Americans should be able to say whatever they want. But even the government is coming after them.
Now an unprecedented assault on the First Amendment sends alarm bells ringing nationwide
FTC’s Overreach Targets Media Fairness Ratings
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has launched a sprawling investigation into companies like Ad Fontes Media Group and Media Matters for America, probing whether their media fairness ratings illegally collude to orchestrate advertiser boycotts against conservative outlets.
This heavy-handed move, involving broad inquiry letters to roughly a dozen firms, raises concerns about the FTC’s priorities, diverting resources to chase unproven allegations of antitrust violations under the Sherman Act.
While the probe, led by Chairman Andrew Ferguson, aims to protect free speech, its aggressive tactics risk stifling legitimate media analysis, aligning with President Donald Trump’s push to curb perceived left-wing censorship but casting a shadow over the FTC’s impartiality.
Questionable Evidence of Collusion
The FTC’s 21-page Civil Investigative Demand sent to Ad Fontes and others demands extensive operational details and relationships with entities like NewsGuard and the Center for Countering Digital Hate, suggesting coordinated efforts to harm conservative media.
A source close to the investigation claimed evidence of “coordinated meetings between media ratings groups and advertisers” designed to collude against competitors, calling it “kind of shocking.”
Yet, a former FTC official, speaking anonymously, cautioned that proving illegal collusion will be “very, very difficult, if not impossible,” highlighting the speculative nature of the probe.
Conservative outlets have long criticized rating systems like NewsGuard’s, which scores HuffPost at 87.5% but Fox News at 69.5% and The Washington Times at 62%, arguing they arbitrarily choke off advertising revenue.
Ferguson himself criticized NewsGuard’s “nutrition label” system, writing in a December memo, “If a website gets a poor rating on NewsGuard’s ‘nutrition label,’ it can choke off the advertising dollars that are the lifeblood for many websites, including platforms on which millions of Americans every day speak their minds.”
The FTC’s focus on these ratings, however, risks overstepping into policing protected speech.
Media Matters and Ad Fontes Push Back
Media Matters, embroiled in a legal battle with Elon Musk over an alleged boycott of X, faces FTC scrutiny for supposedly coordinating with advertisers to deprive conservative outlets of revenue.
Its president, Angelo Carusone, dismissed the investigation as politically motivated, stating, “The Trump administration has been defined by naming right-wing media figures to key posts and abusing the power of the federal government to bully political opponents and silence critics. It’s clear that’s exactly what’s happening here, given Media Matters’ history of holding those same figures to account. These threats won’t work; we remain steadfast to our mission.”
Ad Fontes’ CEO, Vanessa Otero, defended her company’s nonpartisan approach, saying, “No matter what possible claim the FTC is investigating, we are confident that Ad Fontes Media’s business activities are not only proper and lawful, but constitutionally protected. While we are dismayed to even receive such a broad and intrusive demand letter in the first place, we will of course comply with what is required under the law.”
NewsGuard’s Matt Skibinski declined to confirm receiving an FTC letter, stating, “We have no comment about letters that we’ve heard are going out.” The FTC’s aggressive posture, while echoing Trump’s call to protect conservative voices, threatens to undermine credible media oversight, diverting attention from genuine antitrust concerns.
