FTC Moves To Bar ‘Brand Safety’ Advertising Scheme Used To Censor Conservative Media

Several major advertising agencies have agreed not to enter into or enforce agreements that restrict other agencies’ ability to do business with media publishers based on their news or political social commentary content, a group of federal and state officials announced Wednesday.

The settlement was reached between the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and a coalition of state attorneys general, including Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. (RELATED: Trump Won’t End Probe But Will Fire Fed Chair If He Doesn’t Step Down)

Paxton described the group of advertising agencies’ past actions as “anticompetitive conduct” that violated First Amendment rights, stating that companies had attempted to suppress freedom of speech through collusion and “by manipulating ad agencies into sabotaging the reach, revenue, and credibility of conservative voices.”

The three defendants named in the settlement include Dentsu US Inc., GroupM Worldwide LLC (doing business as WPP Media), and Publicis Inc., according to Paxton’s statement.

As part of the agreement, the defendants also pledged not to limit advertising spend based on a publisher’s political viewpoints, ideological leanings, or their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion. To ensure compliance, the defendants will be subject to a court-ordered monitor for regular oversight, the statement said.

“This was an egregious attempt to control public opinion and silence those who speak out against the liberal elites and powerful corporations,” Paxton added. “I will continue to lead the fight against viewpoint suppression and protect the speech of Americans from corrupt manipulation.”

🚨BREAKING: I secured a major win alongside the @FTC to stop advertising agencies that conspired to censor conservative commentators, news agencies, and social media platforms. pic.twitter.com/ZjzRi76eu7

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) April 15, 2026

The FTC framed the actions of these agencies as having “distorted America’s modern public square.”

According to an FTC statement, the defendants, who purchase digital ad inventory, had allegedly colluded since 2018 to impose “brand safety” standards. Operating through trade associations, they established a common “Brand Safety Floor” to target what they termed “misinformation.”

The FTC further alleged that these companies used “misinformation” designations to promote the demonetization of disfavored political viewpoints, thus displacing competition by insulating the ad agencies from the competitive conditions of a free market.

“The ad agencies’ brand-safety conspiracy turned competition in the market for ad-buying services on its head,” said FTC Commissioner Andrew N. Ferguson. “The antitrust laws guarantee participation in a market free from conduct, such as economic boycotts, that distort the fundamental competitive pressures that promote lower prices, higher-quality products, and increased innovation.”

Ferguson also noted that these former practices limited competition and deprived advertisers of the ability to tailor brand-safety standards to their own unique circumstances.

“This unlawful collusion not only damaged our marketplace, but also distorted the marketplace of ideas by discriminating against speech and ideas that fell below the unlawfully agreed-upon floor,” Ferguson said. “The proposed order remedies the dangers inherent to collusive practices and restores competition to the digital news ecosystem.”

Joining the FTC’s final order are Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, Utah, Texas, and West Virginia, according to the filing. (RELATED: DHS Employee Killed By Foreign-Born Individual Naturalized With A Criminal Record)

If the order is approved by a federal judge, it will ensure the prevention of these agencies from engaging in agreements that would “set common brand safety standards or restrict advertising based on biased and politically motivated criteria,” the FTC statement said.