X Loses Lawsuit Against Advertisers Over Alleged Politically Motivated Boycott

A federal court in Texas has dismissed X’s lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), ending the platform’s 18-month legal effort to recover lost advertising revenue. U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle ruled that X failed to demonstrate it suffered harm under federal antitrust laws, rejecting claims that advertisers had organized a politically motivated boycott.

X had filed the lawsuit in 2024 against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), of which WFA is the chief coordinator, along with several member companies including Mars, CVS Health, and Colgate-Palmolive. The platform alleged a coordinated group boycott targeting one of the country’s most widely used social media platforms.

The Case Against GARM

The lawsuit was partly triggered by political commentator Ben Shapiro’s July 2024 congressional testimony, in which he claimed GARM colluded to suppress certain speech online. Following that hearing, X pursued legal action to recoup lost ad dollars. By August 2024, the pressure had pushed WFA to suspend the GARM program entirely.

Advertisers Cited Brand Safety Concerns

Throughout proceedings, WFA representatives argued that advertisers independently chose to leave X due to legitimate brand safety concerns — concerns that grew after Elon Musk’s 2022 acquisition of the then-Twitter. Musk cut nearly 80% of staff, including key trust and safety personnel, and publicly dismissed advertiser demands for greater brand protections.

The ruling arrives alongside another legal setback for Musk, who was separately ordered this week to pay former Twitter shareholders up to $2.6 billion in damages over statements made ahead of his platform acquisition.