FTC could bar Omnicom, Interpublic from boycotting sites over political views as merger condition: report
The Federal Trade Commission could reportedly bar advertising giants Omnicom and Interpublic from suppressing ads to websites over their political views as a condition for approving their pending merger.
The FTC, led by President Trump-nominated chairman Andrew Ferguson, is considering imposing the consent decree as it engages in a broader effort to investigate and stop collusive ad boycotts that unfairly target conservative media.
New York City-based Omnicom was among the companies called out by House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) over its involvement with the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, a left-leaning advertising cartel that allegedly sought to defund news outlets and platforms, including The Post.
Advertisement
3 The FTC is currently reviewing a $13.25 billion all-stock deal between the two ad giants.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
Jordan launched an investigation into Omnicom after the merger was first announced last December.
The FTC is currently reviewing a $13.25 billion all-stock deal between the two ad giants.
Advertisement
If approved, the combined entitles would form the largest ad agency in the world, with around $25 billion in annual revenue.
The terms of the merger deal are still under review and have yet to be finalized, Reuters reported on Thursday, citing a source familiar with the matter.
Representatives for the FTC, Omnicom and Interpublic did not immediately return The Post's request for comment.
3 The Omnicom and Interpublic merger deal was first announced in December.
REUTERS
Advertisement
The FTC's move points 'to a much more highly politicized environment for agencies than we have ever seen before, at least in the United States,' analyst Brian Wieser wrote in a midyear industry update on Tuesday that was cited by the New York Times, which first reported on the proposed consent decree.
Fergson has said that any boycotts organized by advertisers can be illegal because they involve coordinated refusals to do business, which may restrict competition.
Earlier this week, the FTC requested documents from top ad agencies, including Omnicon, Interpublic, WPP, Dentsu, Havas and Publicis, as part of a broad review into whether the firms had violated antitrust law by participating in boycotts against certain news outlets.
The FTC is also targeting so-called watchdogs like Media Matters and Ad Fontes Media in the investigation and in May requested documents about their dealings with a dozen firms, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Advertisement
3 Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Andrew Ferguson, testifies during a House Committee on Appropriations – Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government on a oversight hearing of the US Federal Trade Commission on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on May 15, 2025.
AFP via Getty Images
The probe is focused in part on how the firms dealt with Elon Musk's X, which suffered a mass exodus of advertisers after the mogul bought the social media company formerly known as Twitter in 2022 and loosened its content moderation practices.
The agency's letter to Media Matters requested 'all documents that Media Matters either produced or received in discovery in any litigation between Media Matters and X Corp. related to advertiser boycotts since 2023.'
Last year, Musk filed a sweeping antitrust lawsuit against the World Federation of Advertisers and its now-defunct GARM initiative, which shut its doors after the suit was filed.
X CEO Linda Yaccarino told The Post at the time that the entire online advertising ecosystem was 'broken' as a result of the alleged boycotts.
'We were victimized by a small group of people pushing their authority or ability to monopolize what gets monetized,' Yaccarino said.
With Post wires
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
8 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Senate Republicans revise Trump's policy bill, scrounging for votes to pass it
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Republican leaders in the Senate are rushing to shore up support for the legislation so they can quickly pass it and send it to the House for final approval in time to meet the July 4 deadline Trump has set. An initial vote in the Senate could come later Saturday. Advertisement Party leaders are trying to appease two flanks of their conference. Some, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, said they could not support it without greater reassurances that the Medicaid cuts it contains would not hurt rural hospitals in their states. And fiscal hawks, including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, have said they do not want to back legislation that would only increase the deficit. Advertisement The core of the bill remains the same. It would extend tax cuts passed by Republicans in 2017 and add some new ones Trump campaigned on, while slashing spending on safety-net programs, including Medicaid and food assistance. The biggest tax cuts and the biggest changes to those anti-poverty programs remained intact. Taken together, the bill would likely increase federal debt by more than $3 trillion over the next decade, though lawmakers are still shaping the bill and waiting on an official estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. With Trump demanding quick action, Republicans in Congress have intensified their efforts to push it through to enactment even as many of them — including several who voted for it in the House — have been open about their reservations about a measure they are concerned could be a political loser. The revisions released early Saturday were designed to allay some of those concerns. Senators, including Tillis and Susan Collins, R-Maine, had pressed for the inclusion of a rural hospital fund to help health care providers absorb the impact of a provision that would crack down on strategies that many states have developed to finance their Medicaid programs. Despite their pushback, that provider tax change remains in the bill, though lawmakers have delayed its implementation by one year. It is unclear whether a $25 billion compensation fund will be enough to win their votes. Collins had suggested that she wanted to provide as much as $100 billion to ensure that rural hospitals, which operate on thin margins, were not adversely affected. Advertisement But it appeared to be enough to win over at least one Republican holdout who had expressed concern about the Medicaid cuts — Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who said he would vote for the bill and was confident that changes benefit his state at least in the short term. A new provision allowing 'individuals in a noncontiguous state' to be exempt from enforcing new work requirements imposed on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, appeared aimed at mollifying Murkowski of Alaska. Her state would be hit with billions of dollars in nutrition assistance costs as a result of the legislation, and she had cited the provision as one of her chief concerns. The bill also includes new health provisions designed to benefit Alaska, as well as new tax benefits for fishers in the state's waters. Some of the changes were aimed at appealing to members of the House, where Republicans from high-tax states like New York have threatened to sink the bill if it does not include a substantial increase in the state and local tax deduction, currently capped at $10,000. Senate Republicans, skeptical of the deduction, still ultimately decided to match the House plan to lift the cap to $40,000. But while the House made the increase permanent, the Senate keeps it for only five years, allowing it to snap back to $10,000 in 2030. The newest draft makes even sharper cuts to subsidies for wind and solar power, something that Trump and other conservatives had explicitly called for this past week. It remains to be seen whether those changes could cause friction with Republicans who have publicly supported green energy credits, including Tillis, Murkowski and Sen. John Curtis of Utah. Advertisement Previously, the Senate proposed allowing companies that were building wind and solar farms to claim a tax credit worth at least 30% of their costs if they started construction this year, with a phaseout over two years. But the revised bill would require companies place their projects 'in service' by the end of 2027 to claim the tax break. The bill would also impose additional taxes on renewable energy projects that receive 'material assistance' from China, even if they don't qualify for the credit. Because China dominates global supply chains, those new fees could affect a large number of projects. The new Senate measure would more quickly end tax credits for electric vehicles, doing away with them by Sept. 30. It would also slow the phaseout of a lucrative tax credit to make hydrogen fuels, allowing such projects to qualify if construction were started by the end of 2027, instead of by the end of this year. The bill also includes a provision written by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to sell as much as 1.225 million acres of federal land across the American West in order to build housing. Earlier versions of that proposal that would have auctioned off even more acreage had drawn fierce opposition from conservative hunters and outdoorsmen, and Republican senators from Montana and Idaho had said they would not vote for it. This article originally appeared in
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Nikki Haley hails Trump for US strikes but warns ‘Iran is not done'
Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley offered her first praise for President Trump in several months in a Monday op-ed in Israel Hayom, an Israeli right-wing newspaper. She congratulated his decision to strike three Iranian nuclear sites but warned of further retaliation from Iran. 'Those in America that worry about why these strikes took place should understand that those strikes were a move to keep Americans safer. That was a move to take out one of the threats that Iran has used against Americans for years,' Haley wrote in the outlet owned by Republican megadonor Miriam Adelson. Israel Hayom is distributed in Hebrew and is also available online in English. The op-ed is a rare public appearance for Haley, who has largely faded from public view since the 2024 election. When she has spoken on Trump's foreign policy decisions in recent months, she has often criticized them, panning him for a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin and slamming his acceptance of a Qatari jet. In the opinion piece, however, Haley praised Trump's decision as 'very well done' while arguing that the United States should continue to be hawkish on Iran for the sake of both America and Israel. 'A safe and secure Israel helps us have a safe and secure America,' she wrote, arguing that the chance of diplomacy with Tehran was thin. 'They always say they want to talk, but the action doesn't match what they want to do,' she wrote. 'Trump was right that while you could kick this can down the road if you wanted, the threat would only get bigger.' She also took aim at the United Nations after Secretary-General António Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the strikes, accusing the international arbiter of failing to condemn Iran's moves on ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Haley finished by warning that America and Israel both needed to remain on guard. 'Americans need to be vigilant of our military bases in the region. We need to be vigilant of cyber attacks that could come our way through Iran. Iran is not done,' she wrote. As Trump's ambassador to the United Nations during his first term, Haley made the case both to him and to the global stage that the United States should back out of its 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. In the 2024 Republican presidential primary, during which she attempted to criticize the president, she also positioned herself as both a staunch defender of Israel and a Middle East hawk. After being the last of Trump's primary challengers to bow out, Haley failed to secure a place in his administration (she claimed she wanted no part in it). She is currently at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank, and making her way around the speaker circuit.
CNN
12 minutes ago
- CNN
Senate braces for first big vote on Trump agenda – with support still unclear
Senate Republicans are about to face a major test of loyalty to President Donald Trump, as the chamber braces for its first vote on whether to advance the president's giant tax cuts and spending bill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune and his team have been fiercely lobbying their members to get in line behind the measure, with Trump and White House officials also leaning heavily on the remaining GOP holdouts. Trump met with two key holdouts — Sen. Rick Scott of Florida and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin — on Saturday, just hours before GOP leaders hoped to hold the vote, according to those senators' close colleague, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah. He has also spoken to other critical votes, like Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who earlier Saturday declared his support for the bill. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, another critic of the bill, golfed with the president on Saturday morning, according to Sen. Lindsay Graham. But it's not yet clear whether Thune will be able to limit defections on a procedural vote, to start centrists like Sen. Thom Tillis and a small group of GOP hardliners — Lee, Scott and Johnson — still pushing for changes to the bill. But GOP leadership believe they will ultimately succeed, thanks, in part, to immense pressure from Trump. Already two Republicans, Tillis and Johnson, have said they would block the bill from moving ahead. That leaves Thune just one more vote to lose. It all amounts to an intense Saturday scramble for Trump and GOP leaders, who are intent on passing the president's agenda as quickly as possible. Trump has told GOP leaders he wants to sign the bill at the White House on July 4 – but that would still require approval from the narrowly divided GOP-controlled House, which is also no guarantee. This story is breaking and will be updated.
