigator If the media of the surveillance site face advertisers. This happens to be the identical theory that musk pursues in its private trial against the company. The media are fair has filed a legal action Against the FTC on this subject, claiming that the agency put a “remote campaign”, which is absolutely what it is.
This is not the only fusion where the FTC tries to put its thumb on the scale. Earlier this month, the Agency sent The civil survey requests letters from at least a dozen companies, requiring information in the context of their dummy survey on X.
Related | The FTC is armed for Elon Musk – and it will not stop there
There is no longer any FTC railings, so you can expect to see more. Asset fired The two democratic commissioners, then now, the commission is made up of republican puppets.
It is difficult to find a more blatant example of the government forcing certain speeches, which is extremely unconstitutional and violates the first amendment. The government cannot force you to say things you don’t want to say, and that cannot force you to work with someone if you have moral objections on what it does. In fact, this is what the Supreme Court said only two years ago 303 Creative c. Elenis. In this case, a conservative Christian website designer wanted to be authorized to refuse to design wedding websites for same -sex couples because it opposes homosexual marriage for religious reasons. The conservatives of the Court agreed with her, saying that it was an unconstitutional binding discourse. Of course, now that we are talking about something Trump wants, the court can see that this kind of obligatory speech is just dandy.
It’s really impressive how Trump has transformed the whole federal government into a machine to continue its grievances and intimidate all those he does not like. Omnicrom is not the first target, and there is no way whatsoever.
Campaign action
