On Monday, FTC Commissioner Andrew Ferguson called for an investigation into what he describes as “unlawful collusion” among major tech platforms that he claims is endangering competition by curtailing public discourse. Ferguson’s remarks came in the context of his support for fellow Commissioner Melissa Holyoak’s suggestion to revive Former President Trump’s Executive Order 13925, which aimed to enhance transparency surrounding content moderation and censorship practices employed by these platforms. He emphasized the significance of ensuring that Americans’ ability to participate in substantial national debates is protected and urged the FTC to leave no stone unturned in pursuing these inquiries.
Ferguson, a leading candidate to succeed current FTC Chair Lina Khan, argued that antitrust laws should be employed against platforms that restrict free speech. His perspective extends beyond merely addressing instances of censorship; he advocates for a thorough examination of the foundational issues that may have granted these platforms substantial power over public discourse. He insists on the vigorous enforcement of antitrust regulations against any platforms identified as unlawfully infringing on individuals’ rights to exchange ideas freely and openly, coupled with prosecuting any unlawful collusion among online platforms as well as confronting advertiser boycotts that could compromise competition within the tech industry.
Critically, Ferguson pointed to a notable pattern where major online platforms appeared to enact censorship measures in unison. He cited various contentious issues—including the discourse surrounding COVID-19, masks, vaccines, and the legitimacy of the 2020 election—where platforms such as Snapchat, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube seemingly coordinated their censorship actions. He highlighted a specific instance where these platforms jointly banned President Trump in early 2021. Ferguson suggested that if there are agreements among these platforms to impose shared censorship policies, it could constitute a violation of antitrust laws, as such actions would be akin to establishing an agreement not to compete in terms of contractual conditions or product quality under the Sherman Act.
In Ferguson’s view, the collaborative efforts between federal entities and big tech firms to suppress dissenting opinions pose a significant threat to free speech. He referenced recent discoveries during the Missouri v. Murthy case, which unveiled a “shocking extent” of coordination among the White House, the CDC, the FBI, CISA, and several tech companies in stifling opposing viewpoints. This consolidation of influence could have pervasive implications for public debate, accountability, and the diverse presentation of ideas, further necessitating a robust investigation.
In addition to addressing collusion among tech platforms, Ferguson expressed concern over coordinated advertiser boycotts, exemplified by the campaign that targeted X, formerly Twitter, following Elon Musk’s acquisition of the platform. He outlined that such boycotts, particularly organized by groups like the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), must be scrutinized under antitrust laws, which prohibit third parties from orchestrating group boycotts among competing firms. Ferguson underscored that while adversaries may perceive censorship as justifiable in some circumstances, it conflicts with fundamental democratic principles.
Concluding his statement, Ferguson reiterated the imperative for the FTC to utilize its full authority to safeguard the free speech rights of all Americans. He contended that this authority encompasses investigating collusion that stifles competition and consequently undermines free expression online. He firmly believes that should investigations reveal the existence of anti-competitive cartels that contribute to or endorse censorship, they must be dismantled. The push for such inquiries is pivotal in mitigating the potential for monopolistic practices in the tech sector and in preserving the robust dialogue essential for the functionality of American democracy.
