YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Collusion in the Global Alliance for Responsible Media

Collusion in the Global Alliance for Responsible Media — Transcript

by House Committee on the Judiciary · 33,997 words · 5,275 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:28e
0:58e
1:28e
1:58e
2:28e
2:58e
3:28e
3:58e
4:28e
4:58e
5:28e
5:58e
6:28e
6:58e
7:28e
7:58e
8:28e
8:58e
9:28e
9:58e
10:28e
10:58e
11:28e
11:58e
12:28e e
13:18I don't care
13:33I don't care if he's pooped his
13:37pants I don't care if he
13:44can't and then I'll say okay maybe it's
13:46time to go I have poopy days all the
13:49time all the I step in so much poo you
13:52can't even imagine if it's Biden in a
13:54coma I'mma vote for Biden in a coma I
13:57don't even really particularly like the
13:58guy I a lot of his policy don't like him
14:01he's not Donald Trump right yeah Hitler
14:03White House we keeping him out keeping
14:05project 2025 out that's all I care
14:28about
14:58e
15:27e
15:57e
16:27e
16:57e
17:27e
17:57e
18:27e
18:57e
19:27e
19:57e
20:27e e
21:57e
22:27e
22:57e
23:27e
23:57e
24:27e e
25:26that's one
25:57e
26:27e
26:57e
27:27e
27:57e
28:27e
28:57e
29:27e
29:57e
30:26e e
31:06committee will come to order without
31:07objection the chair is authorized to
31:08declare a recess at any time we welcome
31:10everyone to today's hearing on collusion
31:13in the Global Alliance for responsible
31:15media the chair now recognizes the
31:16gentleman from Alabama to lead us all in
31:18the Pledge of
31:24Allegiance flag flag the United States
31:26of America
31:42stands CH now recognized for an opening
31:44statement section one of the Sherman Act
31:46makes anti-competitive restraints of
31:48trade illegal this includes coordinated
31:51actions that harm consumers by limiting
31:53the choices available to Americans that
31:56is exactly what the world generation of
31:58advertisers the Global Alliance for
32:00responsible media and every company that
32:01is a member of these organization
32:04organizations has done over the last 5
32:06years they came together agreed to limit
32:08advertising on certain platforms and
32:10news outlets that millions millions of
32:13Americans choose to read watch and
32:15listen to and how do they do this WFA
32:19members represent roughly
32:2190% of the global advertising spend that
32:24means WFA has almost complete Monopoly
32:26power over advertising in
32:28dollars and a tremendous amount of
32:31Market power garm which is an initiative
32:33of the WFA includes it in its membership
32:35over 100 of the world's biggest brands
32:38adte providers and advertising agencies
32:41garm has representatives from each of
32:43the six major advertising agency holding
32:45companies garm steer team which acts as
32:48a board of directors for the
32:49organization and approves nearly every
32:50action by the
32:52alliance includes Unilever and other
32:55massive consumer goods companies as well
32:56as group M the world's largest media
32:58buying agency they collude to make sure
33:01that no other advertisers support any
33:03news outlets platforms or creators that
33:05these massive companies don't agree with
33:08and these people do not like
33:10conservatives again don't take my word
33:11for it here's what employees at groupm
33:13said to garms leader about Fox News The
33:16Daily wire and Breitbart News employees
33:19from groupm said quote they hated their
33:22ideology that employee was discussing
33:24how to pull advertising from these news
33:26outlets and unfortunately it's not just
33:28group M unever encouraged Facebook to
33:30label one of President Trump's political
33:32ads as misinformation during the 2020
33:34election which would have caused that ad
33:36to be removed from Facebook garm
33:37organized a boycott of Twitter when Mr
33:40musk bought the platform and bragged
33:43about cutting Twitter and then they
33:44bragged about cutting Twitter's Revenue
33:46by 80% Union lever wrote to G's leader
33:49that the company had quote issues with
33:51overtly partisan takes by Elon
33:55Musk example Union liie gave was Elon
33:57Musk handling of of the uh Hunter Biden
33:59laptop story un lever had a problem with
34:03Elon Musk releasing internal Twitter
34:04documents to journalists and exposing
34:07how and why Twitter incorrectly
34:08suppressed the story about the Biden's
34:11family influence pedaling it's the
34:12Twitter files garment its members
34:15threaten platforms that don't comply and
34:16the best example is Spotify Joe Rogan's
34:19comments on Spotify when Joe Rogan's
34:21comments about the covid-19 vaccine to
34:24be clear any of these companies could on
34:27their own own legally refuse to
34:29advertise on a certain platform or news
34:31Outlet or with certain content
34:34creator unilateral decisions are not
34:36illegal but if they choose to pull
34:38advertising from the daily wire or other
34:40similar Outlets they will not be
34:43reaching millions of Americans who
34:44choose to consume that content but their
34:46competitors will in other words no
34:49single company can unilaterally pull its
34:51advertising dollars off a platform or
34:53news Outlet over a long period of time
34:56because that company's competitors will
34:57advertise and reach the audience it's
34:59called the
35:01market orad a Danish Renewable Energy
35:03company explained it perfectly when its
35:05employees wrote an email to garm asking
35:07when the Twitter boycott will end orst
35:11had told garm that Twitter quote is an
35:13important platform for us to reach our
35:15audience so we would like to consider
35:17going
35:19back but they look to garm for direction
35:22and they were asking G for permission
35:24and frankly that's exactly how cartels
35:26operate they collude against
35:28conservatives and other Outlet platforms
35:30and content creators in fact they come
35:32right out and say it garms leader wrote
35:34that the issue with the advertising
35:35industry and digital platforms is the
35:37quote extreme Global interpretation of
35:40the US uh US Constitution he also
35:43complain taking us norms and applying
35:46them globally is something that's a
35:47concern and said there's a problem with
35:49Americans 230 yearold
35:53Constitution if the WFA and garm are
35:56allowed to continue if these massive
35:58companies can collude without
35:59consequences the results will be
36:00devastating if this cartel continues to
36:02Target conservative Outlets content
36:04creators with different voices and
36:06viewpoints and any person that does not
36:08recite the so-called mainstream media
36:10talking points there'll be real problems
36:12they will deprive these good journalists
36:14and content creators of the funding they
36:15need to succeed they will use their
36:17cartel to eliminate competition based on
36:19internal biases of these massive
36:21companies and they will deprive
36:22Americans of the content that they
36:24actually want to consume with that I
36:26would yield to the ranking M for an
36:27opening
36:31statement Mr chairman this hearing has
36:34nothing to do with antitrust laws since
36:36the majority's allegations wither under
36:39even the most basic Anti-Trust analysis
36:42this is instead another dangerous effort
36:44by the majority to bully companies into
36:47promoting and supporting far-right
36:49extremist views views that Brands
36:52understandably do not want to be
36:53associated with in this case the
36:56majority seeks to undermine comp First
36:58Amendment rights and to make it harder
37:00for them to avoid monetizing online and
37:03offline harm through
37:04advertising this includes harm like the
37:07creation and distribution of
37:08exploitative images and videos of
37:10children the promotion of terrorism and
37:13funding of terrorist
37:14organizations the promotion and
37:16distribution of foreign propaganda
37:18materials and the promotion and
37:20distribution of racist hateful and
37:22discriminatory content under the
37:24majority theory of supposed Anti-Trust
37:27harm advertisers who do not want their
37:29expensive ad campaigns placed next to
37:32hate speech pirated copyrighted material
37:35foreign propaganda and other harmful
37:37content are quote colluding to
37:40demonetize so-called conservative
37:42content under the majority's theory the
37:45only way to cure this alleged harm would
37:47be for advertisers to be forced to run
37:49ads on platforms like Twitter now known
37:52as X truth social Breitbart and the
37:55daily wire even though those sites are
37:59riee with adult content hate speech
38:01false information misinformation and
38:04racist and violent
38:06propaganda further undermining this
38:08claim of harm the so-called victims of
38:10this madeup scheme are well supported by
38:13Ed Revenue subscriber revenue and sales
38:15revenue take the daily wire the media
38:19run by Republican W the media Outlet run
38:21by Republican witness Ben Shapiro its
38:24website generated $220 Million last year
38:28his show is the 13th most popular
38:30podcast in the first quarter of
38:322024 his website is over 15 million
38:35followers across his main social media
38:38handles including on sites that are
38:40members of the Global Alliance for
38:41responsible media known as scarm the
38:44target of today's hearing and the daily
38:46wire quote received more likes shares
38:49and comments on Facebook unquote which
38:51we should note as a member of garm than
38:54any other news publisher by a wide
38:55margin in 202 21 and even the video
38:59which Mr Shapiro claims to be the victim
39:01of global advertising organizations was
39:04itself supported by advertising revenue
39:07and is available on YouTube a member of
39:09garm this hardly sounds like the victim
39:12of a conspiracy to suppress content but
39:15Mr Shapiro's content is not alone many
39:18so-called conservative brands have made
39:20notable gains in corporate reputation
39:22among consumers and several brands that
39:25call themselves anti-woke have the
39:27market to cater to customers who wish to
39:29vote with their wallet advertisers have
39:32the right to Target their ads to the
39:33platforms websites and venues they
39:35choose by forcing advertisers to run ads
39:38on websites that they deem to contain
39:40harmful information and content the
39:43majority would be undermining those
39:44companies right to free speech under the
39:47First Amendment it's also an essential
39:49tenant of a free market that companies
39:51are not forced to do business with
39:53anyone indeed a competitive online
39:55environment is necessary for advertisers
39:58to easily choose where and how their ads
40:00are rolled
40:01out historically this committee has
40:04worked hard to protect consumers ensure
40:07a free and fair market and push back on
40:09corporate abuse greed and malfeasance we
40:12advanc bipartisan bills to combat Market
40:15concentration from online platforms to
40:17drug pricing we did all this because we
40:20took our job seriously to protect
40:22competition in the marketplace we
40:24understood the unique importance of the
40:26federal antitrust trust laws not as a
40:28weapon to use against our political
40:30opponents but as an essential component
40:33of the American social contract
40:35unfortunately this majority has picked a
40:37different direction under the under the
40:40direction of the chair the committee is
40:42abusing its oversight Authority the
40:45Republicans are so committed to the
40:47belief that conservative content and
40:49quotes is being censored despite all
40:52evidence to the contrary that they will
40:54do anything to undermine the efforts of
40:57platforms to moderate their own content
40:59which the Supreme Court recently
41:01affirmed is an exercise of their first
41:03amendment rights governments to
41:05communicate with platforms about
41:07security threats online and offline
41:09crime and terrorism and miss and
41:11disinformation that threatens our
41:13nation's health and democracy and
41:15companies to choose where and how to
41:17advertise their products this hearing is
41:20the result of a 15-month investigation
41:23that has resulted in over 37 Productions
41:25to the committee of more than 100 75,000
41:28pages and one transcribed interview I
41:31can only assume that the reason the
41:33majority has not asked garm the main
41:35target of this investigation to send a
41:37witness here today is that the majority
41:39knows there is no evidence to support
41:42their claim of
41:43wrongdoing their investigation was not
41:46designed to uncover unlawful Behavior
41:48because they knew there was none instead
41:50it was designed to chill companies
41:52exercise of their first amendment rights
41:55it was designed to make companies afraid
41:57to to speak to each other about the real
41:59connection between the online
42:00monetization of criminal and harmful
42:02content and the funding of offline harm
42:06make no mistake the companies
42:08represented here today and the others
42:10that are part of garm want first and
42:12foremost for customers to see their ads
42:15where and when they expect them and to
42:17make purchases based on those ads but
42:20secondly and importantly they do not
42:22want their expensive ad campaigns to
42:24fund people one who pirate content two
42:27who promote and execute terrorist acts
42:31three who make and distribute harmful
42:32and exploitive images of children and
42:35for others who use the internet to
42:37distribute and fund crime Republicans
42:40are so determined to prove their
42:42conspiracy theory that conservative
42:44content is being censored that they will
42:46do anything including launching a
42:48fruitless and harmful investigation to
42:50bully companies that do not hold their
42:53views I hope that we will get back to
42:55doing the serious work of the American
42:56people very soon and not continue to
42:59waste taxpayer dollars on fishing
43:01Expeditions designed to help hate and
43:03criminal activity spread on and offline
43:06I thank the witnesses for appearing
43:08today and yield back the balance of my
43:10Time gentleman yields back without
43:11objection all their opening statements
43:12will be included in the record we now
43:13introduce uh today's Witnesses Mr
43:15Christian juel is the global CEO of
43:16group m one of the world's largest media
43:18buying agencies with more than 60
43:20billion in annual media spending group
43:21M's agencies and subdivisions include M
43:23share wavemaker Essence Mediacom TN pm
43:26and others Mr Harish Patel is the
43:28president of unever USA and CEO of un's
43:31personal care North America division as
43:32CEO of personal care North America Mr
43:35Patel oversees Brands including Dove
43:37degree and AXS among others Mr Benjamin
43:39Shapiro is the host of the Ben Shapiro
43:41show a daily political podcast and radio
43:43show he's also the editor emeritus of
43:45the daily wire which is co which he
43:47co-founded in 2015 Mr Shapiro has
43:49written a number of books on current
43:50events routinely speaks at conferences
43:52colleges and universities and if you can
43:54believe what the ranking members said
43:55has a website that uh generates $220
43:58million a year 13th most popular podcast
44:00and 15 million followers imagine what he
44:02can do if garm wasn't targeting the
44:04daily wire and finally we have Mr
44:05Spencer Waller uh in the is is the
44:08Justice uh John Paul Stevens chair and
44:11competition law and professor and
44:12director of The Institute for Consumer
44:14antitrust studies at Lola University
44:16Chicago School of Law Professor Waller's
44:18courses and research focus on antitrust
44:20class actions Innovation intellectual
44:22property welcome our Witnesses and thank
44:24them for appearing today we will Begin
44:25by swearing you in with would you please
44:27rise and raise your right
44:32hand do you swear or affirm under
44:34penalty of perjury that the testimony
44:36you're about to give is true and correct
44:38to the best of your knowledge
44:39information and belief so help you God
44:41let the record reflect that the
44:43witnesses have answered in the
44:44affirmative thank you please be seated
44:45please know that your written testimony
44:47will be entered into the record in its
44:49entirety accordingly we ask that you
44:50summarize your testimony in five minutes
44:52Mr juel we will begin with you
45:01chairman Jordan ranking member nler and
45:03members of the committee thank you for
45:04the opportunity to speak appear before
45:06you today my name is Christian juel I'm
45:08the global Chief Executive Officer of
45:09group M the media Investment Company in
45:12simple terms We Buy ad space across
45:14channels including television digital
45:16and print for our clients and place ads
45:18within that space Brands tell us the
45:20message they want to share and the
45:21audience they want to Target we then
45:23advertise on which media environments
45:25would be best suited for the product and
45:27Buy ad space on those channels on the
45:29Brand's
45:29behalf collectively Brands invest
45:32billions of dollars in advertising
45:33annually to shape how they perceived one
45:36of the marketer biggest fears is that
45:37years of brand value could evaporate
45:39overnight as a consequence of bad ad
45:41placement companies spending millions of
45:43advertising dollars do not want to risk
45:45their brand on a strategy that could
45:46backfire Brands consistently inform us
45:49as their agency that they do not want to
45:51advertise next to hot button or device
45:52of content they want predictable
45:54reliable environments
45:57in 2017 news outlets reported that major
46:00brands were unwittingly advertising next
46:01to Isis propaganda unsurprisingly they
46:04faced significant consumer push back
46:06brands also had to contend with reports
46:08of Russian troll Farms infiltrating
46:10platforms to disrupt presidential
46:11elections and most recently Brands had
46:14to develop advertising strategies in the
46:16context of a pandemic that divided
46:19Americans This resulted in a growing
46:21emphasis on brand suitability or
46:23marketers desire to protect a Brand's
46:25value by ensuring their ads are not
46:26placed adjacent to content that could
46:28negatively affect their reputation brand
46:30suitability is particular to each brand
46:32what is unsuitable to one may be
46:34perfectly suitable to another but all
46:36brands generally agree they do not want
46:37to appear next to illegal or harmful
46:40content many also seek to avoid as ad
46:43placements near content that while not
46:44illegal does not align with their values
46:47with the increasing focus on brand
46:48suitability Brands wanted to better
46:50understand how Publishers were
46:51identifying prohibiting and removing
46:53harmful content what they found that was
46:56every platform took a different approach
46:58definitions of harmful content also
47:00varied without consistent standards
47:02companies were concerned their ads would
47:04end up appearing in unsuitable
47:06environments we believed the consistent
47:08standards were needed to help our
47:09clients connect with consumers which is
47:11why we and other organizations came
47:13together to establish the Global
47:14Alliance responsible Media or garm garm
47:17developed standard definitions of
47:18content that Brands might consider
47:20unsuitable so that advertisers and
47:21Publishers could speak a Common Language
47:23about sensitive content adoption of G's
47:26definition definitions is and always has
47:28been completely voluntary for group M's
47:31part we follow our clients ad placement
47:33wishes according to their risk
47:34tolerances and priorities these
47:36priorities can shift quickly it's our
47:38job to execute their strategy with speed
47:39and precision we leverage G's
47:41definitions to provide our clients with
47:43a consistent reliable
47:45framework groupm is not the Arbiter of
47:48how to categorize websites nor do we
47:50want to be because we have no control
47:52over Publishers and no role in
47:54moderating content we also rely on
47:55Independent third Pary to identify
47:57domains with those definitions and
47:59additional categories that our clients
48:01deem
48:02unsuitable among other things those
48:04third parties consider media platforms
48:06factchecking resources processes and
48:08Technologies when they evaluate the
48:10risks of placing content that third
48:12party assessment informs where we will
48:14place ads including the sites to which
48:16we will not Place ads without specific
48:17client request of note approximately 94%
48:21of those websites are prescribed because
48:22they infringe on IP
48:24rights this committee expressed an
48:26interest in advertising on certain news
48:28platforms we appreciate the importance
48:29of funding news organizations through
48:31advertising which is why we have taken
48:33steps to make advertising in news
48:35including local news more appealing to
48:37advertisers today however trust in news
48:39sites is at a low point and Brands
48:41generally disfavor advertising next to
48:43news for example only 1.28% of brand
48:47spend is allocated to online news at
48:49this
48:50point this is because Brands to prefer
48:53to avoid advertising alongside common
48:55news content War
48:57Scandal political division and also
48:59because they do not need to advertise
49:00there to reach their target audience
49:03Alternatives such as sports and
49:04entertainment provide a better way to
49:06reach these same consumers this is not a
49:08left right or group M preference it is
49:10apolitical it's an industrywide
49:12preference group M has no interest in
49:15impinging on anyone's right to speak or
49:17publish their points of view we also
49:19believe companies have the right to
49:20choose where they Place their
49:22advertisements we all know how one bad
49:24ad placement can damage a company's
49:26reputation and bottom line which is why
49:28Brands and the companies like groupm
49:30that serve them need tools and
49:31transparency to mitigate these risks
49:34thank you I look forward to answering
49:35your questions uh thank you Mr jel Mr
49:37batal you
49:41recognize make sure make sure that mic's
49:43on and pull it real
49:46close maybe
49:50not we can get someone to help you there
49:52if it's okay thank you
49:58chairman Jordan there you go ranking
50:00member nedler and members of the
50:02committee thank you for the opportunity
50:04to hear you here to be here today to
50:06discuss un's approach to purchasing
50:08advertising that promotes over 400
50:10different brands used by more than three
50:13billion people every day in more than
50:15190 countries around the world univa
50:18takes great care to ensure that our
50:20advertisements reach the consumers who
50:23use our products promote our products
50:25and Brands and serve our business goals
50:27of offering consumers the brands they
50:29know and the trust them their needs
50:33every day in making decisions on
50:35Advertising unver uses its dollar
50:38advertising dollars to reach as many
50:40consumers as we can in an environment
50:42that maximizes sales for our
50:45products currently about 80% of our us
50:48advertising spend is directed in some
50:51form of digital media we spend the most
50:54on digital Commerce platforms like
50:55Amazon War Walmart Target and Walgreens
50:59because that's where consumers are
51:01making their buying decisions only 20%
51:04of UNS advertis in spending goes to
51:06social media platforms and less than 1%
51:10goes to digital news we want all we want
51:13to reach all our consumers who use our
51:15brands on platforms that support and
51:17align With Our Brands conversely being
51:20associated with content or a platform
51:23that detracts from Our Brands harms Our
51:25Brands or is in cons inconsistent With
51:28Our Brands is decidedly not in our
51:30economic interest with the rise of user
51:33generated social media content and other
51:36online media we have unfortunately seen
51:39repeated incidents where our brands have
51:41been associated with content that is
51:43harmful to Our
51:44Brands one earlier example ads from our
51:48Dove soap were appearing adjacent to
51:50content glorifying domestic violence and
51:53rape in 2020 we suspended social media
51:56advertising when it became clear that
51:59the polarizing content would not serve
52:01the brands or add value to the brand
52:03places in the market I want to be very
52:06clear on one crucially important fact
52:10Unilever and unver alone controls our
52:13advertising spending no platform has the
52:16right to our advertising dollars as we
52:19look across the available advertising
52:21infantry recognizing we do not have
52:24unlimited money to spend on Advertising
52:26we choose the channels the platforms and
52:29the outlets that give us the greatest
52:31commercial benefit for our advertising
52:34investment we have internal policies and
52:37guides on our decisions our policies
52:39require our advertisement to be truthful
52:42accurate and transparent in 2018 we
52:45adopted a responsible framework
52:47specifically for digital advertising
52:49focusing on Advertising to boards
52:51responsible platforms responsible
52:53content and responsible infrastructure
52:56we have a dedicated team of
52:58professionals who are who are constantly
53:00examining the advertising Marketplace
53:03working with platforms selecting the
53:04platforms that meet our business needs
53:07we also worked with the industry
53:09including the Global Alliance of
53:11responsible media G arose after leading
53:15advertisers observed that ads for their
53:17brand name products were appearing
53:19alongside despicable
53:21content G's brand safety flaw and
53:24suitability framework are tools to help
53:27platforms communicate clearly about the
53:29content they will monetize and to assist
53:32advertisers and agencies in making
53:34decisions about advertising infantry and
53:36they will purchase although we've made
53:39good progress in ensuring that our
53:41digital advertising spend is advancing
53:43Our Brands business objectives there is
53:46still more work to be done as recently
53:49as two years ago un received notice that
53:52certain ads from Brands had been
53:54unknowingly placed adjacent to social
53:56social media profiles involved in
53:58selling and sting child sexual abuse
54:01material this is wholly
54:04unacceptable we must do everything in
54:06our power as both advertisers and
54:09platforms that ensures our advertising
54:12dollars are serving the intended purpose
54:14of reaching consumers and promoting Our
54:17Brands not funding hate and harm and I
54:20would be happy to respond to your
54:22questions thank you uh thank you Mr
54:24Patel Mr Shapiro you're recognized for
54:25five minutes
54:32of the committee can't hear
54:35you chairman Jordan ranking member nler
54:37members of the committee good morning
54:39first of all ranking member nler I
54:40appreciate the kind words about our
54:42business it's very kind of you and also
54:44I assume that we'd be doing a lot better
54:45without the institutional obstacles that
54:47I'm about to discuss we're in the midst
54:49of a trust crisis in the world of media
54:51which is because so many in the Legacy
54:52Media have lied in order to preserve
54:54left-leaning narratives to take just the
54:55most recent example we were told by the
54:57Legacy Media that President Biden was
54:59just fine for years anyone who
55:01questioned his health and mental Fitness
55:02was trafficking in cheap fakes and then
55:04President Biden went out and engaged in
55:06a full-scale mental collapse on stage in
55:07front of hundreds of millions of people
55:09so we can see why Americans at least
55:11Americans who are not Democrats do not
55:13trust the media the question isn't
55:15really why the Legacy Media have lost
55:16Americans trust we know that answer the
55:18question is why despite that loss of
55:20trust the Legacy Media continue to gain
55:22share in the advertising market and the
55:24answer is simple there is in fact an
55:26informal pressure system created by
55:28Democratic legislators this White House
55:30Legacy Media advertisers and pseudo
55:32objective brand safety organizations
55:34that system guarantees that advertising
55:36dollars flow only to left-wing media
55:38Brands let me explain how this works
55:40when a conservative competitor to the
55:42Legacy Media arises members of that
55:44Legacy Media and their political allies
55:46rush to paint such competitors as
55:47dangerous the commentator Caris Swisher
55:49of the New York Times for example told
55:51the head of YouTube that my videos at
55:52Daily wire were a quote gateway drug
55:54that would lead children including her
55:55own teenage son to watch Neo-Nazi
55:57content never mind the amaka elected
56:00Democrats pick up that same messaging in
56:022017 Senator Diane Feinstein told
56:04lawyers at Facebook Google and Twitter
56:05quote you created these platforms and
56:07now they're being misused and you have
56:08to be the ones to do something about it
56:10or we will social media companies react
56:13to incentive structures including
56:14threats they've responded by adopting
56:16the standards of thirdparty left-wing
56:18informational safety groups like the
56:19global Alli for responsible Media or
56:21garm garm purportedly sets brand safety
56:24standards objective standards by which
56:25advert ERS and platforms can supposedly
56:27determine just what sort of content
56:29ought to be deemed safe for advertising
56:32in reality garm acts as a cartel its
56:34members account for 90% of AD spending
56:36in the United States almost a trillion
56:37dollars in other words if you're not
56:39getting ad dollars from gar members it's
56:40nearly impossible to run an ad-based
56:42business and if you're not following
56:44their preferred political narratives the
56:46ones that Caris Wier and Dian Feinstein
56:47would follow you will not be deemed
56:49brand safe your business will be
56:50throttled we at Daily wire have
56:52experienced this firsthand in 2017 after
56:54Senator Feinstein made her threats to
56:56bring the weight of government down on
56:57social media platforms dailywire YouTube
56:59channel saw 1,000% increase in content
57:02enforcements over a 2-year period since
57:042021 after Democrat officials further
57:06turned up the heat on social media
57:07companies my personal Facebook page has
57:09seen an over 80% drop in Impressions or
57:12take Joe Rogan when Joe said that he had
57:14taken ior mecin after getting Co White
57:16House Press Secretary Jens saki
57:17pressured Spotify to take action stating
57:19quote we want every platform to be doing
57:21more to call out Missin disinformation
57:23while also uplifting accurate
57:24information Spotify applied Spotify of
57:27course works with garm so what are the
57:29brand safety standards that garm uses
57:31the standards begin with inarguable
57:33things that we've heard from the other
57:34Witnesses like preventing distribution
57:35of child sexual abuse material or
57:37stopping terrorism but garm doesn't draw
57:38the line at what is criminal abusive or
57:40dangerous their standards also include
57:42restrictions on hate speech harassment
57:44misinformation or my personal favorite
57:46insensitive irresponsible and harmful
57:48treatment of debated sensitive social
57:50issues those criteria are highly
57:52subjective in theory and they are purely
57:54partisan in practice for example last
57:56year daily wi host Matt Walsh was fully
57:58demonetized on YouTube a garm member why
58:01for quote unquote misgendering which to
58:02garm is to say that men are not women
58:05perfectly obvious facts now run a fail
58:06of G's censorship standards companies
58:09targeted by garm like the daily wire
58:10Breitbart Fox News and so many others
58:12reach hundreds of millions of people
58:13with opinions and beliefs long
58:15established as within the mainstream of
58:16American conservative thought garm and
58:18its members have no respect for the
58:19beliefs of those people they would like
58:21them marginalized or squashed it's time
58:23to stand up for the first amendment in
58:24this Congress Congress can do so in two
58:26ways first Congress must investigate the
58:29informal and perhaps formal Arrangements
58:30between censorship cartels like garm and
58:33executive branch agencies The Daily wire
58:35has already filed a federal lawsuit
58:36against the state department for
58:37allegedly doing just this second
58:39Congress can itself stop engaging in
58:41violation of free speech principles two
58:43weeks ago writing in descent in Murthy
58:45versus Missouri Justice Alo condemned
58:46what he called sophisticated and
58:48coercive government campaigns against
58:49Free Speech members of this committee
58:51have engaged in precisely such campaigns
58:53when Congressman Schiff speaks about
58:55targeting social media companies that
58:56must be quote pulled and dragged into
58:58this era of corporate responsibility
58:59because they are too tolerant of
59:01misinformation he knows what he is doing
59:03he is participating in a sophisticated
59:04coercive campaign against Free Speech
59:06when congresswoman jaal blames social
59:08media for placing America at the quote
59:09precipice of a democratic crisis and
59:11calls on them to Target they deem hate
59:13groups she also knows what she is doing
59:15she is participating in a sophisticated
59:16coercive campaign against Free Speech
59:18when Congressman Hank Johnson says quot
59:20we need a constitutional amendment to
59:21allow the legislature to control the
59:23so-called Free Speech rights of
59:24Corporations he also knows what he is
59:26doing we all know what these government
59:28actors but some people in this room are
59:29doing you're using the tcid threat of
59:31government action to compel private
59:32companies to throttle viewpoints you
59:34don't particularly like the first
59:35amendment was not designed to enable
59:37work rounds by elected official it was
59:38directed at Congress at you and you're
59:41abdicating your fundamental Duty when
59:42you exert pressure on private companies
59:43to censor speech some in this room have
59:45been doing just that for years we in the
59:47non- Legacy Media have been feeling the
59:48effects in the name of the constitution
59:50in the name of democracy this should
59:53stop thank you Mr Shapiro we now
59:55recognize professor
59:56Waller uh thank you uh chair Jordan
59:59ranking member Nadler members of the
1:00:00committee thank you for the opportunity
1:00:02to present My Views uh to you today I am
1:00:05speaking solely in my personal capacity
1:00:07I do not represent garm or any of its
1:00:09member firms I am concerned that the
1:00:12antitrust issues relating to today's
1:00:14hearings and the letters and document
1:00:16requests sent to the various companies
1:00:17do not conform to a consensus
1:00:20understanding of us antitrust law by
1:00:22most courts and commentators I only have
1:00:24access to publicly available information
1:00:26so I cannot aine on whether there is or
1:00:29is not any specific antitrust violation
1:00:32instead I present a road map of the many
1:00:34antitrust issues that would need to be
1:00:36addressed in a serious way before any
1:00:38real antitrust concerns exist in this
1:00:40matter it's important to note that most
1:00:43members of garm do not compete with each
1:00:45other and each has unique needs for
1:00:49marketing and branding including uh as
1:00:52the other Witnesses have already
1:00:53testified having effective marketing
1:00:55Campa pains and uh doing their best to
1:00:58avoid uh any harmful associations that
1:01:01damage their brand or simply Drive Away
1:01:03purchasers uh with respect to the uh
1:01:07diverse Coalition of firms in garm for
1:01:09example Microsoft does not compete with
1:01:11McDonalds Proctor and Gamble uh or
1:01:14Unilever don't compete with shell a
1:01:16pharmaceutical company or group M and
1:01:18also these firms do not generally
1:01:20compete with content providers such as
1:01:22Mr
1:01:23Shapiro now the activities of gar do not
1:01:26appear from publicly available
1:01:27information to be a cartel as that term
1:01:30is understood in antitrust law and
1:01:32cartels are a serious concern of
1:01:34antitrust laws but they normally involve
1:01:36an agreement between competitors to fix
1:01:38prices rig bids limit production divide
1:01:41markets or otherwise uh interfere with
1:01:44quality production Innovation and
1:01:47U instead what we're talking about is
1:01:52the development of terms uh and
1:01:54definitions uh they call it a lexicon it
1:01:57is in some way sort of like a dictionary
1:01:59these terms do not affect the price
1:02:02production or quality of the goods and
1:02:04services sold by the members of garm
1:02:07advertisers media buyers advertising
1:02:09agencies may or may not rely on the garm
1:02:11terminology and may adopt any other
1:02:13criteria to determine how and where to
1:02:16place advertising this is done in a a
1:02:19public uh process everything is is
1:02:22published and available to you and this
1:02:24is very different from the secretive
1:02:25process by which traditional cartels
1:02:27meet to create and enforce their
1:02:29unlawful agreements um in addition there
1:02:33are on its face legitimate business
1:02:35justifications that the firms would be
1:02:37asserting including protecting brand
1:02:39images and successful marketing
1:02:41strategies these are two types of
1:02:43business justifications that are
1:02:45routinely considered in antitrust
1:02:47cases and characterizing G's conduct as
1:02:51a boycott doesn't really change the
1:02:52antitrust analysis in any important way
1:02:55uh group boycotts are only per se
1:02:58unlawful when they're used to implement
1:03:00some otherwise unlawful cartel agreement
1:03:03or where firms with Market power
1:03:05collectively deny a competitor access to
1:03:08some key source of Supply it needs to
1:03:11survive separate from the traditional
1:03:14anit trust analysis that I've outlined
1:03:15in my opening statement and my remarks
1:03:17and in my witness statement the First
1:03:20Amendment and the interest of free
1:03:21expression also limit the application of
1:03:23antitrust laws in important ways the
1:03:25North Pennington Doctrine immunizes
1:03:27conduct that seeks to influence
1:03:29government action and public policy
1:03:31through a variety of techniques
1:03:32including publicity campaigns in short
1:03:35uh an agreement by firms if there is an
1:03:37agreement uh is not an antitrust
1:03:41violation if it's designed to influence
1:03:44governmental action at any level of the
1:03:45government federal state local
1:03:48legislative judicial or executive branch
1:03:52in addition the Supreme Court and the
1:03:55lower court courts have shown a separate
1:03:57and special caution for applying the
1:03:59antitrust laws to impose liability for
1:04:02political and social boycots even if
1:04:04that's what's going on even if there is
1:04:06a degree of economic self-interest uh by
1:04:09the groups conducting the boycott one
1:04:11example uh is that the Supreme Court has
1:04:13held that the first amendment protects
1:04:15the Civil Rights boycott of white
1:04:16merchants in Mississippi by the NAACP
1:04:19even though some other businesses May
1:04:21well have prospered or done more
1:04:24business because of that boycott
1:04:26um so um the committee's expressed
1:04:29concerns over the conduct examined today
1:04:32are not consistent with the consensus
1:04:34view of the antitrust law set forth in
1:04:36the leading cases uh I agree with the
1:04:39chair that an individual decision to do
1:04:41business or not to do business is not
1:04:43covered by section one of the Sherman
1:04:44Act however uh in addition to the lack
1:04:47of the other uh issues and evidence uh
1:04:51from the public available information
1:04:53there are significant First Amendment
1:04:54implications raised by the actions of
1:04:56garm and these first amendment issues
1:04:59suggest that even if the antitrust laws
1:05:01were fully Justified and every issue in
1:05:03the antitrust road map were satisfied
1:05:05there would be a plausible argument that
1:05:07the conduct was protected as a matter of
1:05:09speech and free implication and I'm
1:05:11running out of time but I also want to
1:05:12suggest that the policy implications of
1:05:14imposing antitrust liability in these
1:05:16circumstances should be quite concerning
1:05:18regardless of one's political views a
1:05:21leading Treatise published by the ABA
1:05:23antitrust section states boycotts are a
1:05:25common instrument for bringing about
1:05:27social change or advancing political
1:05:29religious or other non-commercial goals
1:05:32and using the antitrust laws to
1:05:33challenge expressive conduct can
1:05:35interfere with commonplace forms of
1:05:37advocacy that are used by consumers
1:05:39religious groups political groups of all
1:05:42policy and Persuasions as a result I do
1:05:44not see any benefit from further
1:05:46legislative action on these issues thank
1:05:48you Professor we will now proceed under
1:05:50the five minute rule with questions the
1:05:52chair recognizes the gentleman from
1:05:53California for five minutes uh thank you
1:05:55Mr chairman I find myself a bit
1:05:56conflicted I agree with both Mr Waller
1:05:58and Mr Shapiro on on matters they've
1:06:01mentioned I first of all no matter how
1:06:03much gas lighting we've heard this
1:06:04morning is clear to me from the internal
1:06:07Communications in the committee's report
1:06:10that garms objectives are clearly
1:06:12political uh to use its influence among
1:06:15its members to suppress free speech and
1:06:17to financially harm outlets in which the
1:06:19leadership disagrees I don't see any
1:06:22other reading uh of of those
1:06:24Communications that reaches any other
1:06:26conclusion it's a manifestation of the
1:06:28ESG movement that has financially harmed
1:06:30so many companies that practice it and
1:06:33there is a huge economic price to be
1:06:35paid for this conduct go woke go broke
1:06:38is is more than just a slogan it's an
1:06:40economic fact I mean ask Disney ask
1:06:43Budweiser uh they pay a um the the the
1:06:46companies I think uh in in G's case are
1:06:49risking missing huge SVS of the market
1:06:52that they're seeking to reach they pay a
1:06:54premium for ads in the forms they've
1:06:56deliberately saturated they miss
1:06:59Bargains in the forms that they are I'll
1:07:01use their word
1:07:02throttling um and they risk alienating
1:07:05the consumers upon whom they rely for
1:07:07profits I mean I was a devoted lifelong
1:07:09Gillette consumer until they launched
1:07:11their men are pigs campaign in in 2017 I
1:07:14haven't bought a Gillette product since
1:07:18um but that's their right as a company
1:07:20to alienate me as a consumer and it's my
1:07:23right as a consumer to be alienated
1:07:26now if if I were a stockholder in in
1:07:28garms member companies I would be
1:07:30absolutely livid uh i' I'd either be
1:07:32raising hell at stockholder meetings or
1:07:34withdrawing my investments or both if I
1:07:36were a management in any of these
1:07:39companies uh I'd be livid also and I'd
1:07:41be cancelling my membership in garm with
1:07:43a strong letter to follow but here's the
1:07:45fine point of the matter that's a beef
1:07:48between the company stockholders and
1:07:50their management it's a beef between G's
1:07:52member companies and garm it's a beef
1:07:55between those companies and their
1:07:58consumers but it is not a beef between
1:08:01garm or its member companies or their
1:08:03stockholders and consumers and this
1:08:07government people have a right to their
1:08:09opinions and to express those opinions
1:08:11in any peaceful manner that they choose
1:08:13companies are simply a collection of
1:08:15people gathered together to pull their
1:08:17resources toward a common goal whether
1:08:19it's to make money or Advance a
1:08:21political cause or or or both it's a
1:08:24little amusing to see that the Democrats
1:08:25suddenly championing this freedom
1:08:27because in G's case it benefits them but
1:08:30real against the very same Freedom when
1:08:32it comes to such matters as Citizens
1:08:34United for the left their ethics are are
1:08:37strictly situational and as I've often
1:08:39warned on this committee we can never
1:08:41allow them to become our teachers
1:08:43democracy extends beyond the political
1:08:45realm to the free market as well in a
1:08:47free market consumers vote every day
1:08:50with every dollar they spend on what the
1:08:52market will produce who best produces it
1:08:55what their willing to pay and and who
1:08:57they'll buy it from a free government
1:09:00exists to protect this right and that's
1:09:02why I think we should be careful when we
1:09:03tread into this matter in the
1:09:05application of government power in in
1:09:07disputes that are strictly between
1:09:09private parties but I do think Mr Beer
1:09:11pero is absolutely correct that if this
1:09:13government is in any way acting to
1:09:16pressure or nudge companies to censor
1:09:18speech or to corrupt their business
1:09:20decisions for political ends we ought to
1:09:22vigorously act to stop that um but if
1:09:25they're just doing that to themselves
1:09:27that's their right to make stupid
1:09:29decisions and government also exists to
1:09:31protect that right Mr sh I'll give you
1:09:33the last word I mean I agree with much
1:09:35of what you're saying I think that the
1:09:37big concern for the daily wir and
1:09:38companies like ours is the Nexus between
1:09:41government action and groups like arm
1:09:44and it appears clear to us that a well
1:09:48meaning organization that simply wanted
1:09:50to appeal to the broadest possible
1:09:51audience would not be making political
1:09:53decisions about which Outlet are to
1:09:56right which Outlets are to left I'm
1:09:57perfectly fine with advertisers
1:10:00advertising on pod Safe America or on
1:10:02MSNBC that the problem that we have is
1:10:04an informal structure by which members
1:10:06of government including this White House
1:10:07have pressured social media companies in
1:10:09order to restrict their content and
1:10:11everyone can see that there there's a
1:10:13lot of will no one rid me of this of
1:10:15this metalsome priest going on from
1:10:18members of the government who then seem
1:10:19to be shocked when there's push back
1:10:21from the right on exactly the same sort
1:10:22of
1:10:23matter thank you Mr chairman I you back
1:10:26gent you's back the breaking members
1:10:27recognized for 5
1:10:33minutes thank you Mr chairman Mr Patel
1:10:36has the Global Alliance for responsible
1:10:38media ever required that your company
1:10:40Unilever avoid advertising on any
1:10:42platform or website no sir Mr juel same
1:10:47question has the Global Alliance
1:10:48responsible media ever required group M
1:10:50to avoid advertising on any platform or
1:10:53website no sir
1:10:56Mr juel has your company's participation
1:10:58in the Global Alliance for responsible
1:11:00media ever restricted your company's
1:11:02advertising decisions in any way no it's
1:11:05completely optional excuse me garm is
1:11:08completely optional thank you Mr Patel
1:11:10same question to you yeah it's
1:11:13completely voluntary Professor Waller
1:11:16one of the goals of the Global Alliance
1:11:17responsible media is to avoid having
1:11:19companies advertising dollars funding
1:11:21online and offline harm like the
1:11:24creation and imination of commercially
1:11:26exploitative and exp and explicit images
1:11:29of children or the funding of terrorism
1:11:32groups or the promotion and
1:11:33dissemination of explicit images and
1:11:35depictions of crime outside of news
1:11:37stories and Reporting is there any US
1:11:40law that requires companies to advertise
1:11:42in every website and every platform uh
1:11:44no there's not uh a company can
1:11:46individually choose to do business or
1:11:49not do business with an Advertiser
1:11:51advertising agency or a platform is
1:11:53there any law that requires companies to
1:11:55support through advertising dollars
1:11:57speech content or statements that they
1:12:00don't believe in there's no uh there's
1:12:03no antitrust law that deals with that
1:12:05what would be the consequences if there
1:12:08were I can say that the Supreme Court
1:12:10has you know Express concern and not
1:12:12impose liability they typically Don't
1:12:14Force companies to do business with each
1:12:16other if they don't wish to uh and uh
1:12:21they're frankly more concerned about
1:12:22about cartel agreements and the other
1:12:24thing rather than forcing companies to
1:12:25continue to do business if they don't
1:12:27wish they wish to encourage unilateral
1:12:28decisions about how to proceed in the
1:12:30real world as each company thinks
1:12:32best and that's what the Supreme Court
1:12:34has said yes and what do you think about
1:12:37the uh getting the Supreme Court for the
1:12:41moment what do you think about the
1:12:42effects of of such a
1:12:44law uh we want companies the antitrust
1:12:49laws really do a couple of things they
1:12:50prevent agreements that U unreasonably
1:12:53harm competition they prevent single
1:12:56firms from abusing their power and they
1:12:58prevent mergers and Acquisitions that
1:13:00can lead to either of those other
1:13:01problems I've already outlined that's
1:13:03what the antitrust laws do they don't
1:13:05generally micromanage the decisions of
1:13:07Corporations as they decide what's best
1:13:09for them in the
1:13:11market thank you Mr chairman I must note
1:13:14once again that this sham investigation
1:13:16has revealed that these companies have
1:13:18broken at no competition law the
1:13:21investigation never should have started
1:13:23but it certainly should have ended after
1:13:25after the committee spoke to a
1:13:26representative of garm and learned
1:13:28exactly what we all should know by now
1:13:30that there is no basis for a claim of
1:13:31antitrust harm but that does not mean
1:13:34that this investigation is harmless the
1:13:37committee's power has been used to bully
1:13:39intimidate and impoverish any
1:13:41organization or company that dares to
1:13:43disagree with so-called conservative
1:13:46speech in quotes speech that in many
1:13:48cases causes and spreads harm both
1:13:50online and offline and I believe that
1:13:53that is exactly the purpose of this
1:13:55investigation to misuse the power of the
1:13:58of this committee to bully intimidate
1:14:00and impoverish any organization or
1:14:04company that dares to disagree with
1:14:06so-called conservative
1:14:07speech in other
1:14:09words to
1:14:12intimidate the exercise of free speech
1:14:16uh to impoverish organizations to
1:14:18improperly use the power of this
1:14:21committee to force organizations to
1:14:24spend themselves
1:14:25into poverty and thereby to inhibit and
1:14:29deter exercise of free speech this is a
1:14:33gross misuse of the power of this
1:14:35committee we have an opportunity Mr
1:14:37chairman to have a constructive
1:14:38conversation about Anti-Trust law and
1:14:41how we can help the American people but
1:14:43unfortunately this hearing is not it
1:14:46this hearing is an exercise of
1:14:48intimidation of free speech and it's
1:14:52shameful I yield back gentle yelds back
1:14:54gentle from Arizona is recognized thank
1:14:57you Mr chairman I thank the witnesses
1:14:59for appearing here
1:15:00today
1:15:02um Mr juel and Mr Patel your your your
1:15:06companies and your clients you you as an
1:15:09individual company are both sit on the
1:15:11steering committee for garm is that
1:15:13correct yes
1:15:15sir yes and um with the steering
1:15:21committee um there's been a number of
1:15:25standards that are have been developed
1:15:27by garm and Mr Patel you mentioned your
1:15:30company unever has has developed its own
1:15:33set of Standards do you have you adopted
1:15:36uh the standards of garm as part of of
1:15:39your standards as well ad advertisement
1:15:41placement firstly univa created its own
1:15:44standards in 2018 and then uh there was
1:15:46an industry need to create some
1:15:48standardization which is what G was born
1:15:50for in 2019 my question was though did
1:15:53do you did your compy
1:15:55adopt those garm standards from
1:15:582019 we adopt the garm standards okay
1:16:02and and Mr juwel how many of your
1:16:04clients have adopted the garm
1:16:08standards garm exists to create the
1:16:11framework and the definitions that we've
1:16:13used so so this is we get that I've read
1:16:15your read your statement how many of
1:16:17your companies yeah how many companies
1:16:19do you represent we represent thousands
1:16:22and how many of those companies have
1:16:24Exel accepted and adopted the the garm
1:16:26standards I couldn't give you an exact
1:16:28number but I would tell you most of our
1:16:30major advertisers use garm as a
1:16:32foundation and then we build upon that
1:16:34for whatever their custom preferences
1:16:36are for whatever their particular
1:16:38suitability might be okay and do you get
1:16:42as part of the steering committee do you
1:16:43have regular discussions with with the
1:16:47garm and its
1:16:50leadership of which you're part
1:16:52regarding placement of advertisements
1:16:55I do not meet with stands I do not meet
1:16:57with garm on a regular basis I've
1:16:59actually never met with
1:17:00them your company the company would yes
1:17:04okay Mr Patel the company would meet but
1:17:08we 100% decide where our marketting
1:17:11investment goes that's un leave his
1:17:12decision so Mr rewitz who who works for
1:17:16garm is there he's kind of the face of
1:17:20garm in some respects have you either of
1:17:22you or your company dealt with Mr reik
1:17:25in
1:17:26communicating about advertisement
1:17:28placement and uh subject
1:17:31matter I I haven't met Mr uh rewood but
1:17:35we have a member that sits on the
1:17:38stom yes okay so let's let's get to that
1:17:41for a second um in n in
1:17:452020 um Rob Master vice president media
1:17:49and digital engagement at Unilever sent
1:17:50an email to Facebook about a
1:17:54presidential ad and he was concerned
1:17:57about it violating the the Facebook
1:18:01policies are you familiar with that
1:18:03situation Mr
1:18:05Patel I wasn't part of the communication
1:18:08but I have seen the communication that
1:18:09you referring to and I think what I
1:18:12interpret from it he was checking uh
1:18:15what was Facebook's policy on
1:18:18it I find it interesting that the way
1:18:21you couched that you were checking what
1:18:22Facebook's policy was weren't you really
1:18:25your staff really checking to see if it
1:18:28was consistent with your own with your
1:18:30own policy I would assume right no sir
1:18:33we we don't decide on what media content
1:18:35goes up or goes down that's up for the
1:18:38media platforms to decide so so but when
1:18:41you're looking for for ad safety
1:18:43placement you're not concerned then
1:18:46whether that was consistent with
1:18:47Facebook's policy you're just you you're
1:18:49just basically inquiring with Facebook's
1:18:52policy not not concerned with your own
1:18:55policy of
1:18:56placement what we do is we have a ad we
1:19:00decide all our marketting investment
1:19:01we'll decide on target audiences where
1:19:03we want Our Brands to appear so why were
1:19:06you inquiring whether that was a
1:19:08violation of Facebook's um
1:19:12policy so I'm not clear on why Rob
1:19:15Master sent that communication but as I
1:19:18said we decide where we want to put our
1:19:20ads um with whichever social media
1:19:23course of course we I I appreciate that
1:19:25that you you decide where you place your
1:19:27ads the question though is why are you
1:19:29then going to Facebook and saying does
1:19:31this ad meet your your Criterion because
1:19:34because that indicates you're trying to
1:19:35influence Facebook because in
1:19:38reality your position is we're going to
1:19:41play put place it wherever we think is
1:19:43best but there's an ad over here a
1:19:46specific ad that you're asking does that
1:19:49meet your policy that seems to in
1:19:51intimidate that seems to imply um that
1:19:54you want to question their policy their
1:19:58place their their uh what their platform
1:20:01is doing before you bother to place your
1:20:04ad but you didn't do it that way you
1:20:07just wanted to know whether it meant
1:20:09their policy you didn't say we're not
1:20:11going to do it because we don't like it
1:20:13that in indicates you're interfering in
1:20:17YouTube's um policy decision yield
1:20:21gentleman y's back the gentle lady from
1:20:22Washington is recognized well I really
1:20:24like my colleague on the other side but
1:20:25I did not understand that argument
1:20:27antitrust enforcement is experiencing a
1:20:29real Renaissance under the Biden
1:20:31Administration our Anti-Trust enforcers
1:20:34have won victories in court against
1:20:36employers that sought to suppress worker
1:20:38pay successfully fought to lower the
1:20:41price of inhalers and are working to
1:20:43lower food prices by targeting
1:20:45anti-competitive practices in the
1:20:47grocery industry the list of antitrust
1:20:50accomplishments under this
1:20:52Administration is unprecedented and the
1:20:54American people have noticed it is
1:20:57unfortunate that this majority has not
1:20:59moved forward with the bipartisan
1:21:01package of Anti-Trust bills that we
1:21:03passed under Democrats in the 118 117th
1:21:07Congress um that would have protected
1:21:09small businesses and consumers across
1:21:11the country as they were demanding to be
1:21:13able to have more competition to be able
1:21:15to lower their prices and to protect
1:21:17their ability as small businesses to
1:21:19compete if we are concerned about the
1:21:21trustworthiness of media uh then and we
1:21:25want to Foster more responsible media
1:21:27then I would suggest we take up my
1:21:29bipartisan journalism competition and
1:21:31preservation act let's debate that let's
1:21:34make sure independent Publishers across
1:21:36the country newspapers and small
1:21:38communities across the country can
1:21:41survive but that's not what's happening
1:21:43we've begun to see some colleagues on
1:21:45the other side co-opt the language of
1:21:47antitrust enforcement to Target
1:21:49behaviors that have nothing to do with
1:21:52antitrust I know that the details of
1:21:54anti trust law are confusing so I want
1:21:56to clarify a few specific legal points
1:21:59in plain English Professor Waller as an
1:22:02expert on antitrust law and in plain
1:22:05English can you explain what kinds of
1:22:08anti-competitive behavior our Anti-Trust
1:22:10laws are designed to
1:22:13prevent uh sure um and I as a as a
1:22:16teacher I try to explain complex things
1:22:17and and plain language so I appreciate
1:22:19your approach um I can give examples
1:22:22just in the real world uh over the years
1:22:24years the justice department has brought
1:22:26criminal antitrust cases against Global
1:22:28cartels that have raised the price of uh
1:22:31vitamins food additives um and smaller
1:22:34cases of road building and other um
1:22:37expenses that taxpayers bear uh this has
1:22:39been a a traditional priority of of
1:22:41antitrust enforcement uh as you know uh
1:22:44both the FTC and the Department of
1:22:46Justice have major section two cases
1:22:49going on both in the um Tech sector and
1:22:53and otherwise going after after powerful
1:22:55firms uh that are that they're alleging
1:22:57have violated the antitrust laws abusing
1:22:59Monopoly Power by by a single firm
1:23:01whether it's Amazon Live Nation Google
1:23:04Etc they're in various stages and there
1:23:06are pending mergers uh cases uh such as
1:23:09a supermarket merger that's being now
1:23:10litigated uh by the FTC in 30 some
1:23:13states where the consequences are likely
1:23:16of the government's right higher food
1:23:18prices as well as harm to labor if that
1:23:20merger goes through as currently
1:23:22proposed those are some of the
1:23:23priorities perfect and and actually that
1:23:26uh Kroger's Albertson merger there was a
1:23:29an article in on the front page of the
1:23:31Seattle Times today over 150 stores will
1:23:34close in my area just in Seattle as a
1:23:37result of that merger now you touched on
1:23:39this in your prepared statement and I
1:23:40know you only have access to public
1:23:42information about the facts in this case
1:23:44but given those constraints do you see
1:23:46any of these anti-rust elements in the
1:23:48information that was uncovered by my
1:23:50Republican colleagues um based on what
1:23:52I've seen um I do not at this stage and
1:23:55um based on publicly available
1:23:57information gam appears to be very
1:23:59different from either a trade
1:24:00Association or even a traditional
1:24:02standard setting body um they're do not
1:24:05appear to be create creating binding
1:24:07industry standards that determine
1:24:09whether products and services can be
1:24:11sold they are creating uh sets of terms
1:24:14that firms can use or not use to make
1:24:16decisions that they each do in the
1:24:18marketplace so another fruitless
1:24:20investigation in this Congress um I
1:24:22would also add that project 2 the
1:24:24radical right-wing plan for a second
1:24:26Trump Administration calls for more of
1:24:29these ideologically driven attacks on
1:24:31private actors in its section on the FDC
1:24:33cloaking these culture war attacks in
1:24:36the popular rhetoric of antitrust and
1:24:38Market power on a different note Mr
1:24:40Patel and quickly how do you think
1:24:42consumers might view your products if
1:24:44they were advertised alongside hateful
1:24:46vile or dangerous content like
1:24:48anti-lgbtq rhetoric child sexual abuse
1:24:51material or content promoting
1:24:52terrorism convict
1:24:55it would create severe damage to the
1:24:57brand Equity that we built for decades
1:24:59and decades thank you uh in fact one of
1:25:02our Witnesses has repeatedly made
1:25:04hateful and derogatory comments about
1:25:05lgbtq plus people in the past Mr Shapiro
1:25:08has argued that transgender and gay
1:25:10Americans suffer from a quote
1:25:12psychological disorder or mental illness
1:25:15and has denigrated same-sex couples
1:25:17raising children I and my fellow
1:25:19Americans consider this deeply offensive
1:25:22hateful and in fact an analysis in 2023
1:25:24found that a network of Facebook pages
1:25:27connected with Mr Shapiro's website had
1:25:29quote earned over 17 million
1:25:31interactions from nearly 15,000 posts
1:25:34with transgender related keywords I
1:25:37yield
1:25:38back Mr Patel are you part of an
1:25:40organization that uses Market power for
1:25:43censorship no sir and how much
1:25:46advertising Capital do you deploy
1:25:49annually how much marketing investment
1:25:51do we spend yeah uh 850 million a year
1:25:54and you spend you said less than 1% of
1:25:57that in the news area right yes sir and
1:25:59that's because really your Brands don't
1:26:02want to be involved in these costic news
1:26:05disputes or political disputes they want
1:26:07to be apolitical in the presentation of
1:26:09their brand that's your is am my
1:26:11understanding that testimony correctly
1:26:13so we we serve 90% of American
1:26:15households with our portfolio it's a
1:26:17fascinating answer just not to my
1:26:19question is the reason you deemphasize
1:26:22news because you want to be a
1:26:26political we target our investment to
1:26:29address the consumers that buy Our
1:26:31Brands okay are you doing so for
1:26:34political reasons or apolitical reasons
1:26:37we don't do it for any political reason
1:26:39okay so then why are the vice presidents
1:26:41of your company trying to shape the way
1:26:44Facebook limits view of a trump
1:26:49advertisement so I'm not sure what the
1:26:52intention of that communication was I do
1:26:55it was to get the Trump ad taken down
1:26:57it's pretty clear you had two vice
1:26:59presidents Rob master and Luis Tacomo
1:27:02who were pressuring Facebook to to
1:27:05utilize Facebook's policies to take down
1:27:08a trump ad so it's it's just hard to
1:27:11believe that your goal is to avoid
1:27:13politics when the like not some intern
1:27:16at your company but the vice presidents
1:27:18at your at Unilever are writing Facebook
1:27:21saying we want you to take this Trump ad
1:27:23down and apply these policies to do it
1:27:26so I'm not sure what the intention of
1:27:28communication was but I tell you what
1:27:30I'll read you the communication it's two
1:27:32words it's for it's it's your vice
1:27:35president to garm when they were trying
1:27:37to get the Facebook ad taken out it said
1:27:39honestly reprehensible So you you're
1:27:42you're using this $800
1:27:44million plus power that you have over
1:27:47the marketplace Facebook is craving your
1:27:50advertising dollars and you have two
1:27:52vice presidents hammering Facebook to
1:27:54take down a trump ad about whether or
1:27:56not Joe Biden should have his ear
1:27:58inspected for an earpiece that was what
1:28:00the ad was about that you all found so
1:28:02reprehensible so sir respectfully I'm
1:28:05not sure that word was done by a
1:28:07Unilever person you're you're okay so Mr
1:28:11doomo didn't work for
1:28:12unver he he sits on the if I if I did my
1:28:17homework right I think that came from um
1:28:20the
1:28:21G uh Rob oh Rob ranits yes and and you
1:28:25you but you are member entities to garm
1:28:28you pay garm you guys are garm I mean as
1:28:30Mr juel said you guys have got you have
1:28:32to have tools in order to help you place
1:28:34your ads so you go fund garm and then
1:28:37here your executive your vice presidents
1:28:39are commiserating with garm over the
1:28:41fact that Facebook won't remove this I
1:28:42guess Mr Shapiro when you when we look
1:28:44at these big advertising platforms and
1:28:47they're here they're hearing the people
1:28:49with the advertising dollars Hammer them
1:28:52with this ideological tilt what does
1:28:54what what does that do to the
1:28:56marketplace for ideas
1:28:58obviously obviously it shuts down the
1:29:00marketplace of ideas which is largely
1:29:03the intent and one of the things that
1:29:04I've heard from some of the democratic
1:29:06members of the committee today is an
1:29:08extraordinary amount of projection
1:29:10projection wherein they suggest that
1:29:11Republican members of the committee are
1:29:12trying to shut down free speech by
1:29:14trying to get answers to questions about
1:29:15the kind of political pressures that are
1:29:17being put on social media companies for
1:29:19example but it's been Democrats who for
1:29:21years have been spending their time
1:29:23trying to pressure social media
1:29:24companies into doing their bidding by
1:29:25limiting the types of information that
1:29:27are available to the public and how that
1:29:29information is actually distributed one
1:29:31of the things that that's worth noting
1:29:32here is that it's not just a matter of
1:29:34advertising dollars flowing the way that
1:29:36it works on social media is that if you
1:29:37are demonetized then the reach of your
1:29:40actual content is also limited by the
1:29:42same social media companies you think
1:29:44the frequency of those demonetization
1:29:46Rises when you have vice presidents of
1:29:49companies at Unilever trying to hammer
1:29:51entities like Facebook into taking down
1:29:53Trump at absolutely absolutely there's
1:29:56no question that when you have internal
1:29:57pressures put on social media companies
1:29:59to take down rightwing material that
1:30:01that has an impact on the reach of
1:30:03right-wing messaging there's just no
1:30:05question and I guess I don't mind when
1:30:07Democrats say they don't like
1:30:08conservative speech or we get to say we
1:30:09don't like some of their speech that's
1:30:11how this works but it's when when the
1:30:13business community colludes and utilizes
1:30:16Market power to shape the way social
1:30:20media companies or websites disseminate
1:30:22information that the public doesn't even
1:30:24get to see that that debate and engage
1:30:26it and I think the fact that it's
1:30:28clandestine is actually even more
1:30:29corrosive to the values that underg it's
1:30:31absolutely true the complete lack of
1:30:33transparency with which garm treats both
1:30:35the member companies as well as the
1:30:37consuming public is one of the major
1:30:39problems if they simply wish to Levy a
1:30:41boycott against a right-wing Source they
1:30:43should simply say that's what they're
1:30:44doing hiding behind fake standards in
1:30:46order to project objectivity is a major
1:30:49problem in transparency for the market
1:30:51Mr Cohen recognized for five minutes
1:30:55thank you Mr chair uh
1:30:58firstly thank you Mr chair this issue
1:31:00was already raised as I understand it
1:31:02addressed in a transcribed interview
1:31:04with the representative garm as this
1:31:06that witness stated and as I'm sure the
1:31:08representatives from group M and unil
1:31:10lever would likewise note they are not
1:31:12responsible for creating or implementing
1:31:14Facebook's ad policies that's something
1:31:16Facebook does they are as advertisers
1:31:19though rightly concerned about the
1:31:20uniform enforcement of those policies as
1:31:23the witness stated quote you can't
1:31:25imagine a global marketer if you they
1:31:28are trying to run a campaign across
1:31:29platforms or across markets and if they
1:31:32start hitting those
1:31:33inconsistencies where that there are
1:31:35actions taken against advertising
1:31:37messages and campaigns that are not
1:31:38clear they are not transparent it
1:31:40creates disruption because it's like all
1:31:42of the sudden I now actually have an
1:31:44outage in my campaign and I'm not going
1:31:46to be able to reach as many consumers
1:31:48I'm not going to get business results
1:31:50the company is not going to perform
1:31:51stock market prices it's all there
1:31:53basically supply and demand is all very
1:31:55American that's what we're all about
1:31:57capitalism is that Mr patella is that
1:31:59pretty much correct yes sir thank you I
1:32:02would uh appreciate
1:32:05your the app was was not taken down the
1:32:07ad was not taken down was
1:32:09it not to my understanding yeah thank
1:32:12you sir uh this is I was in
1:32:15transportation working on some issues
1:32:17there and came here to what I think is a
1:32:19rather bizarre hearing not the first
1:32:21we've had in this committee um it's our
1:32:24second hearing ostensibly charging
1:32:26specific groups with illegal conduct
1:32:29without a single expert witness to lay
1:32:31out that conduct and how that conduct
1:32:34violates the law this is the Judiciary
1:32:36Committee we're supposed to be looking
1:32:37about law violation of law legal experts
1:32:41notada we did have two oversight
1:32:43hearings of the anti trust enforcement
1:32:45agencies the F Federal Trade Commission
1:32:48and the Department of Justice we had two
1:32:50top enforcement officials here not one
1:32:53once did any member bring up Global
1:32:55Alliance for responsible Media Group M
1:32:57Unilever or any of this so when
1:33:00Republicans had the opportunity to ask
1:33:01any trust experts they
1:33:04didn't today we have two witnesses a
1:33:07large Advertiser and a large advertising
1:33:09buyer we testifying why the Republicans
1:33:11just have it factually wrong and we have
1:33:15a talk show host who is bitter that
1:33:17corporations to not want to buy his
1:33:19program it's a good thing we haven't
1:33:21esteemed any trust expert with us today
1:33:23Professor Waller he diligently and
1:33:26politely explained why this legal theory
1:33:28that there are some any trust violation
1:33:30designed to censor conservatives is bunk
1:33:33so that is the evidence we have before
1:33:34us thank you Mr Waller the legal theory
1:33:37is
1:33:38bunk clean that up a bit the Republicans
1:33:41have it backwards their cry against
1:33:43censorship is nothing more than an
1:33:44attempt to bully or as they would like
1:33:46it compelled by law companies to
1:33:48associate themselves with individuals
1:33:49and content creators the companies
1:33:51believe are harmful and pay them
1:33:54seriously you think un L should be
1:33:55forced to advertise and doing so
1:33:58financially support posts about rape or
1:34:00domestic violence that's not the
1:34:02American way we let the private
1:34:04Enterprise capitalistic system determine
1:34:06where they want to advertise and that is
1:34:08the record that's coming out in this
1:34:10hearing is that they want to force you
1:34:11lever to do certain things this is a
1:34:13real concern we have images that show
1:34:16how a company has legitimate business
1:34:18interest and I would argue a social
1:34:19obligation not to support this type of
1:34:22harmful conduct and then be be
1:34:23associated with it it also gets Free
1:34:26Speech wrong as Professor Waller
1:34:28explained this isn't about government
1:34:30censoring anyone it's in fact it's about
1:34:33trying to use the antitrust laws and
1:34:34enforcements to compel speech the
1:34:37Republicans must read the
1:34:39constitution in a funhouse mirror it's
1:34:43very much out of focus in weird shapes
1:34:45and they pick out what they want and
1:34:48then they come out of the fun house and
1:34:49maybe they wake
1:34:51up with that I have a couple of
1:34:53questions
1:34:55and I haven't read project 2025 so that
1:34:57could all be in Project 2025 when they
1:34:59want to turn America over this may be
1:35:01part of it uh Mr Patel Mr Shapiro or is
1:35:05it
1:35:06Shapiro it's Shapiro Shapiro thank you I
1:35:09had an uncle he was Shapiro and then his
1:35:11son became
1:35:13Shapiro he Mr sh Shapiro says the
1:35:16Democrats are using the tacit threat of
1:35:18government action to compel private
1:35:19companies to throttle
1:35:21viewpoints that we don't like
1:35:26you know what hutzpah is sorry sir you
1:35:28know what hutzpah is no sir well that's
1:35:32hutzpah we are literally in a hearing
1:35:35where the Republicans are using the
1:35:37power of this committee not tacitly
1:35:39threatened but actually
1:35:45accused would the gentleman yield for a
1:35:49question companies of illegal activity
1:35:52and investigate them because they don't
1:35:53like like their Viewpoint a very
1:35:55sensible Viewpoint I would argue that
1:35:56they don't want to be associated with
1:35:58hate speech or domestic violence or rape
1:35:59or harassment would want to be
1:36:01associated with anything to deal with
1:36:03somebody who went into Bergdorf Goodman
1:36:05and got a woman and took her into a lock
1:36:07dressing room and molested her no you
1:36:09wouldn't want to do that and you
1:36:11wouldn't want to be uh I can go on and
1:36:13on and on about that deal so I'll I'll
1:36:15I'll yield right now and the balance of
1:36:17my time and thank you sir gentleman
1:36:19yield is back the gentleman from
1:36:21Wisconsin's recognized thank you Mr
1:36:23chair Democrats must have been given
1:36:25their uh talking points on Project 2025
1:36:28yesterday at the internal meeting of the
1:36:31conference to determine who the next
1:36:33presidential candidate will be for the
1:36:35Democrat Party uh this is the second
1:36:37committee I've sat through this morning
1:36:39including financial services and project
1:36:412025 has come up at least a dozen times
1:36:44I just find that interesting Mr Patel
1:36:47unil is a publicly traded company uh
1:36:50meaning you have fiduciary duty to
1:36:52deliver return of shareholders
1:36:55correct uh yes sir in your in your 2023
1:36:58annual report you identify consumer
1:37:00preferences as a principal risk to your
1:37:02business in examining this risk you
1:37:04stated our success depends on value and
1:37:07rence of Our Brands and products to
1:37:09Consumers around the world would you
1:37:11agree that the uh it's it's got to be a
1:37:14critical element in managing that risk
1:37:17uh because you have to continue to grow
1:37:20consumer preference of your Brands right
1:37:23yes sir right uh and you do that through
1:37:27brand and marketing Investments uh or
1:37:30advertisements I guess is another way of
1:37:32describing that right that's how we
1:37:34build Brands but uh between 2021 and
1:37:372023 unever spend more than 23 billion
1:37:40on brand and marketing Investments
1:37:42that's a fairly big chunk of your
1:37:44operating costs I'm sure would it be
1:37:45fair to say that Unilever believes brand
1:37:48marketing delivers a positive return on
1:37:51investment
1:37:53so that's why we invest to build Our
1:37:55Brands and the equity and that's why
1:37:57we're in 90% of us households right but
1:37:59if consumer preference is still at risk
1:38:01you could always do better correct I
1:38:04mean that's obviously the goal the
1:38:07business could always grow better right
1:38:09uh so let me ask you this if consumer
1:38:11preference is vital to the success of
1:38:13your company you acknowledge that a
1:38:15principal risk and commit billions of
1:38:17dollars each year to mitigating that
1:38:20risk then why would you boycott
1:38:23companies that reach millions of
1:38:26consumers what what it doesn't make any
1:38:29sense youve you've got this goal in
1:38:30place you're pursuing it but yet you're
1:38:33still pursuing
1:38:35boycotts so we don't boycott we have a
1:38:38clear internal process Our Brands have
1:38:41jobs to be done we have Target audiences
1:38:43that we look for Our Brands actually 80%
1:38:46of our marketing spend goes between 18
1:38:49and 49 year old women uh because they
1:38:51make 80% of the purchaseing decisions uh
1:38:53for our business and that's how we set
1:38:56our choices on investment what's right
1:38:58for Our Brands to make give us the best
1:39:00business return on investment what about
1:39:02Twitter has there been any boycotting of
1:39:04Twitter uh it would be in the best
1:39:07interest of growing your consumer
1:39:08preference and delivering returns to
1:39:10shareholders to have uh to utilize
1:39:13Twitter to make sure that your your
1:39:15brands are continuing to grow right so
1:39:18on Twitter or X as it's known now we
1:39:20there was a period in 2019 2020 Duty
1:39:23safety that we pulled our investment but
1:39:25we have now returned to Twitter across
1:39:27the world okay thank you Mr Shapiro um
1:39:32can you explain the importance I don't
1:39:34want to oversimplify this can you
1:39:35explain the importance of advertising
1:39:36dollars to Growing daily wire uh into
1:39:40the company that it is today sure so the
1:39:42truth is that advertising dollars
1:39:44represent a far a far smaller share of
1:39:46the revenue of the daily wire than they
1:39:47did at the very beginning when you're
1:39:48first starting a company the possibility
1:39:50of starting it off the basis of
1:39:51subscribers alone is very difficult
1:39:53because you actually don't have
1:39:54tremendous Market reach the gradual
1:39:56increase in revenue is largely due to
1:39:58Advertiser Revenue so at the beginning
1:39:59of the daily wire nearly 100% of all
1:40:01revenue that we had when we were
1:40:03building the business was based on
1:40:04Advertising Revenue today it's
1:40:06significantly smaller than that because
1:40:07we have a very large subscriber base so
1:40:09the principal threat that I'm here to
1:40:11talk about is not about the bitterness
1:40:13of my company which continues to be
1:40:14thank God highly successful uh the the
1:40:16reason that I'm here is to talk about
1:40:17startup companies that are attempting to
1:40:19get into the market are being barred
1:40:21from an extraordinarily large pool of
1:40:23advertising Revenue along political
1:40:25lines do you believe there is collective
1:40:27boycotts that are happening there's no
1:40:29question there are collective boycotts
1:40:30happening and I will say that I do
1:40:32appreciate the kpah of of some of the
1:40:34democratic members of Congress and I'm
1:40:35Charmed by their Newfound love for free
1:40:37markets and corporate free speech that
1:40:39one seems to be a bit of a new one to me
1:40:41um but it is it is charming only in that
1:40:45it requires you to ignore many of the
1:40:47statements that that they have made
1:40:48historically about the amount of
1:40:49pressure they would love to bring on
1:40:50private companies when it comes to free
1:40:52speech and here I will quot quot the
1:40:54ranking member quote these platforms are
1:40:56utilized as conduits to spread vitalic
1:40:58hate messages into every home and
1:41:00Country efforts by media companies to
1:41:01counter the search of fallen short
1:41:02social network platforms continue to be
1:41:04used as ready Avenues to spread
1:41:05dangerous white nationalist speech or
1:41:08that was from 2019 from 2020 it goes Way
1:41:11Beyond the fact that big Tech misbehaves
1:41:12it's the fact this kind of power exists
1:41:14that kind of power cannot be allowed to
1:41:16exist in society when you use that sort
1:41:18of language with regard to the same
1:41:20companies we're now hearing require free
1:41:22speech
1:41:23I I find that somewhat difficult to
1:41:25swallow thank you chairman I yield back
1:41:28gentleman yields back the gentleman from
1:41:30Georgia is recogniz thank you Mr
1:41:32chairman uh this is a sham hearing
1:41:35railing against a madeup
1:41:37boogeyman I'm not normally up here
1:41:40defending big business uh and as Mr
1:41:42shapira noted uh I have said repeatedly
1:41:46that we need to limit the massive dark
1:41:48money spending that big business pours
1:41:52into our politics and also pours into
1:41:54our Supreme Court but let's talk about
1:41:57what's really happening here corporate B
1:42:00Brands care about their reputation
1:42:02because they sell more products if they
1:42:04have a good Public Image and these
1:42:06companies think it's bad for business to
1:42:09run their advertising content next to
1:42:12child porn or Isis videos or hate speech
1:42:17or an advertisement from the Heritage
1:42:20Foundation about project 2025 which is
1:42:23so alarming to U most Americans
1:42:27Americans are are are alarmed and that's
1:42:30why they representatives are talking
1:42:32about project
1:42:332025 a 900 page
1:42:36Manifesto which is the blueprint for the
1:42:40um uh Trump uh Administration should he
1:42:45be so uh fortunate and we' be so
1:42:48unfortunate that he be reelected nobody
1:42:52wants there video wants their uh
1:42:56advertisements running against that kind
1:42:58of uh
1:43:00content uh foreign propaganda uh Network
1:43:05disinformation campaigns so these brands
1:43:08are working together to demand greater
1:43:11transparency and accountability from
1:43:13platforms regarding where their ads are
1:43:16placed and what kinds of content the ads
1:43:20are monetizing that just sounds to me
1:43:23like good common business sense am I
1:43:26right about that Mr Patel yes sir and uh
1:43:31how about you Mr juel am I right or am I
1:43:33wrong that's correct sir thank you but
1:43:36that's not really why we're here this do
1:43:39nothing congress has nothing to run on
1:43:41this fall uh they have uh they started
1:43:45out this congress with 15 rounds of
1:43:48voting uh to elect a speaker and then
1:43:51they promptly proceeded to throw the
1:43:53speaker out and they wasted another 3
1:43:56weeks trying to put in another speaker
1:43:59uh Maga Republicans have given us two
1:44:01years of
1:44:04dysfunction two years and they don't
1:44:06have anything to show for it but a few
1:44:09Rabbit Hole investigations of uh the
1:44:12Biden corrupt crime family
1:44:16allegedly um you know $20 million in
1:44:20taxpayer money spent between two
1:44:23committees uh investigating the
1:44:25president with the aim of impeachment
1:44:28and we saw where that went so they have
1:44:30nothing absolutely nothing to to show
1:44:33for their dysfunction and so what
1:44:36they're now trying to do is G up their
1:44:38base against this madeup Boogeyman and
1:44:41give the plat give uh a platform to
1:44:45extreme voices who want to spread
1:44:48misinformation the American people know
1:44:50better and they want a Congress that
1:44:52will work work on behalf of Real
1:44:54Americans on real problems instead of
1:44:57this sham hearing we should be working
1:44:59on protecting and strengthening our
1:45:01democracy which is about to be
1:45:04undermined should project 2025 go into
1:45:09effect Mr uh Professor Waller Mr
1:45:14Shapiro's testimony states that quote
1:45:17garm acts as a cartel end quote you are
1:45:21an expert in antitrust law are you
1:45:25not i' I've devoted a lot of my career
1:45:27to studying it can you explain why that
1:45:30assertion is
1:45:32false um I have not seen any uh evidence
1:45:35uh and publicly available information
1:45:38that suggests that garm plays a role
1:45:40like a traditional cartel it does not
1:45:43consist primarily of firms that compete
1:45:45with each other and they are not
1:45:46agreeing on the price amount uh or other
1:45:50kinds of Market division that a cartel
1:45:53uh normally does and is normally
1:45:55punished for it if you can prove so this
1:45:58hearing is is a uh is pretty much false
1:46:01advertisement when you
1:46:03say well I you know I I would just
1:46:06caution uh all members of the committee
1:46:08just not to fall in the Trap that
1:46:10sometimes my students do which when they
1:46:11see something that they don't like they
1:46:13think it's either an antitrust violation
1:46:15or a violation of the Constitution it's
1:46:17just not necessarily true well gosh I I
1:46:21really hope that uh
1:46:23project 2025 does not come into play
1:46:27because if it does we'll be having a
1:46:28whole lot more hearings like this uh
1:46:31sham hearings uh on issues that actually
1:46:35suppress the rights of the people and
1:46:38even business owners to conduct business
1:46:41in a businesslike fashion and with that
1:46:43Mr Speaker I yield back uh gentleman
1:46:46Yi's back Mr juel what's uncommon
1:46:48collaboration
1:46:53uncommon collaboration Yep this is from
1:46:56the Global Alliance for responsible
1:46:58media you're working Charter priorities
1:47:00for uncommon collaboration I just want
1:47:02to know what you what you you guys say
1:47:04is uncommon
1:47:06collaboration
1:47:08well I can't speak for garm but I think
1:47:11what you're you're you're on the board
1:47:13right you're on the steer team your
1:47:14company my company's on the steering
1:47:16team I think what they're referring to
1:47:17founding member what they're referring
1:47:19to are you founding
1:47:20member founding founding member arm
1:47:24right so I'm asking what in your this is
1:47:26your Charter your working Charter what's
1:47:28uncommon
1:47:29collaboration I believe what they're
1:47:31referring to is a cross industry
1:47:32collaboration between agencies Brands
1:47:36technology companies adtech
1:47:38companies well that's all warm and fuzzy
1:47:41but here's what Mr rakowitz the guy you
1:47:42guys hired to run garm here's what he
1:47:45says uncommon collaboration is
1:47:46competitors working together competitors
1:47:49working together to rise above
1:47:51individual commercial interests
1:47:53uncommon collaboration needs to be
1:47:55understood as the industry coming
1:47:56together putting aside competitive
1:47:58concerns Mr Waller just said we don't
1:48:00have a cartel here but that sounds a lot
1:48:02like a cartel to
1:48:03me would you
1:48:05agree sounds a lot like limiting actions
1:48:09that would limit consumer choice that
1:48:10sounds like unlawful Restraint of trade
1:48:12and all that stuff is illegal according
1:48:14to the Sherman
1:48:16Act what do you think Mr juel
1:48:23um what's the question sorry what's I
1:48:26the same question you you're trying to
1:48:27tell me I asked what uncommon
1:48:29collaboration is which is from your
1:48:30working Charter G's working Charter and
1:48:32Mr rakowitz defines uncom uncommon
1:48:35collaboration as R Rising above
1:48:37individual commercial interest I thought
1:48:39a company was focused on their
1:48:40commercial interest of their individual
1:48:43company sir garm is used for a framework
1:48:46and definitions to try and make order of
1:48:48something that quite honestly had no
1:48:49order to begin with well here's what
1:48:51garm here's what it looks like I think
1:48:52in practice can we put up the let's put
1:48:54up the the email from Mr Montgomery who
1:48:58works for Mr jues company email about
1:49:01Breitbart the daily wire in Fox
1:49:04News this is there's an interesting
1:49:06parallel here with Breitbart as much as
1:49:08we hated their ideology and blank we
1:49:11couldn't really justify blocking them
1:49:13for misguided opinion I don't know the
1:49:15daily wire that well but we should watch
1:49:17them carefully too if we block the daily
1:49:19wire why wouldn't we block Fox News
1:49:22That's seems to me like uncommon
1:49:24collaboration in practice focused on
1:49:27three conservative news outlets you see
1:49:30it that way Mr
1:49:32juel I respectfully no sir well how do
1:49:35you see it
1:49:36then I see this is somebody from our
1:49:38brand safety team and he's asking
1:49:40questions about what sort of standards
1:49:42of service they have and trying to
1:49:45figure out what is happening U with that
1:49:47particular publisher well let's put up
1:49:49the next one let's let's show some more
1:49:50on common collaboration in practice
1:49:53put up the next one this is the one
1:49:55about Twitter based on your
1:49:56recommendations we have stopped all paid
1:49:58advertisement because the platform was
1:49:59rather unsafe this is their opinion due
1:50:01to Elon mus decision to firing lot this
1:50:03when Elon mus bought Twitter um but if
1:50:06it's it's but it's an important platform
1:50:08to uh for us to reach our audience so we
1:50:10would like to consider going
1:50:12back looks like you this was a you know
1:50:15a coordinated uncommon collaboration to
1:50:19boycott Twitter but this company wants
1:50:21to go back because they make a lot of
1:50:22money when they're on when they're
1:50:23advertising on Twitter is that what this
1:50:26uncommon collaboration is that garm
1:50:28engages in Mr
1:50:30juel um we're not party to this email so
1:50:33I can't really speak to this um we
1:50:36actually have been big supporters of
1:50:38Twitter andx uh recently two weeks ago
1:50:41we met with Mr musk introduced her our
1:50:43advertisers to be clear we want more
1:50:45choice in this industry more places to
1:50:47create trusted brand advertising Mr Mr
1:50:49Shapiro it's been cited several times I
1:50:51think Mr ner said this is being
1:50:52statement other people said that that
1:50:54they they they come together they
1:50:55collaborate they cude they come together
1:50:57because they don't want to be
1:50:57advertising on sites where there's
1:50:59terrorism piracy harmful images of
1:51:01children or other uh other crimes on
1:51:04those associated with those websites any
1:51:05that activity take place on The Daily
1:51:07wire website no it must certainly is not
1:51:09yeah so that's just that's just you know
1:51:12we're all against that stuff what we're
1:51:14not for is this cluding this
1:51:17collaboration to go after different to
1:51:19limit advertising because you don't like
1:51:21their IDE you don't like their politics
1:51:24that's what we're that's what we're
1:51:25focused on and that's exactly what's
1:51:26going on out there and frankly as you
1:51:27said in your opening statement anybody
1:51:29can see it the emails that you're
1:51:31showing I I've yet to see an email on
1:51:33the other side suggesting the
1:51:34possibility of divestment from CNN yeah
1:51:37for example yeah we we we and trust me
1:51:39we did a lot of investigating we'd had
1:51:41that we'd have put it in our report
1:51:43didn't find a one didn't find a one it
1:51:45was all targeted in One Direction and
1:51:48they say it in their Charter document
1:51:51and R Mr rakowitz says uncon
1:51:53collaboration is limiting the choice of
1:51:55I mean it makes absolutely no sense to
1:51:58me that I will recognize the gentleman
1:52:00from
1:52:01California thank you Mr chairman I want
1:52:03to welcome the witnesses as well and
1:52:06let's talk a little bit about brand
1:52:08reputation if we may um we all know that
1:52:12how important brand reputation is as
1:52:15Warren Buffett has said it takes 20
1:52:17years to build a brand and 5 minutes to
1:52:20destroy it
1:52:23let me start out with Mr Patel the
1:52:25question sir uh in 2020 unil lever
1:52:28stopped paused all social media
1:52:30advertising because the environment had
1:52:33become very polarized and unhelpful to
1:52:36its brand is that correct yes
1:52:39sir let me say consumers agree with you
1:52:42that in fact 82% of consumers also feel
1:52:46that it is important that the content
1:52:48surrounding online ads be appropriate
1:52:51and Mr chairman I'm going to submit for
1:52:52the record an article titled brand
1:52:55safety what do consumers consider to be
1:52:58inappropriate
1:53:02content so Mr brel I'm going to ask
1:53:05again Unilever paused advertising on
1:53:08both conservative and liberal channels
1:53:11and did not specifically Target
1:53:14conservative platforms or content
1:53:17creators is that correct and that's for
1:53:192020 yes sir we pulled all our
1:53:22advertising from all assets so Mr Patel
1:53:25it sounds like this is more of a pure
1:53:27business decision and not a messaging
1:53:30Crusade on your part would you agree
1:53:32with that no we did what was felt was
1:53:34best for Our Brands business decision
1:53:36yes sir and Mr pel you've testified that
1:53:40un at unil liver you make decisions to
1:53:44advertise independently is that correct
1:53:47yes sir we we make our investments on
1:53:50what's right for Our Brands and no group
1:53:52including garm dictates or approves
1:53:55where unil liver spends its advertising
1:53:58dollars is that correct 100% unever
1:54:00makes its own decisions and no group
1:54:03directs unil lever to avoid any platform
1:54:06or Creator is that correct yes
1:54:10sir so Mr Patel members of garm can come
1:54:14and go freely like X formerly Twitter
1:54:18have done is that correct G is a
1:54:20voluntary organization okay Professor
1:54:23Waller if I may some in this committee
1:54:27have suggested that members of garm have
1:54:30colluded to harm competition by
1:54:32boycotting certain platforms of
1:54:36speakers don't businesses have the
1:54:38fundamental right to choose how and
1:54:40where they spend their advertising
1:54:42dollars uh that is
1:54:44correct and it's clear from Mr Patel's
1:54:47answers and the public documents that
1:54:50there is no collusion would you agree
1:54:52with
1:54:53that uh I can only say as a matter of I
1:54:56have not read the committee's report and
1:54:58based on publicly available information
1:55:00uh I'm seeing a discussion of unilateral
1:55:02decisions on how to do business which is
1:55:04the purview of each company and you
1:55:07simply need more you need more even if
1:55:09other firms are doing similar or even
1:55:11identical decisions as the law is clear
1:55:14that you need something that shows um
1:55:17that they're acting in a way together
1:55:19rather than independent and uh I see you
1:55:21have a element of antitrust violation
1:55:24well chart behind you have behind me Sir
1:55:26Mr Waller is is a chart of the three
1:55:29elements the mandatory elements of a
1:55:31Sherman Act section one violation you
1:55:34need to prove all three elements so Mr
1:55:37Waller let me ask you are you aware of
1:55:40any agreement among the competitors to
1:55:42boycott or collude well I have no
1:55:45personal agreement but I'm not I'm not
1:55:46hearing anything today that suggests
1:55:48that and in the absence of an agreement
1:55:50um I can just there is no c one
1:55:52violation so if there's no agreement
1:55:55there can't be a section one antitrust
1:55:58violation that is
1:56:00true so there's no antitrust
1:56:03violation if there's no agreement
1:56:05there's no section one and then there
1:56:07are other requirements that your chart
1:56:08has uh two additional requirements you
1:56:11have to show an unreasonable harm to
1:56:13competition um and there's a one an
1:56:16addition I would suggest that if the
1:56:18firms involved have a legitimate
1:56:20business justification for what they do
1:56:22that is often enough to avoid a
1:56:24violation even if there were an
1:56:26agreement that's
1:56:28a
1:56:30lot thank you very much Mr chairman I
1:56:33yield the remainder of my time is back
1:56:35gentlem from California is
1:56:36recognized Professor
1:56:38Waller you were uh a senior advisor to
1:56:41the federal over here you were a senior
1:56:44adviser to the Federal Trade Commission
1:56:46under Lena Khan Lena Khan right that is
1:56:49correct and when you left did you take
1:56:51copies of the of your work product no
1:56:55are you aware that the FTC deleted them
1:56:57all and would not make them available to
1:56:59this committee so we have no idea what
1:57:01you did I have no idea what the FTC did
1:57:03after I left but you didn't take any
1:57:05copies under oath you're telling us that
1:57:06you have no records of your time there
1:57:09your opinions or what you did there uh
1:57:11no in fact I was prohibited from doing
1:57:13so I turned in my computer my phone and
1:57:15I have no access to any of that stuff
1:57:17okay well that's fine so they just
1:57:19destroyed the evidence um the Federal
1:57:21Trade Comm under uh chairwoman KH has
1:57:25found everything to be anti trust they
1:57:28haven't found a merger or an acquisition
1:57:30they seem to like even if they're
1:57:32unrelated were you part of that decision
1:57:35in other words when they've decided that
1:57:37uh the only way you can merge or require
1:57:39somebody is if it hurts comp hurts your
1:57:41ability to compete were you part of that
1:57:43because today you're talking about a
1:57:46nothing is you know what we're seeing
1:57:47here which clearly smells like a cartel
1:57:50certainly looks like a suppression of
1:57:53free speech you're saying none of it is
1:57:56you've testified repeatedly that you see
1:57:59no there there and yet you were part of
1:58:01the FTC which sees a there everywhere
1:58:04can you explain that
1:58:05quickly uh I'm providing a road map of
1:58:08all the issues that I think this
1:58:09committee would have to find to solid
1:58:11out I find I find your behavior and the
1:58:14behavior of the Federal Trade Commission
1:58:16under your uh participation to be
1:58:18inconsistent with your testimony and as
1:58:20a result have to discount your opinions
1:58:23a considerable amount for uh Mr Patel
1:58:26and Mr jural um Unilever uh is based
1:58:31where the US is no no no where is the
1:58:34Theo the stockholding parent company
1:58:36London sir London so you're not a
1:58:39us-based company other than you're a
1:58:41division of a foreign company is that
1:58:43correct we're Bas head headquarters
1:58:46London okay that's okay you got a
1:58:48wonderful British accent it's fine I I I
1:58:51like that actually
1:58:52so um where is garm
1:58:58based the answer is Belgium it's not
1:59:01hard H actually I'm not sure where G is
1:59:04based okay well our information shows
1:59:06it's Belgium so a non- US company
1:59:08working with a non us Consortium that
1:59:11controls 90% of advertising all of which
1:59:14is outside the US and outside the reach
1:59:17of of really being discovered wants to
1:59:20tell us it's not a cartel
1:59:22you know the one thing about a cartel is
1:59:24the first way you know it's a cartel is
1:59:26it says it's not a
1:59:27cartel I think that's really what we're
1:59:29dealing with here um I would ask Mr
1:59:33Waller except that I find him
1:59:35inconceivably disingenuous when uh when
1:59:38what he's saying today doesn't seem to
1:59:39be consistent with where he was working
1:59:41till recently so I'll go to Mr Shapiro
1:59:44Mr Shapiro uh do you have more than 10%
1:59:46market share in the advertising or
1:59:49social media work we certainly do not
1:59:51you don't so you you don't have any
1:59:52Market power very little okay but if you
1:59:55had control or influence over 90% of it
1:59:59do you think that uh the Federal Trade
2:00:02Commission would be up your derrier
2:00:04every day with
2:00:06questions I didn't the term because I
2:00:09things currently stand I overpay my
2:00:11taxes okay so basically what we're
2:00:14dealing with here today is you fox the
2:00:18others don't have uh individually enough
2:00:21market share to to or to have Market
2:00:24power so that you can control a market
2:00:26but clearly G's influence does have 90%
2:00:30of the advertisers and according to
2:00:32everything we've seen you've been
2:00:33blacklisted by them that seems to be the
2:00:35case now the late Roger ales was a
2:00:39friend of mine I I thoroughly enjoyed my
2:00:41time in the guidance he gave me but he
2:00:43also gave rert Murdoch a piece of
2:00:45guidance and it is true till today he
2:00:48found a niche that the company that
2:00:50became Fox News could Phil and he said
2:00:53Mr Murdoch I found a niche I think we
2:00:55can exploit and he said well what is it
2:00:57he said it's it's half of
2:00:59America so can you explain in 35 seconds
2:01:03or less uh more or less um one if you
2:01:07know that huta means nerve I'm afraid
2:01:09most people aren't good and Yiddish here
2:01:11apparently uh although they use it but
2:01:13can you explain to
2:01:15me why systematically whether it's one
2:01:19conservative Media or not that uh that
2:01:22garm is is seemingly wanting us an
2:01:25outside the US group wanting not to have
2:01:2850% of Americans here
2:01:31advertising and as a result see
2:01:34profitable networks it seems to me there
2:01:36are a variety of reasons why a group
2:01:37like gar is attempting to withdraw the
2:01:40advertising Market from half of American
2:01:42businesses that happen to be on the
2:01:44right side of the aisle those reasons
2:01:46range from the overtly political to the
2:01:48fact that they coordinate with foreign
2:01:50governments government actually does
2:01:51coordin
2:01:52in Europe with a bunch of European
2:01:53governments in consolidating standards
2:01:56and all the rest and they obviously
2:01:57don't have the same First Amendment
2:01:59restrictions that they do in the United
2:02:00States these sorts of informal
2:02:01arrangements are then carried across the
2:02:03pond here and incentivized by again
2:02:06members of of this body members of the
2:02:09executive branch who put pressure on
2:02:11social media companies in order to
2:02:13throttle particular viewpoints Mr
2:02:16chairman I would certainly say for the
2:02:18record that if you if you dis or dis
2:02:22enroll half of America's access that's
2:02:25hutzpah y uh the gentleman uh gentleman
2:02:28y's
2:02:30back gentle lady from
2:02:34Georgia Thank you Mr chairman
2:02:37um responsible advertising standards are
2:02:40being questioned here today and we
2:02:43should not be using taxpayer dollars to
2:02:45speak on an issue that has been
2:02:47investigated and produced no support for
2:02:49any
2:02:50unlawfulness we need to trust the facts
2:02:53that we have gathered not Chase
2:02:55conspiracy theories or Force companies
2:02:58to make investments against their
2:03:00will there are so many issues issues
2:03:03that we could be focusing on here today
2:03:06that would actually kind of save
2:03:07millions of lives such as gun violence
2:03:10prevention or better serve the American
2:03:12people and make a positive and
2:03:14meaningful difference in the lives of
2:03:16those that we are sworn to serve we
2:03:19could focus on measures to reform our
2:03:22prisons and protect our children from
2:03:25online violence or we could make a good
2:03:28faith effort to protect the First
2:03:30Amendment we have urged our colleagues
2:03:33on this committee time and time again to
2:03:35follow the facts and resist the urge to
2:03:37chase down unbiased claims for political
2:03:42clout we should be using tax dollars to
2:03:44help the very
2:03:46people who pay them instead of some of
2:03:50my colleagues in the majority are are
2:03:52wasting money so that they may spread
2:03:54falsehoods and distract the public from
2:03:56their inability to effectively
2:03:59legislate and I want to thank each and
2:04:01every one of you for being on this panel
2:04:03today um but I do have uh a number of
2:04:05questions so if you don't mind just kind
2:04:07of answering as succinctly as you
2:04:09possibly can I appreciate it Professor
2:04:11Weber Waller in the research that you
2:04:13have attained on the Global Alliance for
2:04:15responsible media are members of garm
2:04:18within their First Amendment right to
2:04:20voluntarily decide whether to place
2:04:22their advertisements on a certain
2:04:24website or
2:04:26platform yes thank you is this true even
2:04:30if multiple members of garm make the
2:04:32same decision
2:04:34voluntarily
2:04:36yes in
2:04:382020 Spotify entered into an exclusive
2:04:42deal with a podcaster for 100 million
2:04:46dollar and on this podcast the host
2:04:49shared covid misinformation
2:04:52including suggesting that Health young
2:04:54that healthy young adults did not need
2:04:57to be vaccinated leading prominent
2:05:00artists to leave Spotify over this roly
2:05:04inflammatory language was constantly
2:05:06being used including using the nword
2:05:10repeatedly over a several period of
2:05:13years Mr Patel and Mr jwel can you
2:05:17explain why Brands would not like to
2:05:19have their advertisements appear
2:05:21alongside this kind of audio
2:05:26content from a un perspective it would
2:05:29uh create damage to what the brands
2:05:31stand for and the equity that we built
2:05:32for many decades uh around um why they
2:05:38exist thank you from our perspective
2:05:41it's much similar a companies spent
2:05:42billions of dollars over decades
2:05:44building their brands committing certain
2:05:47values making it feel safe making it
2:05:49feel useful making it earn its place in
2:05:51in consumers lives when you put it next
2:05:53to something like that at a time when
2:05:55there's a massive Health crisis and
2:05:56these types of comments come out it
2:05:58destroys those billions of dollars
2:06:00they've invested over long periods of
2:06:02time thank you for those
2:06:04clarifications um Mr Patel and Mr juel
2:06:07how do your companies determine what
2:06:09platforms and products you wish to use
2:06:12for your
2:06:13advertisements from a un leave lens what
2:06:15what we do is and it's different for
2:06:17every brand we have a uh a job to be
2:06:20done for the brand we have Target
2:06:22audiences so we have selective uh
2:06:24demographics that we're trying to
2:06:26address through through um the brand
2:06:29equity and then the team locally will
2:06:31work with the group M to to understand
2:06:34where that uh content is and then we'll
2:06:36Target that through our advertising
2:06:38thank
2:06:40you I think that's exactly right if you
2:06:42want to introduce a new pickup truck in
2:06:44America you're going to go out and
2:06:45figure out who is most likely to buy
2:06:47that and how do I match the brand values
2:06:48of what that truck is with the audience
2:06:50segments so so I'll make it up but we're
2:06:53going to find men between 24 and 35 who
2:06:56believe in durability toughness and they
2:06:58like the message appeal of made in
2:07:00America we're going to go find the news
2:07:02outlets that represent that audience
2:07:03best and connect them to that audience
2:07:05thank you for those clarifications Mr
2:07:07Patel and Mr juel if the committee
2:07:09decides today that companies must
2:07:12advertise on platforms that are not
2:07:15aligned with their brand how could this
2:07:18affect the future of advertisements
2:07:22respectfully ma'am what what we believe
2:07:24is that we have a right to choose where
2:07:26we want to choose our investments and
2:07:28where we want to advertise Our
2:07:33Brands I agree with that thank you and I
2:07:36Y back the balance of my time gent lady
2:07:38y's back the gentleman from Wisconsin Mr
2:07:40Tiffany thank you Mr chairman gentleman
2:07:43hang on for one second we've been ated a
2:07:44couple hours if any you need a break
2:07:46just please let us know we take a break
2:07:47but you've got several to go just let us
2:07:49let our staff know we'll go gentlemen
2:07:51Rec yeah thank you very much Mr chairman
2:07:53um we know from uh hearings in this
2:07:55committee that in the 2020 election that
2:07:58ads were throttled um from president
2:08:02Trump and um uh Mr juel what is group M
2:08:07doing to make sure that President
2:08:10Trump's ads are not going to be
2:08:12throttled here in the 20 uh 2024
2:08:18election um thank you for the question
2:08:22group M works with all of our different
2:08:24Publishers and partners um to enforce
2:08:26their standards of service to make sure
2:08:28that we look at what those are and
2:08:29that's part of the reason that we
2:08:30actually use garm and others is to get
2:08:32an industry framework and guidelines and
2:08:35use third parties to look at the content
2:08:37that comes through and make sure that
2:08:38it's um performing as it should so will
2:08:41you be watching companies like Google
2:08:43like meta like X to make sure that they
2:08:47are not throttling information coming
2:08:49from conservatives and in particular
2:08:51president president
2:08:52Trump we actually work with all the
2:08:54major Publishers um around the world and
2:08:56certainly here in the United States and
2:08:58meet with them on a regular basis talk
2:08:59about their standards of service their
2:09:01policies and make sure that they are
2:09:03living to those standards of
2:09:05service it's really important to us to
2:09:07have choice in this Marketplace and to
2:09:08be able to connect Our Brands and
2:09:10consumers in a wide variety of
2:09:12organizations so there's a real concern
2:09:14that we see this email there were some
2:09:16emails that were posted earlier we have
2:09:18one here from Joe Baron managing partner
2:09:20brand safety America we confirmed with
2:09:22Spotify that group M brand safety team
2:09:24will conduct a complete trust and safety
2:09:26review this was after um uh this was in
2:09:30response to Joe Rogan being on Spotify
2:09:33Spotify said we do not want to take Joe
2:09:34Rogan down and you guys put additional
2:09:37pressure on how can we be confident with
2:09:39something like that happening is Mr
2:09:40Baron still working for group
2:09:43M no sir he's not okay so we can be
2:09:46confident something like this will not
2:09:48happen again where um you guys use
2:09:51actually kind of secondary power to uh
2:09:54secondary authority to be able to go
2:09:56after somebody like Spotify we be
2:09:58confident that's not going to happen
2:09:59again sir we routinely conduct brand and
2:10:03safety reviews um to make sure that
2:10:06these partners of ours are living to
2:10:08their standards and in the case of
2:10:09Spotify we didn't boycott anything we
2:10:12didn't pull our spend they continue to
2:10:13be a major media partner for us we
2:10:16wanted to understand during a Health
2:10:17crisis in America what Joe Rogan was
2:10:19talking about and did it comply with
2:10:20Spotify
2:10:21standards of service so one final um
2:10:24issue in regards to this is it um has
2:10:28group M done a Mia kulpa in regards to
2:10:32this information that was throttled in
2:10:34regards to the covid um um Co disaster
2:10:39that happened not just in the United
2:10:40States but across the world has there
2:10:42been an acknowledgement by group M that
2:10:44many of the things that were talked
2:10:46about by people like Joel Rogan and
2:10:48others have actually turned out to be
2:10:50true that they are not misinformation
2:10:52has group M acknowledged that sir I'm
2:10:55not aware that group M ever came out and
2:10:57said that Joe Rogan was spreading
2:10:58misinformation or that Spotify the
2:11:00platform we ask Spotify to clarify their
2:11:02policies um we are in the business of
2:11:05connecting Brands and
2:11:07consumers in a way that their messages
2:11:09can be heard in an authentic manner so
2:11:10you weren't going after Spotify as I
2:11:13said we never reduced our spend once we
2:11:14didn't call for a boycott we didn't um
2:11:17we asked for clarification from Spotify
2:11:19Mr Patel um the VP for Facebook um let
2:11:23us know a few years ago that they put
2:11:26out information telling people how to
2:11:28get into this country illegally and
2:11:30we've seen over 10 million people do
2:11:32that here in less than four years under
2:11:34the Biden
2:11:35Administration is uh a uh your company
2:11:39Unilever does some advertising on meta
2:11:41I'm assuming yes sir yeah is a trump ad
2:11:45as was alluded to by my colleague from
2:11:47Florida is that more dangerous or is it
2:11:49more dangerous to have Facebook telling
2:11:51people how to get into our country
2:11:53illegally you had some VPS that said
2:11:56that a trump ad was very dangerous and
2:11:58it should be pulled down is that more
2:12:00dangerous a trump advertisement for
2:12:02president or is a Facebook um saying
2:12:06that they um are encouraging people to
2:12:08come into the country illegally which
2:12:10one's more dangerous so if for me you
2:12:12leave a lens we we
2:12:14believe that's not the content we want
2:12:16Our Brands associated
2:12:18with uh will you stop advertising with
2:12:21meta because they have encouraged people
2:12:23to come in illegally I mean if you took
2:12:24an ad like that out in the newspaper um
2:12:26you'd be in big trouble it seems like
2:12:28the same thing should happened to meta
2:12:29they're breaking the law telling people
2:12:31to come into this telling people how to
2:12:32come into this country illegally uh will
2:12:34you be dropping your advertising from
2:12:36them so that's why we work with uh group
2:12:40M and a different partners to ensure um
2:12:42Brands appear adjacent to the content
2:12:44that we're targeting for the audiences
2:12:46that we are but hasn't group M fail
2:12:47failed you then they did not find out
2:12:49that they're actually encouraging
2:12:50illegal activity shouldn't group M be
2:12:52telling you that hey there's a problem
2:12:57here so that would be we also have
2:13:00verification within our own organization
2:13:01to see where our assets appearing so it
2:13:04would be picked up in the system I wish
2:13:06I could do some more follow-ups but I'll
2:13:07yield back Mr chairman General yelds
2:13:09back Mr Sall thank you um Mr Shapiro
2:13:13thank you for joining us today I I think
2:13:15it is important that you're here um as
2:13:19one of the leading conserv ative voices
2:13:22in the country and and the country has
2:13:24in the last couple weeks talked a lot
2:13:26about and Googled uh prag project 2025
2:13:30it's one of the most Googled uh Search
2:13:32terms right now and uh you're not going
2:13:35to get any censorship for me so uh I
2:13:37just wanted to know from your
2:13:39perspective I think it would help us
2:13:41understand on just like a scale of 0o to
2:13:44100% how much do you support project
2:13:482025 I think like President Trump I
2:13:50haven't looked at that deeply at project
2:13:522025 but it seems that Democrats on this
2:13:54committee sort of like Peter Pan and
2:13:56Tinkerbell uh if they say project 2025
2:13:59enough their presidential candidate
2:14:00becomes alive
2:14:01again and
2:14:04so well let's just talk about pieces of
2:14:06it and you I guess you can tell me if
2:14:08you support it um you probably want less
2:14:10bureaucracy right I do I want less
2:14:12bureaucracy you want more efficiency I
2:14:14do I want less effic more efficiency you
2:14:16want taxpayer money spent wisely I do
2:14:19congrats on becoming a Republican yeah
2:14:22yeah my parents would be proud
2:14:24um Mass deportations it calls for that
2:14:27do you support that part I support the
2:14:29deportation of any illegal immigrant who
2:14:31is in the United States who is not of
2:14:32benefit to the generalized American
2:14:34public so if they're uh picking
2:14:37agriculture that puts food on the tables
2:14:39of everyday Americans they've never
2:14:42committed a crime inside the United
2:14:44States they didn't come across with
2:14:45documents should they be deported if
2:14:48they have not paid taxes and if their
2:14:49draw on the tax payer benefits are
2:14:52larger than the contribution they are
2:14:53making to the economy or if they're
2:14:54involved in criminal activity they
2:14:55should be deported how do we measure
2:14:57that the same way that the IRS measures
2:14:59my income every year it seems like if
2:15:00the IRS can track down every aspect of
2:15:02every receipt that I've ever submitted
2:15:04and hundreds and millions of other
2:15:05Americans they can do that for illegal
2:15:06immigrants as well except for the fact
2:15:08that no one knows how many are in the
2:15:09country thanks to this Administration so
2:15:11you would be cool with creating a system
2:15:13where they could pay those taxes if they
2:15:15wanted to and then stay and work and put
2:15:17food on our table uh it depends on how
2:15:19long it would take for them to pay the
2:15:20taxes and they would also have to go
2:15:22presumably to the back of the line
2:15:23although I'm not sure why I'm testifying
2:15:24about immigration policy at this point
2:15:27how about banning the abortion pill
2:15:29that's part of project 2025 do you
2:15:30support that part I think that that's a
2:15:32state byst state issue on a personal
2:15:34level I you know
2:15:36I'm sure I'm I'm I'm I'm a fully
2:15:39pro-life person which means that I'm not
2:15:41in favor of the distribution of the
2:15:42abortion pill Banning samesex marriage
2:15:44what about that part I am in favor of
2:15:47traditional marriage between a man and a
2:15:49woman and I am perfectly fine with
2:15:50anyone having any sort of voluntary
2:15:51sexual Arrangement they seek that's a
2:15:53different thing from whether the
2:15:54government should attach benefits to
2:15:55that personal relationship but you think
2:15:57it's a sin to have same-sex marriage I
2:16:00mean I'm I'm confused are you asking me
2:16:02as a religious Jew what I think about
2:16:04biblically I'm just asking is it a sin
2:16:06to be gay is it a sin to be gay I mean
2:16:09would how long do we have here two
2:16:11minutes I mean if the if the basic idea
2:16:13is that sexual orientation is up for
2:16:15government regulation I'm not in favor
2:16:16of the government regulating the private
2:16:18consenting sexual activity of adults
2:16:20that is a different Thing Once Again
2:16:21from whether the government ought to
2:16:23engage in actual benefits for particular
2:16:26sexual Arrangements that adults make but
2:16:29again just you you to me is it a sin or
2:16:30not from a religious Jewish perspective
2:16:33orientation is not a sin but activity is
2:16:35that's also the same perspective of most
2:16:36major religion so far as I'm aware okay
2:16:39and how
2:16:41about cutting Social Security do you
2:16:44support that part of
2:16:4520125 I'm I'm not sure what project 25
2:16:48202's position on Social Security is I'm
2:16:50I'm in favor of the restructuring of
2:16:52Social Security along the lines of
2:16:53privatization and lowering and and
2:16:55increasing the retirement age because
2:16:56you as well as every other Congress
2:16:58person knows Social Security is going to
2:16:59go bankrupt and yet everyone seems to
2:17:01have an interest in lying about it for
2:17:02the next decade and a half until we have
2:17:03to take austerity measures or radically
2:17:05increase inflation or taxes and and bans
2:17:07against uh books about slavery do you
2:17:09support that part about why would I
2:17:10possibly be in favor of bans about books
2:17:12about slavery that that would be
2:17:13absolutely ridiculous what I am in favor
2:17:15of is the idea that school libraries
2:17:17should be able to make decisions along
2:17:20the lines of what exactly is appropriate
2:17:22for say a seventh grader and whether
2:17:24they ought to be treated to cartoons in
2:17:26gender queer that's not quite the same
2:17:27thing and and just because we found some
2:17:30receipts you did say I think homosexual
2:17:31activity is a sin yes I'm religious I'm
2:17:33sure there's a genetic component found
2:17:35orientation but the view of all
2:17:37religious people I know has always been
2:17:38that sexual behavior is something that
2:17:40is up to you and you said I may have a
2:17:42desire to sleep with many women but I uh
2:17:45do not I agree with me yes that's true
2:17:47um congratulations on your yeah uh I'm
2:17:50sure it's very hard to restrain um
2:17:52yourself Mr chairman I just want to uh
2:17:54shift to um Alvin Bragg uh he was
2:17:59supposed to be here uh this week and
2:18:02he's not coming and Hunter Biden was
2:18:04supposed to testify now he's not
2:18:06testifying we were supposed to have
2:18:07votes on articles of impeachment and we
2:18:10didn't and again we're just wondering
2:18:12you guys write great press releases uh
2:18:15but the payoff uh seems to never come
2:18:17and so I guess we will uh keep waiting
2:18:19and and we'll do hearings like this and
2:18:21finally chairman you know you can you
2:18:23can yell you cannot
2:18:26yell fire in a crowded theater but and
2:18:29that's a restriction on speech as you
2:18:31have recognized before uh but you can
2:18:33yell theater in a crowded fire and and
2:18:35you all can continue to do that uh all
2:18:37you want and we'll just waste the
2:18:39American people's Time gentleman his
2:18:40time has expired and I remind him of the
2:18:42first rule of holes when you're in one
2:18:44stop digging uh chair recognizes Miss
2:18:47Lee for five
2:18:48minutes Mr Shapiro
2:18:51we have heard a lot today from our
2:18:54colleagues across the aisle and your
2:18:56fellow Witnesses about the need for
2:18:58Brands to avoid placement against or
2:19:01association with controversial content
2:19:03and the examples that we've heard cited
2:19:06are truly uh despicable child sex abuse
2:19:09materials Terror threats foreign
2:19:11propaganda promotion and funding of
2:19:13criminal activity so just to be clear
2:19:16you have had personal experience being
2:19:19targeted by these collusive activities
2:19:22and these limitations of advertising so
2:19:25let's clarify the daily wire and its
2:19:27Associated content do you include any
2:19:30child sex abuse materials on your
2:19:32website no we certainly do not do you
2:19:34promote terrorist activities or Isis
2:19:36videos no we certainly do not unlike
2:19:38some members of the democratic party who
2:19:39seem to be do you promote or fund raise
2:19:42for criminal conduct we do not do you
2:19:44share foreign propaganda you do not in
2:19:46fact Mr Shapiro is it not true that the
2:19:48dailywire website associate content and
2:19:52social media involve none of those
2:19:54things and are instead a reflection of
2:19:57mainstream conservative ideas and
2:19:59thought that is correct I'd also like to
2:20:02discuss the concept of Advertiser
2:20:04engagement in return on investment do
2:20:07you have any knowledge or information
2:20:09about the level of audience engagement
2:20:12with advertisers who do choose to
2:20:14advertise on your platforms thank God we
2:20:16have extraordinary level extraordinary
2:20:18levels of Advertiser engagement with our
2:20:20audience is which is why we continue to
2:20:22maintain a significant ad presence
2:20:24despite the obstacles we've discussed
2:20:25today and if an Advertiser were making a
2:20:30market-based decision do you have a
2:20:32decision based on actual economic input
2:20:35and engagement with the content
2:20:38consumers do you have any information or
2:20:40opinion about whether that return on
2:20:42investment is a good one if they engage
2:20:45with the daily wire I'm obviously biased
2:20:47in this matter but I obviously think it
2:20:48would be an excellent investment and we
2:20:50have heard from from certain advertisers
2:20:52that what they actually would like is
2:20:54some sort of cover and less public
2:20:56pressure on them so they can make
2:20:57market-based decisions now in your
2:20:59experience you have actually had your
2:21:01own content limited or removed or
2:21:04censored have you not we have would you
2:21:07share with us some of the examples of
2:21:09content that you have had limited or
2:21:11censored well let's see I have about
2:21:144,000 of them seriously about 4,000
2:21:16content enforcements across our various
2:21:18YouTube channels we've actually had to
2:21:20engage in self- enforcement because the
2:21:22corresponding information that we're
2:21:23getting from social media is so poor and
2:21:26so one of the things that we've had to
2:21:27do in the past is sort of prospectively
2:21:29remove material in the hopes that we
2:21:31will not be demonetized if we do so some
2:21:33of those matters have been for example
2:21:36describing the geography of the
2:21:37Philadelphia Corridor which is the
2:21:38border between Israel and Egypt in the
2:21:40Gaza Strip that could get us demonetized
2:21:42any mention whatsoever of a man not
2:21:44being a woman that will get you
2:21:45demonetized on YouTube for example and
2:21:48as I've mentioned when you're
2:21:49demonetized it's not merely that you're
2:21:50monetized that YouTube then has an
2:21:52interest in preventing the the
2:21:54dissemination of your message so the
2:21:56number of people who will actually see
2:21:58your particular video will be lower than
2:22:00if you are a monetized video and we have
2:22:02we have you know example after example
2:22:05of this I mentioned in my testimony that
2:22:07Matt Walsh fellow host over at the daily
2:22:08wire he was fully demonetized on YouTube
2:22:11for pointing out that men are not women
2:22:13for example so is it correct to say then
2:22:16that the collusive activity by
2:22:18advertisers to choose to limit or choose
2:22:21to restrict uh utilizing your platforms
2:22:23it has both a monetary impact and a
2:22:26potential impact on your ability to
2:22:28reach new subscribers and viewers and is
2:22:30certainly true now you touched earlier
2:22:32on the fact that you've obviously been
2:22:34able to transcend these types of
2:22:35barriers in your own business operation
2:22:38but you touched earlier on the type of
2:22:41uh detrimental effect that this has on a
2:22:44new or startup company could you explain
2:22:47to us exactly how this type of conduct
2:22:49or this typ type of collusion can
2:22:52inhibit the ability of new companies to
2:22:55form or new thoughts or ideas to
2:22:57actually reach the American public sure
2:22:59so let's take a look at a startup
2:23:01conservative Media company and garm
2:23:03decides to apply its misinformation
2:23:05standards which are extraordinarily
2:23:07Broad and subjectively defined to that
2:23:08conservative startup Media company they
2:23:11have to be extraordinarily careful of
2:23:12what they say to the extent that they
2:23:14may not report material that they think
2:23:15will be detrimental to them and we've be
2:23:18we've been demonetized in the past for
2:23:19even pointing out something that's now
2:23:21become patently obvious to the American
2:23:22people the mental decline of the
2:23:23president of the United States if you
2:23:25are a startup media outlet and you are
2:23:27focused in on something like that the
2:23:29possibility that you will then be
2:23:30demonetized by a social media platform
2:23:32based on garm removing its advertising
2:23:35using its standards telling its
2:23:36advertisers not to advertise on these
2:23:38particular platforms that's going to
2:23:39deprive you of the advertising Revenue
2:23:40necessary to actually build your
2:23:41operation get new reporters hire a new
2:23:44opinion writers and then do the actual
2:23:46marketing on your own that you would
2:23:47want in order to achieve market share
2:23:49and you go all over over the world and
2:23:51give talks and engage with everyday
2:23:53citizens about the issues that are of
2:23:54interest and concern to them in your
2:23:56opinion and experience do those issues
2:23:59you just touched on are they of interest
2:24:01to people about just in general the
2:24:03political discourse and things they want
2:24:05to hear content about today they they
2:24:07certainly are of interest and I find it
2:24:09a mass puzzle as to why the advertising
2:24:11Market if there is no sort of at least
2:24:13informal collusion between them have
2:24:15deprived the advertising revenue from
2:24:17literally half the American public the
2:24:19uh gent L's time is expired without for
2:24:22what purposes General Mr chairman I need
2:24:24to uh speak to my colleagues comments
2:24:27about Professor Waller he misrepresented
2:24:29and maligned the witness and falsely
2:24:32represented that the witness has
2:24:34something to do with's far-reaching
2:24:37investigation garm testified over a
2:24:39month ago and all these gentl majority
2:24:42could have invited them to gentl the
2:24:44gentle
2:24:46will the gentleman has a right to speak
2:24:49on his time or or if it's yielded on
2:24:51someone else's time if there's no motion
2:24:53involved the gentleman is not in order
2:24:55does the uh gentleman uh wish to pursue
2:24:58a point of order I withdraw it Mr chair
2:25:01U the committee will now stand in recess
2:25:02for five minutes to give the witnesses
2:25:04and the members a
2:25:19break
2:25:49e
2:26:19e
2:26:49e
2:27:19e
2:27:49e
2:28:19e
2:28:49e
2:29:19e
2:29:49e
2:30:18e
2:30:48e
2:31:18e
2:31:48e
2:32:18e
2:32:48e
2:33:18e
2:33:48e
2:34:18e
2:34:48e
2:35:18e
2:35:48e
2:36:18e
2:36:48e e
2:37:48we need
2:37:56how are
2:38:18you commit will come to order the chair
2:38:20now recognize the Gent lady from
2:38:22Pennsylvania thank you Mr chairman you
2:38:25know when I was home in my district last
2:38:27week I was not surprised to be
2:38:29approached by multiple constituents who
2:38:32were appalled by the radical decisions
2:38:34that had been issued recently by Mr
2:38:37Trump's right-wing Supreme Court
2:38:39particularly the US versus Trump
2:38:41decision which gutted the carefully
2:38:43constructed checks and balances on the
2:38:46presidency which had been drafted by our
2:38:48founders to ensure that presidents would
2:38:50be held accountable for criminal
2:38:52activity and other dictatorial
2:38:55Tendencies I was more surprised at the
2:38:58number of constituents and it was not
2:39:00small who wanted to talk about the Trump
2:39:02Court's decision to overrule the Chevron
2:39:05decision I mean administrative law is
2:39:07not usually the first thing that I get
2:39:10approached on but at picnics and and out
2:39:12in the community at at the grocery store
2:39:15the checkout clerk wanted to know about
2:39:16the Chevron decision and and this is a
2:39:19doctrine that has required courts to
2:39:21defer to agencies with subject matter
2:39:23expertise when interpreting
2:39:25Congressional statutes last month the
2:39:28court said that unelected judges are not
2:39:32to defer to the agency experts and must
2:39:35substitute their own judgment when
2:39:37making those interpretations and at the
2:39:39same time the court removed time limits
2:39:42for challenging agency regulations so as
2:39:45my concerned constituents realized these
2:39:48decisions seriously destabilized and
2:39:51damaged our regulatory system uh but
2:39:54after all that is one of the chief
2:39:56objectives of the Trump transition plan
2:39:59known as project 2025 and it is wholly
2:40:02supported by The house's magga majority
2:40:05and the radical Trump court but ordinary
2:40:08Americans are rightly concerned that
2:40:11these decisions have opened the door to
2:40:13attacks on regulations that have long
2:40:16kept us safe that protect the air we
2:40:18breathe the water we drink the food we
2:40:21eat the medications we take that prevent
2:40:24businesses from cheating customers and
2:40:27that require employers to have safe
2:40:29workspaces in addition to endangering
2:40:32American families these decisions will
2:40:34introduce uncertainty into nearly every
2:40:37part of our economy and over and over
2:40:39again I hear from the businesses in my
2:40:41district they want certainty businesses
2:40:45that have operated for decades in a
2:40:47stable settled regulatory environment
2:40:49will now have to adjust to an unstable
2:40:51and everchanging Landscape this will
2:40:54raise costs to businesses and will raise
2:40:57barriers to entry for new or small firms
2:41:00in the wake of these radical decisions
2:41:02Americans want to see their
2:41:03representatives discussing how to keep
2:41:05them safe they want to see us supporting
2:41:07bills like the stop corporate capture
2:41:10act which codifies the Chevron Doctrine
2:41:12and strengthens the federal rulemaking
2:41:15process this is what we should be
2:41:16discussing not a podcaster right to
2:41:19advertising Revenue but that's what
2:41:22Judiciary Republicans want to spend our
2:41:24time and resources on so we're here
2:41:25today to discuss whether conservative
2:41:28commentators and websites have the right
2:41:30to an ad deal private companies are
2:41:32allowed to choose where they want to
2:41:34advertise that's the free market which
2:41:36our Maga Republican colleagues claim to
2:41:38Revere except when the free market
2:41:41rejects their deeply unpopular messages
2:41:45we're here today because our Mega
2:41:46colleagues and their right-wing Nut Job
2:41:48allies cannot accept the fact that
2:41:50Americans and businesses are not buying
2:41:53what they're selling chaos conspiracy
2:41:57theories lies their websites are being
2:42:00rejected not because of censorship or
2:42:02Anti-Trust violations it's because their
2:42:04product stinks they are the intellectual
2:42:08equivalent of an edil maybe New Coke or
2:42:12perhaps Trump water if companies don't
2:42:15want their products advertised on a
2:42:17website that runs headlines like
2:42:19Disney's not so secret anti-white agenda
2:42:22that's up to them it's embarrassing to
2:42:25demand that government
2:42:27guarantee ad Revenue to extremist
2:42:30websites these deals aren't handouts
2:42:33they're earned this Congress committee
2:42:35Republicans have used a corrupt
2:42:37interpretation of the Sherman Act to
2:42:39call any business activity they don't
2:42:40like illegal collusion we saw the same
2:42:44nonsense at last month's hearing on
2:42:46responsible investing or ESG which many
2:42:49investment companies had implemented in
2:42:52response to Consumer demand go figure
2:42:56but this is how house Judiciary
2:42:58Republicans have repeatedly wasted
2:43:00Congressional time and taxpayer dollars
2:43:03with absurd conspiracy theories uh
2:43:05ignoring the results of their hearings
2:43:07and then making wild claims Mr Waller we
2:43:11hear a lot in this committee about
2:43:12weaponization can you speak to how
2:43:15antitrust law is being weaponized in
2:43:17this hearing for political purposes
2:43:21what I can what I can talk about is I've
2:43:24written and published and and and
2:43:25expressed concern going back several
2:43:27years about the the misuse of antitrust
2:43:30for political purposes and I trust uh
2:43:33and I I used examples from both the
2:43:35prior Democratic and prior Republican
2:43:38administrations um and I trust works
2:43:40best uh to preserve a competitive
2:43:43marketpl uh to stop the abuse of power
2:43:46by dominant firms and prevent mergers
2:43:48that are likely to be harmful to
2:43:50Consumers labor and other uh groups and
2:43:52suppliers um and that is not a democrat
2:43:55or a republican issue uh that that is a
2:43:58just how the law has been for 130 years
2:44:01okay thank you thank you for your
2:44:02expertise I yield back gent lady yields
2:44:04back gentlemen from North Carolina is
2:44:05right guys thank you Mr chairman Mr
2:44:07Shapiro I was struck by uh what another
2:44:10example of what you described earlier
2:44:12accurately as projection in Mr swall
2:44:14swalwell's comment see the Democrats
2:44:16today are expressing solicitude for and
2:44:19chastise the majority for chilling the
2:44:21sacred expressive rights of
2:44:22multinational conglomerates based in
2:44:24foreign capitals but interrogates you
2:44:26about the intricacies of your religious
2:44:28beliefs on sexual morality I apologize
2:44:30on his behalf um you know if it were
2:44:34genuine I would sympathize with the
2:44:37objective of keeping famous Brands out
2:44:40of controversy that they stick to sports
2:44:43and
2:44:44entertainment but the World Federation
2:44:47of advertisers and their uh garm that
2:44:51they've
2:44:52created their their members they and
2:44:54their members continue to seek to
2:44:57involve themselves in highly
2:44:58controversial
2:45:00issues uh your colleague Michael nolles
2:45:03in an article last year pointed out the
2:45:05that
2:45:05mbev is a member of
2:45:08WFA and the and the pretext for for what
2:45:11we're talking about today is they want
2:45:13to keep their brands out of trouble but
2:45:14they rolled out the Dylan Mulaney
2:45:16campaign and destroyed the famous Bud
2:45:19Light
2:45:20brand uh but they but they but they
2:45:23would tell us that they're being the
2:45:25purpose of this organization all these
2:45:27Global conglomerates are members of is
2:45:29to is to keep their brands out of
2:45:30trouble Disney's a member of the WFA
2:45:33according to Mr n's
2:45:35article um the report that the committee
2:45:39has issued discloses intense activity by
2:45:43garm around musk's purchase of Twitter
2:45:47they didn't like that uh Mr rakowitz in
2:45:51a February 20 23 uh email joked to his
2:45:55colleagues about quote being the idiot
2:45:58who challenged musk on brand safety
2:46:00issues since then Twitter is 80% below
2:46:04revenue
2:46:06forecast um and I think that email can
2:46:09be taken a couple of ways but it sort of
2:46:10appears that he's um he's actually
2:46:14patting himself on the back he was
2:46:15called an idiot but he's saying I'm the
2:46:17genius that took Twitter down 80% of its
2:46:21revenues uh but there's also one of the
2:46:23things that they didn't like about
2:46:25Twitter uh was that it uh they say Mr
2:46:30rackwitz also wrote that he that he had
2:46:32connected with members of garms steer
2:46:35team these guys about Mr musk's
2:46:38leadership of Twitter and Unilever has
2:46:40quote issues with overly partisan takes
2:46:43EG Hunter Biden laptop
2:46:46exposure I think Mr Tiffany was on to
2:46:48something earlier uh when he begged the
2:46:52question about interference in American
2:46:55elections and the question I think I'd
2:46:57like to pose I've heard a lot from my
2:46:58colleagues time I've been here about
2:47:00foreign malign
2:47:02influence the hunter B Hunter Biden
2:47:04laptop suppression very arguably had a
2:47:07significant impact on the outcome of the
2:47:092020 election so is this foreign malign
2:47:14influence and and what determines
2:47:16whether foreign influence from London
2:47:18for example is
2:47:21malign again I think that one of the big
2:47:23problems here that we have is vague
2:47:26unspecified subjective standards that
2:47:28are posing is pseudo objective standards
2:47:30and under that guise all bias Falls in
2:47:33One Direction when all the bias keeps
2:47:34falling in One Direction you start to
2:47:36suspect that actually the standard is
2:47:37not objective and once again you know
2:47:40the standards that are being used by
2:47:42garm are as stated by the titular head
2:47:45of garm not aligned with the First
2:47:46Amendment this is a person who who is
2:47:48overtly criticized according to the
2:47:50report the First Amendment itself talked
2:47:52about how those standards should not
2:47:53apply so why wouldn't he apply his own
2:47:56standards or the standards of a
2:47:57political side of the aisle to
2:48:00advertising dollars if they could I mean
2:48:01the use again of advertising dollars as
2:48:03a cudgel in order to shut down one
2:48:05political side of the aisle the effects
2:48:07of that are quite clear certainly on a
2:48:09wide variety of businesses on the
2:48:11right
2:48:13so is it then whether or not antitrust
2:48:16law as it currently exists extends to
2:48:18that
2:48:19that if foreign government or for
2:48:22foreign-based political actors with
2:48:24global reach are using their economic
2:48:26power to limit the expressive rights of
2:48:29Americans or certainly to intrude on and
2:48:33affect our electoral processes by
2:48:35favoring one political side or the other
2:48:37to the point of you know jumping and
2:48:39saying we don't like the hunter Biden
2:48:41laptop being
2:48:42exposed um is that not a legitimate
2:48:45object for congress certainly to look at
2:48:47and then should Congress cons consider
2:48:49the extent of its regulatory power to
2:48:51protect Americans expressive rights and
2:48:54certainly quite dangerous when you have
2:48:55the EU working with garm to set
2:48:57standards for what companies can and
2:48:58cannot advertise or should or should not
2:49:00advertise while simultaneously
2:49:01attempting to regulate the social media
2:49:03companies that are largely the
2:49:05recipients of those ad dollars what
2:49:06accounts for the solicitude of my
2:49:09colleagues democrats for the
2:49:10conglomerate International conglomerates
2:49:13expressive rights and their disregard
2:49:14for the expressive rights of ordinary
2:49:16Americans yeah I mean the hypocrisy is
2:49:18is rather glaring as I said earlier the
2:49:20the shocking adherence to free market
2:49:22capitalism and and freedom of consumer
2:49:24Choice uh on the on the left side of the
2:49:27aisle today is something to behold
2:49:28they've invoked it almost as commonly as
2:49:30they've invoked project 2025 today which
2:49:33frankly I'm getting a little creeped out
2:49:34by I think if they say it three times
2:49:36then president Trump appears and
2:49:37challenges them to a golf match or
2:49:38something it's like Beetle Juice it
2:49:40would be funny if it weren't so uh
2:49:42strange thank you gentem Yi's back the
2:49:45gentle lady from
2:49:46Pennsylvania thank you Mr chairman
2:49:49and I thank all of our guests for being
2:49:51here today Professor Waller I appreciate
2:49:53you being here and sharing your time and
2:49:55your expertise with us on these issues
2:49:58uh of issu issues of antitrust H and I
2:50:01thank you for setting this committee
2:50:02straight when it comes to as you put it
2:50:04quote the consensus of understanding of
2:50:06antitrust laws by most courts and
2:50:09commentators it's critical that we
2:50:11combat misinformation faithfully and
2:50:14communicate the state of our law it is
2:50:17also critical that we not lose sight of
2:50:19how the content underlying this hearing
2:50:21impacts businesses and people especially
2:50:24my focus is children and other
2:50:27vulnerable groups as our lives move
2:50:30increasingly online I want to read just
2:50:33briefly from the charter it says we are
2:50:36committed to taking actions which better
2:50:40protect everyone children in particular
2:50:43online and working towards a media
2:50:47environment where hate speech bullying
2:50:49and disinformation is
2:50:51challenged and taking steps to ensure
2:50:55personal data is protected and used
2:50:57responsibly when given that's a pretty
2:51:00critical Mission I care about that for
2:51:03my kids and my grandkids uh as we are
2:51:06all moving more and more online
2:51:08Professor what does your professional
2:51:10experience tell us about garms
2:51:12objectives and the need to safeguard
2:51:15against the worst kinds of online
2:51:17content child sex abuse material
2:51:20terrorism related content and deliberate
2:51:23hate speech or
2:51:29misinformation what I what I've heard
2:51:31today particularly from the um Witnesses
2:51:33from the companies is um a concern that
2:51:39an antitrust agency or an antitrust
2:51:41Court would take very seriously as a
2:51:42legitimate business concern about how um
2:51:45the standards for garm assist a company
2:51:47in making a unilateral decision about
2:51:50the types of advertising that would best
2:51:52serve their marketing and and brand
2:51:54management strategies so um I I can't
2:51:57take it much past that but I'm I'm
2:51:59hearing something that a court or an
2:52:01agency would take seriously I appreciate
2:52:04that and and Mr Patel and Mr juel maybe
2:52:06you could uh help me he from your
2:52:09perspective if businesses were required
2:52:11to place ads on certain platforms what
2:52:13would that mean for your companies uh
2:52:16and if you're comfortable speaking to
2:52:17this issue that I just pointed out I
2:52:19care deeply about what do you think it
2:52:21would mean for child sexual abuse
2:52:24victims and
2:52:26survivors Mr Patel firstly what what I
2:52:30would say is that
2:52:33um telling us where to invest wouldn't
2:52:35be the best return investment for Our
2:52:37Brands and and how to build the equity
2:52:39of Our Brands in the US would be the
2:52:41first uh response um we have a clear
2:52:44policy when it comes to where our brand
2:52:46agenes want we don't want our brand to
2:52:48be near any harm um like my testimony
2:52:52shared there was examples of child abuse
2:52:55Etc that Brands like Dove should not be
2:52:58associated with uh and money invested
2:53:01against quite frankly can you give me an
2:53:03example of that an ad placement that
2:53:06yeah I think two year two years ago uh
2:53:09there was a dove ad that uh was was next
2:53:11to uh um child child abuse uh we had a
2:53:16backlash rightly so from our consumers
2:53:19to say why would the brand be Associated
2:53:21an ed agency to that um and that's why
2:53:23we do what we do on brand safety I
2:53:26appreciate that Mr
2:53:28juel I believe the question was around
2:53:31if I was required to advertise on
2:53:32certain channels correct what impact be
2:53:34on that um I would just that would be
2:53:38not great for our business not great for
2:53:39free economy not great for the brands
2:53:41that we represent that are trying to
2:53:42grow their own business each brand and
2:53:44each product and service tries to
2:53:46connect with different audiences and
2:53:47it's up to them them and some of the art
2:53:49of what we do and honestly the trillion
2:53:51dollar media Market that exists
2:53:52worldwide is about finding those
2:53:54audiences and how do you connect the
2:53:56brands with those people to be forced
2:53:58into certain paths would sort of
2:54:01eliminate a free market do you do you
2:54:03have internal conversations around the
2:54:06possibility that your ad dollars could
2:54:08be used unwittingly uh to fund child
2:54:11sexual abuse material do you worry about
2:54:14that do you have conversations about it
2:54:16because certainly it is a high risk
2:54:19absolutely we worry and our clients
2:54:21worry when things I spend most of my
2:54:23time talking to our clients about where
2:54:24their brand dollars show up and how they
2:54:26fund different types of content and
2:54:28their number one concern is about
2:54:29providing assurances that they're not
2:54:31doing societal harm Mr P that that's at
2:54:35the heart of the brand safety
2:54:36conversation absolutely and that's what
2:54:39we ought to be focused on here how do we
2:54:41protect the online world that we are all
2:54:44now in not just through uh the economy
2:54:47and through business business such as
2:54:49yours but how do we protect our children
2:54:51against this that's where this committee
2:54:54ought to be working not in the way we
2:54:56are today thank you all for your
2:54:57expertise i y back gent lady y back
2:54:59gentle lady from Indiana is recognized
2:55:02thank you Mr chairman um and thank you
2:55:04for doing this hearing it's actually a
2:55:06very very serious um issue actually
2:55:09personal experience you know some of
2:55:11them I POS when I criticize uh um
2:55:14failures of President Biden or president
2:55:17zalanski of Jake solivan to detour
2:55:19Russia actually we couldn't even post
2:55:21some of them not just to get direction
2:55:22was kind of interesting but uh so I'm
2:55:25sure that this is you know very serious
2:55:27situation for a lot of people and know
2:55:29for freedom of speech or freedom of
2:55:31opinion and we creating dictatorship of
2:55:33opinion Tyran of opinion in our country
2:55:36and I agree with Professor wallard
2:55:38that's not a traditional C collaboration
2:55:41of cartel that's not a traditional
2:55:43cartel too because we actually have
2:55:46government coerced in business
2:55:48businesses and useing mechanism and
2:55:51businesses to restrain trade and take
2:55:53down competition very interesting you
2:55:56actually on the website of all of this
2:55:58organization you talk it's first of its
2:56:00kind cross industry Alliance this is
2:56:03actually a flagship project of the world
2:56:05economic Forum you know we creating
2:56:08public private Corporation framework we
2:56:11actually creating This Global risk you
2:56:14know initiative and to control
2:56:16misinformation and dis information to
2:56:19shape the future of media entertainment
2:56:22and culture and using organization like
2:56:26SEC FTC pcob to take down competitors in
2:56:31businesses that don't agree with the
2:56:34dictatorship of opinion that we're
2:56:36creating actually it's kind of
2:56:37interesting I have to tell you you know
2:56:39under Carl Marx and hyek communism
2:56:43socialism it's not redistribution of
2:56:45wealth that's control of means of
2:56:47production
2:56:48centralized power and now with
2:56:51centralizing power in Washington DC by
2:56:54controlling means and production maybe
2:56:56not in the form but in the essence by
2:56:59using Financial system by using un
2:57:02climate agenda and CSG which is very we
2:57:05Disclosure by using Global organization
2:57:07to coer cosos and businesses to be able
2:57:10to intimidate to sign on to something
2:57:13actually could be against the interest
2:57:15of their shareholders this is very d
2:57:18dangerous what we have right now
2:57:20creating the collusion of business and
2:57:22government and what my question is you
2:57:24know as an you know American
2:57:26congresswoman that have to protect
2:57:28American public interest and our
2:57:30investors so I have a question for you
2:57:32Mr shapir don't you think you know if
2:57:34these companies you know actually sign
2:57:37on to this initiative of global agenda
2:57:39initiatives you know that could be
2:57:41actually this unusual collaboration
2:57:43could be actually harmful to sharehold
2:57:45because they can exclude you know I
2:57:47think your organization actually this is
2:57:49your organization Mr Jewel put daily war
2:57:52on a global high-risk exclusion list
2:57:54categorizes conspiracy theory interest
2:57:56and only conservative groups on that
2:57:58list kind of be very very interested but
2:58:00don't you think if we're going to
2:58:02include everyone who has a different
2:58:04views like conservative views in our
2:58:06country that's a risk that companies
2:58:08publicly traded companies should
2:58:10actually disclose I think sccc need to
2:58:13tell them so American investors know do
2:58:16they want to invest in all of this
2:58:18Global initiatives and know that their
2:58:19Pension funds are investing in these
2:58:21initiatives don't you think that is
2:58:23transparency that American public
2:58:26deserves and actually protect them
2:58:28because they might make your country you
2:58:30know board goo company bankrupt because
2:58:32they now also colluded to take down
2:58:34boards using some illegal tools but very
2:58:37interested in passive investment to
2:58:39become an active shareholder and against
2:58:42interest of the company this is a pretty
2:58:44organized very clever organized cartel I
2:58:48I agree it never existed before this is
2:58:52a very dangerous cartel to actually
2:58:55intimidate Americans and go after our
2:58:58first amendment rights and freedom of
2:59:01speech and using money to do that so I
2:59:04have you know a little bit that minute
2:59:05remaining so I would like Mr shapir to
2:59:07tell me what are your thoughts I mean do
2:59:09do you think American people deserve at
2:59:11least transparency so they know where
2:59:13the money are
2:59:14going that is my main concern I think
2:59:17the lack of transparency
2:59:18is extraordinary and the question that I
2:59:20would have for some of my colleagues on
2:59:22the panel is can they name a single
2:59:23conservative Outlet or conservative
2:59:25leaning host that they would deem to be
2:59:27brand safe on behalf of their
2:59:29advertisers a single one and if so could
2:59:31they name them yeah maybe that's maybe
2:59:33some Jew do you know who's that good you
2:59:35know because you have you excluded a lot
2:59:36of conservative media your company so
2:59:39what who who which are which are not in
2:59:41your risk
2:59:46profile there are 600 ,000 sites in that
2:59:49exclusion list and the vast majority of
2:59:51those are made up of illegal content um
2:59:54IP
2:59:55infringement and we do very we work very
2:59:58hard to make sure that we understand who
2:59:59those are and how we protect our brands
3:00:01from infringing on that well how like do
3:00:03you have like high level you know like
3:00:05vary with a lot of traction liberal
3:00:07groups on that list give me some
3:00:09examples just because I only see
3:00:11conservative on so which ones you know
3:00:13MSNBC actually part of his interested
3:00:15NBC it's part of your cartel so that's a
3:00:18where you want them to be part of your
3:00:19cartel so how is that works to be not on
3:00:22the global exclusion time of the
3:00:24gentlemen can respond time of the gentl
3:00:25ladies inspired gentlemen wish to
3:00:27respond I think the question was
3:00:29directed to Mr
3:00:30juel um the the exclusion list is public
3:00:32we have access to it there are sites on
3:00:35both sides of it that are are
3:00:38represented time G has expired the
3:00:40general lady from Texas is recognized
3:00:42thank you Mr
3:00:43chairman I have lost count of the number
3:00:47of times we've convened this committee
3:00:49to advance tired debunked and wholly
3:00:52irresponsible right-wing talking points
3:00:55but here we are again today this morning
3:00:59my Republican colleagues are upset that
3:01:01private companies that prefer to not
3:01:05have their ads monetize online
3:01:07disinformation or disturbing content
3:01:10have established a taskforce to address
3:01:12their concerns according to my
3:01:14Republican colleagues these efforts harm
3:01:17conservative media but let's be clear
3:01:21this hearing is about Republican
3:01:23concerns over continuous drops in ad
3:01:26revenue on social media sites like X
3:01:29formerly Twitter whose CEO has done his
3:01:32best to make the site accommodating to
3:01:34hate speech disinformation anti-Semitism
3:01:38adult content and other inappropriate
3:01:41material since buying Twitter in
3:01:432022 concerned companies have paused
3:01:46advertising on the site or walked away
3:01:49from advertising on X altogether to
3:01:52preserve their brand safety and and
3:01:55their Brand's
3:01:56reputation this has angered my
3:01:59Republican colleagues who do not want
3:02:01companies to have the freedom to make
3:02:04decisions in their own best
3:02:07interests apparently they now hate the
3:02:10free market which is an incredible
3:02:14turnaround I have a couple a question
3:02:17for Mr and Mr Patel one anti-semitic
3:02:21conspiracy theory that has proliferated
3:02:23in certain quarters of the internet is
3:02:25the so-called great replacement Theory
3:02:28which claims that Jewish people are
3:02:30orchestrating mass immigration in order
3:02:33to replace the white population can you
3:02:37explain why Global Brands would not want
3:02:40their advertisements to be associated
3:02:43with Publications or individuals who
3:02:46promote the racist great great
3:02:48replacement Theory Mr Patel I'll ask you
3:02:52first well first of all we we want to
3:02:54invest uh our marketing investment into
3:02:58the brands with the target audience that
3:03:00we go after uh and that type of content
3:03:03wouldn't fit with what the brands stand
3:03:05for and what our consumers would expect
3:03:07um from the
3:03:09brand Mr
3:03:14juwel as I said earlier I mean Brands
3:03:17spend billions of over decades building
3:03:19trust with consumers about the products
3:03:21and services that they bring to Market
3:03:23that's how they build their companies
3:03:24that's what advertising does if you then
3:03:27take that and put that next to content
3:03:29that is incredibly polarizing and
3:03:31divisive I mean think of the frame of
3:03:33mind of that consumer as they're looking
3:03:34at that it's a bad Association we want
3:03:37to create good associations between
3:03:39products and services and the consumers
3:03:41it's not about the the content in terms
3:03:43of being conservative or Progressive
3:03:47it's about the nature news and the
3:03:48divisiveness that exists right now and
3:03:50so that's why overall news spend has
3:03:53come down to low single digits overall
3:03:55it isn't about Progressive or
3:03:58conservative it's about the frame of
3:03:59mind and creating positive associations
3:04:01for Our Brands and our consumers so that
3:04:03they can have the productive
3:04:04conversations they want to have and
3:04:05continue the brand growth over time and
3:04:08wouldn't you say it's also about your
3:04:10bottom line absolutely and what would
3:04:14happen if I mean you've heard the debate
3:04:17debate happening here on this de all day
3:04:20you've heard the questions from my
3:04:23colleagues on the other side of the
3:04:24aisle you you can sort of see the
3:04:27intention and where they're trying to
3:04:29drive this conversation they they want
3:04:32to ensure that you are forced to do what
3:04:36they want you to do what would that do
3:04:39to your brand and to your business and
3:04:42to your bottom line Mr Patel so firstly
3:04:45mamy would um Cil impact the brand
3:04:48equity and what the brand stands for as
3:04:51um we we built these Brands over decades
3:04:53and decades we substantial investment
3:04:56secondly we would get a consumer
3:04:58backlash um because if they couldn't
3:05:00associate the brand with the content and
3:05:02thirdly the bottom line impact would be
3:05:04loss sales um and we're very proud to be
3:05:07serving 90% of American households today
3:05:10with our
3:05:11portfolio I appreciate it I'm running
3:05:13out of time I'll just say this you've
3:05:15heard a couple of members mention
3:05:17project 2025 and uh you know there have
3:05:20been some jokes made about it and we've
3:05:22seen some of my colleagues try to run
3:05:25away from it the whole point of our
3:05:28bringing this up to the American people
3:05:30and as we've seen today is that there is
3:05:33an effort by our colleagues on the other
3:05:35side of the aisle to force their will
3:05:38upon the American public and American
3:05:40businesses and it's terrifying I yield
3:05:43back G yields back the chair and I
3:05:45recogniz is uh soon to be governor of
3:05:46New York Dakota Mr Armstrong well thank
3:05:49you Mr chairman I I didn't know we were
3:05:52going to talk Chevron Defence uh I
3:05:54didn't know we were going to talk
3:05:56consumer uh welfare standard and
3:05:58antitrust which we have an entire FTC
3:06:01that has decided that is no longer the
3:06:02standard anymore um but I I think
3:06:06sometimes when we talk about this stuff
3:06:08it's when you live it and you do it Mr
3:06:11Shapiro you're not asking Congress to
3:06:13force any particular Advertiser to
3:06:15advertise on your show are you no I
3:06:17certainly am not and this isn't a simp
3:06:19this this debate and conversation we're
3:06:22having right now isn't as simple as an
3:06:23Advertiser calling you and saying hey
3:06:25I'm not going to reup my next contract
3:06:27because my ad revenue is not generating
3:06:30what we're doing that is normal course
3:06:31of business it has happened from time to
3:06:33time yeah and it's and it's not as
3:06:35simple as you know we could talk shrank
3:06:38and Brandenburg and fire in a crowded
3:06:40theater but one of the times you can
3:06:41yell fire in a crowded theater is if you
3:06:43see
3:06:44smoke like that's truly what the
3:06:47decision means there's an imminence
3:06:48requirement I've been off Judiciary for
3:06:50a while I haven't got to give my speech
3:06:51on fire in the crowd of theaters not
3:06:53actually the law but uh from there so we
3:06:57talk about demonetization we do all of
3:06:59these things explain how it works like
3:07:02you are a businessman you provide
3:07:04content you have over a million paid
3:07:07subscribers I believe yes you understand
3:07:09your demographics you I mean that has a
3:07:11value at so explain how this works and
3:07:13why it's a problem okay so the the way
3:07:15that demonetization typically works is
3:07:17is that we are notified by YouTube for
3:07:19example that ads will programmatic ads
3:07:22will no longer be placed in the content
3:07:24on a particular video uh We've also had
3:07:28videos that are taken down by YouTube
3:07:29for the same sorts of reasons because
3:07:30they're trying to provide what garm
3:07:32would call a brand safe environment and
3:07:34so they will censor those videos or they
3:07:35will restrict the reach of those videos
3:07:37it's not just that we receive less
3:07:38Revenue it's also that the messages that
3:07:40are being disseminated in those videos
3:07:42see less audience and this this has
3:07:44become sort of a a common practice I
3:07:45mentioned earlier we've had probably
3:07:474,000 content enforcements across our
3:07:49various YouTube channels based on some
3:07:52of the most innocuous statements that
3:07:54that I've ever made or that some of our
3:07:56other hosts have ever made that
3:07:57demonetization is not just a matter of
3:07:59removing you know prospective
3:08:00advertising dollar from the pockets of
3:08:02of particular Outlets it is a matter of
3:08:05also shrinking the reach of particular
3:08:08accounts such as to violate sort of
3:08:10censorship generally those sorts of
3:08:13General standards and ultimately what it
3:08:16does is it forces companies to make
3:08:18decisions as to whether or not they're
3:08:19going to change their content absolutely
3:08:21we do that all the time we literally and
3:08:22not only that but Outlets like YouTube
3:08:24will actually attempt to demonetize or
3:08:27restrict your video If you mention that
3:08:29you're doing that if you say I I can't
3:08:30talk about this issue on YouTube because
3:08:31I'm going to go talk about it over at
3:08:32Daily wire they will then demonetize the
3:08:34video for you mentioning that there's
3:08:35another place where they could receive
3:08:36that content and you have you seen any
3:08:38metric in any of these uh it how all of
3:08:42this works it says this is I mean you
3:08:44talk about arbitrary uh yes yeah all of
3:08:47those different rules
3:08:49but is there any evidence whatsoever
3:08:52that this is applied even-handedly at
3:08:54all I've seen extraordinarily little
3:08:56evidence that the sort of Advertiser
3:08:59standards that garm spells out have been
3:09:00applied to my friends on the other side
3:09:02of the island some of them are my
3:09:03friends but people who who oppose me uh
3:09:06or who oppose my agenda again I think
3:09:09that the the proof is in the pudding
3:09:10there have been zero questions about
3:09:11Advertiser pullouts from MSNBC or CNN
3:09:14those those questions are routinely
3:09:16asked with regard to people on the right
3:09:18side of the aisle and I will once again
3:09:19ask you know for advertisers please name
3:09:21an outlet on the right side of the aisle
3:09:23that you would deem brand safe and
3:09:25that's my point this isn't a particular
3:09:27Advertiser choosing not to advertise on
3:09:29a particular show or a particular medium
3:09:32this is widespread throughout the
3:09:33industry which is eventually trying to
3:09:36create the content and it would be
3:09:38easier to deal with this we talk about
3:09:39misinformation and disinformation and
3:09:41all of that we have also been in these
3:09:43hearings where they were censoring Mal
3:09:46information which is a new brand new
3:09:48word which is actually true information
3:09:51that isn't being used in what they deem
3:09:53the correct context that's correct and
3:09:56so we can flate the first amendment in
3:09:59censorship and all of these different
3:10:00things at different times but eventually
3:10:03where we have to end up here is in this
3:10:06place where there is the ability for
3:10:09people who have thought and have on the
3:10:11other side of the aisle to be to to be
3:10:13able to participate in a Marketplace in
3:10:16a way that is fundamentally fair and I
3:10:19don't think advertisers are making these
3:10:20decisions based on where where they're
3:10:23reaching the most customers I think that
3:10:25there's a lot of fear that goes into it
3:10:26and I think there's been a bait and
3:10:27switch that's been played by some
3:10:29members of the democratic party in going
3:10:31after social media companies and
3:10:33threatening a different incentive
3:10:35structure suggesting that if they put
3:10:36their ad dollars the wrong way or set
3:10:38their standards the wrong way they are
3:10:39going to be regulated they're going to
3:10:41be targeted and then the minute that
3:10:42anybody says that that's happening then
3:10:44the answer is you're not putting
3:10:45pressure on advertisers how dare you
3:10:47invoke principles of free speech while
3:10:49attempting to tread upon it yeah and
3:10:51often times they just hire former FBI
3:10:52agents to do the comp compliance in
3:10:54their own social media company and with
3:10:56that I yield back gent yields back G
3:10:57from North Carolina is recognized uh
3:10:59thank you Mr chairman um I'd like uh ask
3:11:02unanimous consent to introduce into the
3:11:04record a fake tweet sparked Panic at Eli
3:11:07Lily and may have cost Twitter Millions
3:11:09I have it right that objection thank you
3:11:12um and thanks to all the witnesses for
3:11:14being here today um I actually thought
3:11:18that Republicans were supposed to be
3:11:20proponents of the free market uh but now
3:11:23I see I was mistaken because the
3:11:25majority of this committee appears
3:11:27intent on having independent companies
3:11:30run ads on their favorite com
3:11:34conservative media platforms and I hate
3:11:37to break it to my colleagues across the
3:11:39aisle but company's decisions not to
3:11:42advertise on conservative platforms as
3:11:45we've heard today is be because they're
3:11:48concerned about being associated with
3:11:50the content on on those platforms and
3:11:53that content can hurt your brand and
3:11:57your revenue and that's not an antitrust
3:12:01violation that's the free market doing
3:12:05its work it's also not an antitrust
3:12:08violation for these companies to be
3:12:11members of the Global Alliance for
3:12:13responsible media they're not forced to
3:12:16do that
3:12:18gar garm is an organization that as
3:12:21Professor Waller notes in his written
3:12:23testimony does not appear to function as
3:12:26a trade Association or even a
3:12:29traditional standard setting body
3:12:32Professor Waller also notes that G's
3:12:34members for the most part don't compete
3:12:37with each other rather G's members are
3:12:40freely
3:12:42associating a First Amendment right it
3:12:45is explicitly protected by the First
3:12:49Amendment so the majority and Mr Shapiro
3:12:53alleg that garm is helping advertisers
3:12:57collude in violation of our competition
3:12:59laws and I quote Mr Shapiro prevent
3:13:02anyone from disseminating information
3:13:05they don't
3:13:06pre-approve however garms members lack
3:13:10this kind of power they're not
3:13:12Gatekeepers for online information and
3:13:14even if they did have this power they
3:13:17the revenue Mr Shapiro's own company and
3:13:20popularity of his podcasts undermine
3:13:22this argument however if there even if
3:13:25there was collusion which there is not
3:13:28um that could be protected by the first
3:13:32amendment by the right to Association
3:13:35and the right to speak or not to speak
3:13:38isn't that right Professor Waller
3:13:40because the Sherman Act was never
3:13:42intended to restrain First Amendment
3:13:44expressive actions like group boy CS is
3:13:47that
3:13:48correct yes um the the the first
3:13:51amendment in antitrust operates more as
3:13:53a shield rather than a sword and
3:13:56companies are allowed to work together
3:13:58or individually to seek governmental
3:14:00action to persuade the public um on on
3:14:04matters that that um that are of concern
3:14:07to them and Professor Waller even if it
3:14:10made sense to characterize G's conduct
3:14:14as a boycott would that make any
3:14:17difference under the
3:14:18law uh no you'd have you would have the
3:14:21same issues that we've talked about
3:14:22there would have to be an agreement
3:14:24there would be uh you'd have to have
3:14:25some substantial harm to competition and
3:14:28in general you would have to have a lack
3:14:29of a um legitimate business
3:14:31justification okay so and the courts
3:14:34have been consistent about this is there
3:14:36any kind of big split in the circuit big
3:14:39uh controversy over this not that I'm
3:14:42aware of over the last 60 years there
3:14:44there was a time where if you called
3:14:46something a boy Cott it would be treated
3:14:48as per se and over time the courts have
3:14:50just backed off and said we really
3:14:52unless it's part of a uh like enforcing
3:14:54a cartel it's really a case-by casee
3:14:57basis where you balance the harm um
3:15:00against the justifications involved and
3:15:03the situation with garm and that's going
3:15:04on with advertising wouldn't even come
3:15:07close to meeting um these antitrust
3:15:10standards uh in terms of the publicly
3:15:12available information what I've heard
3:15:14today no okay thank you I yield back
3:15:17gent's back gentleman from New Jersey
3:15:22recognized thank you Mr chairman let me
3:15:25be clear the outset here because I've
3:15:27heard some things words on the other
3:15:30side that don't make sense nobody here
3:15:33and we all know this I shouldn't even
3:15:34have to say it nobody here believes in
3:15:37advocating for child pornography for
3:15:40violence for glamorizing harm to others
3:15:43for human rights um we are support
3:15:46supportive nobody here is
3:15:50anti-Semitic and for that matter X is
3:15:52not accommodating hate speech or
3:15:55pornography they just tell they let
3:15:58everything be heard everything that's in
3:16:00the free Marketplace of
3:16:02ideas and we are proponents we keep
3:16:05hearing oh you're not proponents of the
3:16:06free Marketplace the very reason we're
3:16:09here is because we are proponents of the
3:16:12free Marketplace the very problem that
3:16:15you have and what you do is you are
3:16:17stopping the free Marketplace not only
3:16:20of goods and services but of ideas
3:16:23that's what America is based on a
3:16:25freedom of ideas it doesn't matter if
3:16:28you're conservative if you're
3:16:29Progressive if you're
3:16:32liberal it doesn't matter what you
3:16:34believe as long as you're allowed to
3:16:37express yourself and let the consumer of
3:16:40those ideas or those products be the one
3:16:43to judge what they want to do
3:16:48you know the whole damn thing sounds
3:16:50like some kind of grand conspiracy
3:16:52theory it's like a bad James Bond movie
3:16:55I I can't believe it a global cartel and
3:16:58this is what it really is the plain
3:17:00words it's a global cartel controlling
3:17:03what we see the news we consume and the
3:17:06post that we engage with and the power
3:17:09isn't that you tell them no you you
3:17:11don't go to an individual business and
3:17:12say no you can't do this and they know
3:17:15very well that that's not what it is
3:17:17it's the rating
3:17:19system so businesses are busy being
3:17:22businesses they look at a rating system
3:17:24and if you get a low number they figure
3:17:26you probably shouldn't advertise on
3:17:28there it amazes me that conservative
3:17:31viewpoints get out there at all it
3:17:33amazes me that this election is even
3:17:35close it amazes me that people do have
3:17:38alternative ideas everybody have an
3:17:40iPhone almost everybody does do you ever
3:17:42go to Apple news on the iPhone I do all
3:17:45the time CU I want to hear what what
3:17:46they're saying 90 some per of the time
3:17:49it is obviously
3:17:51blatantly
3:17:53left we should hear both sides that's
3:17:57what this is
3:17:59about unelected
3:18:01unseen it's undeniably a true threat to
3:18:05Freedom gorm wields tremendous power it
3:18:09controls and you know this already 90%
3:18:11of global advertising almost $1 trillion
3:18:15we have concrete evidence not making
3:18:17this stuff up of garm organizing
3:18:19boycotts like the one against Twitter
3:18:21for fall because of Elon musk's
3:18:23acquisition which the left used to love
3:18:25Elon Musk because he's electric cars
3:18:26he's all about it now they don't because
3:18:28he believes in individual
3:18:31Freedom they also pressured Spotify to
3:18:33penalize Joe Rogan for expressing views
3:18:35on Co covid-19 vaccines despite not
3:18:39having a direct brand concern but it was
3:18:42your concern it's your ideas you want to
3:18:45change America that's the truth you want
3:18:48to change America as we know it it's not
3:18:52protecting Brands it's silencing
3:18:54dissenting viewpoints internal documents
3:18:57reveal coordinated efforts to demonetize
3:19:00conservative news outlets Fox News
3:19:02dailywire Breitbart simply because they
3:19:06don't align with your ideas because you
3:19:09want to change
3:19:11America this is blatant partnership part
3:19:14partisanship it undermines the very
3:19:16Foundation of our freedom of speech it's
3:19:19everything what America is about Freedom
3:19:22all those ideas on the market place left
3:19:25right middle everybody should hear
3:19:28everything and you shouldn't rate them
3:19:30just on the basis of that we know in the
3:19:33up up up to the 2020 election guard
3:19:36members actively flag and suppressed
3:19:38political ads from then president Trump
3:19:41as
3:19:44misinformation I there's so many
3:19:46questions and I'm going to put them put
3:19:47them in for the record but let me ask
3:19:49this Mr Shapiro News Guard ranked
3:19:52leftist media organizations on average a
3:19:5591 left organizations on a zero to 100
3:19:58scale right leaning organizations a 66
3:20:01can you name a few examples and I know
3:20:03you can of leftist news sites and
3:20:06newspapers who've published verifiably
3:20:09false stories yet still receive a high
3:20:12grade from you all because you want to
3:20:15change America can you name some I mean
3:20:17the the list is extraordinarily long of
3:20:19obviously you CNN targeting the kids at
3:20:22Covington Catholic would be a perfectly
3:20:23obvious example in which they lost a
3:20:24massive lawsuit to one of those kids uh
3:20:27the the attempt to to treat the White
3:20:29House as favorite talking point of cheap
3:20:30fakes uh with regard to the president's
3:20:33mental Wellness as actual fact which has
3:20:36been the the sort of case for the last
3:20:38couple of weeks that that's leaving
3:20:40aside opinion host like Joy Reed who
3:20:41routinely says things that are
3:20:43extraordinary celebrating quote unquote
3:20:45white tear and the these sorts of things
3:20:48happen all the time on the left but that
3:20:49has never amounted to a massive ding in
3:20:51the rating of for example MSNBC Russian
3:20:54collusion the idea that President Trump
3:20:56was himself some sort of Russian catpaw
3:20:58Russian catspaw which was trotted out by
3:21:01the Democratic party as well as the New
3:21:02York Times for literally years on end
3:21:04and the list is endless which is
3:21:06precisely why if you look at the gallop
3:21:07polls and levels of Trust in Media
3:21:09levels of Trust in Media right now are
3:21:10at all-time lows they were about 50%
3:21:12back in say 2005 and today they're south
3:21:15of 30% there's a reason for that they've
3:21:17blown out their credibility but that
3:21:19doesn't seem to blow out their
3:21:20credibility with with garm or News Guard
3:21:22because they want to change America I
3:21:24yield back gentlemen gent from Vermont
3:21:26recogniz thank you Mr chairman uh thank
3:21:28you to all the witnesses I know you're
3:21:29all visit people appreciate your time
3:21:31here
3:21:32today what I've gleaned uh from the
3:21:35hearing so far is that companies set up
3:21:39Global Alliance for responsible media
3:21:41out of Common Sense out of business
3:21:44sense out of um the bottom line
3:21:47decisions and not essentially about
3:21:50ideology and I suspect many big
3:21:52corporations would advertise on hard
3:21:55right websites if it made business sense
3:21:58um but it doesn't oftentimes make
3:22:00business sense and that's why they make
3:22:03companies make a different decision and
3:22:05some of my colleagues are having a very
3:22:06difficult time accepting that in the
3:22:09real world most people and I talk to
3:22:12constituents a lot are very skeptical of
3:22:16consp cons iracy theories they do not
3:22:18want to be on divisive platforms
3:22:21generally they they tend to unplug from
3:22:24uh news media generally right now
3:22:27because of the partisanship they shy
3:22:29away from hate speech they don't want to
3:22:32be fully engaged day-to-day on divisive
3:22:35partisan politics and it follows that
3:22:37people get a negative impression of
3:22:40brands that are associated with that
3:22:43content this is my understanding from
3:22:45everything that I've heard here today
3:22:47this is at the heart of what you're
3:22:48talking about in terms of brand
3:22:51safety so we can't help that there are
3:22:53conservative corners of the web that are
3:22:55Rife with hate speech and misogyny and
3:22:59yes some disinformation and it's simply
3:23:02a fact that companies operating in the
3:23:04free market have to contend with that
3:23:07they have to make decisions about the
3:23:09situation that they're confronted with
3:23:12and as others have pointed out I do
3:23:14think there is some hypocrisy at work
3:23:16here when we my colleagues claim to care
3:23:19so passionately about the free market
3:23:22except when it tilts away from decisions
3:23:26that companies are making against
3:23:28posting advertisement on particular
3:23:31platforms that they think are not
3:23:32helping their bottom line so Mr Patel
3:23:36thank you so much for your time today
3:23:38why did
3:23:39Unilever decide to join garm can you
3:23:42just take us through that
3:23:43quickly well firstly um UN created the
3:23:47responsible um framework in 2018 because
3:23:50there was a need uh to have safe content
3:23:53with the social media platforms then in
3:23:562019 um G was um built from 12
3:24:00advertisers six um multimedia sites um
3:24:04um social platform sites and agencies
3:24:07and that was because they needed some
3:24:08sort of structure to say how would we
3:24:11Define um brand safety uh and that's how
3:24:14it the G was born it was voluntary uh
3:24:17and it's up to the social media houses
3:24:20uh to decide on what content is uploaded
3:24:23or not I appreciate that and you said uh
3:24:26it was based in need can you just flesh
3:24:28out for us when you say the need what
3:24:30was that need the need was for
3:24:33advertisers to find to make sure how
3:24:35would we have a safe place for Our
3:24:37Brands to be adjacent to content that we
3:24:39thought would be right for our consumers
3:24:42and so there are risks to Brands and
3:24:45could you just give us one example Le of
3:24:47um what what that looks like when a
3:24:50decision is being made about your
3:24:51product and where it's placed how does
3:24:53that um potentially risk your your
3:24:58brand an example would be you know the
3:25:00the dove brand that's for 20 years
3:25:02supported real Beauty uh in the US uh
3:25:05would be next to content that would be
3:25:09um harmful to shaming um body shapes
3:25:14which is not what the brand stands for
3:25:16and you mentioned that um I believe you
3:25:19said that 75% of your $850 million ad
3:25:23budget is directed towards women in
3:25:25particular yeah and so does advertising
3:25:28on parts of the web that feature um hate
3:25:33Prejudice
3:25:34misogyny help you sell your products to
3:25:39women
3:25:41no right no no no no no because I I mean
3:25:45I can I can speak here as a member of
3:25:47this committee I can also speak here as
3:25:49a woman no right and so we have lost the
3:25:55thread here on the common
3:25:58sense and I think we we have to cut
3:26:02through all of the posturing here why
3:26:05would you want your brand next
3:26:10to speech that potentially is uh
3:26:14discriminatory towards women if most of
3:26:17your Market that you're trying to sell
3:26:18to is
3:26:21women Mr
3:26:24juwel in your testimony you describe an
3:26:28apolitical industrywide preference to
3:26:31advertise on sports and entertainment
3:26:33sites instead of news briefly can you
3:26:36explain once again why that
3:26:40is it's a sister it's similar to what Mr
3:26:43Patel just said we want to avoid
3:26:45divisive of um conversations and places
3:26:49where we have poor Brad brand
3:26:51Association I really appreciate that and
3:26:54um in conclusion I would just like to
3:26:56say this is something that we all should
3:26:58take to
3:26:59heart that the divisive partisanship and
3:27:02the fear Ming is is not serving uh the
3:27:05nation it's also not serving our economy
3:27:07thank you I Y back gentleman from uh
3:27:10Alabama is recognizing thank you Mr
3:27:12chairman I appreciate all the witnesses
3:27:13being here today Mr Patel um how much
3:27:17market share did you said you have in
3:27:19the United States how how many million
3:27:21dollars do you spend uh we spend 850
3:27:25million so are are any of those clients
3:27:27big
3:27:29Pharma drug
3:27:32companies no sir none at all we we spend
3:27:35our advertising on conventional media
3:27:38channels but I mean do do when you buy
3:27:40when you're buying ads are you placing
3:27:42ads for big Pharma for pharmaceutical
3:27:44companies or do you just
3:27:47um no sir okay okay Ben I got a quick
3:27:49question for you we' we've heard a lot
3:27:51today about uh uh some experiences with
3:27:55garm and the way they've treated certain
3:27:57conservative Medias or at least what we
3:27:59appear to be a mistreatment of certain
3:28:00conservative Medias
3:28:03um what about how have those
3:28:06organizations like say Global
3:28:07disinformation index and newsguard how
3:28:09have they impacted you as a as a
3:28:11business owner well garm and and other
3:28:13organizations like it have worked in
3:28:14conjunction with GDI and and News Guard
3:28:18to set standards and again those
3:28:20standards are purportedly objective in
3:28:22practice they rarely are and so
3:28:24newsguard for example has penalized us
3:28:27openly for being a conservative site and
3:28:29when we mention that we are actually
3:28:30honest about our biases what they say is
3:28:32well that means you're not objective as
3:28:33opposed to other outlets which claim to
3:28:35be objective and actually are biased
3:28:37toward the left for example so when
3:28:39these standards are set this is part of
3:28:41the the problem that I would hope that
3:28:42Congress would would help uncover the
3:28:44lack of transparency in the standards is
3:28:46actually a weapon that's used against
3:28:47one side of the political aisle and I
3:28:49keep asking the question over and over
3:28:50and over again can newsguard name a
3:28:52major right-wing Outlet or conservative
3:28:54outlet that it deems brand safe can can
3:28:57garm do the same because I certainly
3:29:00have seen no evidence that they have
3:29:01deemed say the New York Times or CNN
3:29:03brand unsafe in the same way that they
3:29:04would for conservative Outlets so
3:29:06basically you you think liberal
3:29:08organizations are not being treated the
3:29:09same well they're being they're being
3:29:11whitelisted and I think that well it's
3:29:12clear that it is true that the amount of
3:29:14money that's being spent in the ad
3:29:15Market in news is declining that does
3:29:17not mean that it is declining
3:29:19proportionately based on politics that
3:29:21is not the case a huge percentage of
3:29:23those ad dolls are still going to
3:29:25purportedly objective or leftwing
3:29:27outlets and and virtually none are going
3:29:29to right-wing outlets and in in
3:29:31referencing Joe rugan he's been
3:29:33mentioned a couple times today and I
3:29:35think on when he said on his podcast
3:29:37that young males probably didn't need to
3:29:39vaccinate um I'd imagine that did impact
3:29:42a lot of the you know the big Pharma
3:29:45companies that do a lot of advertising
3:29:47do you see a scenario and that's what I
3:29:48was trying to get out with Mr Patel do
3:29:50you see a scenario where the the
3:29:52advertisers come to say a Spotify or
3:29:54whoever's buying bulk advertising for
3:29:56that certain group and say hey this guy
3:29:58may hurt our market share and could
3:30:01y'all quieten his voice a little again
3:30:03i' I've only skimmed the report but I
3:30:04believe there are explicit instances in
3:30:06the report in which garm actually
3:30:08attempted to suppress particular
3:30:10messages on social media that were
3:30:12damaging to its product meaning videos
3:30:14that for example criticize particular
3:30:16products did a bad product review and
3:30:18they suggested perhaps the these videos
3:30:20were violative of of garm
3:30:22Standards uh Mr juel I got a quick
3:30:24question here uh one of your employees
3:30:26John Montgomery the Executive Vice
3:30:28President of global brand safety wrote a
3:30:31letter of letter to the or lead he's the
3:30:33leader of he wrote a letter to the
3:30:35leader of garm Mr rakowitz comparing the
3:30:37dailywire and Breitbart he wrote quote
3:30:41as much as we hated their mised opinion
3:30:44or I'm sorry as much as we hated their
3:30:46ideology and an exploitive we couldn't
3:30:49really justify blocking them for the
3:30:50misguided opinions what what ideology of
3:30:54daily wire and Breitbart does your
3:30:56company hate
3:30:59exactly
3:31:02um it's not an ideology that they're
3:31:05talking about and John Montgomery no
3:31:07longer works at the company um really
3:31:09what we're trying to do he said we hated
3:31:11their ideology in quote so what do you
3:31:13think if he wasn't talking about
3:31:15ideology were what did he mean exactly I
3:31:17think that's an individual Viewpoint
3:31:19that he was espousing it's not the
3:31:21firm's decision it's not what group M's
3:31:23position is um and I can't speak for
3:31:25garm
3:31:26directly so Ben do you think that Mr
3:31:29juul's answering that correctly that uh
3:31:31that's not their ideology that just one
3:31:33former employees ideology I me that that
3:31:35letter does use the first person plural
3:31:36as in we as opposed to I so the the idea
3:31:40that he was speaking on solely on his
3:31:41own behalf while also I believe in that
3:31:43email signing with his with his
3:31:45corporate title at the bottom of the
3:31:47email it's sort of beggar's belief that
3:31:50this is non-representative of the
3:31:52generalized worldview of the company of
3:31:54which he was an employee and in which
3:31:55capacity he was speaking Ben I got one
3:31:5815 seconds what is hate speech this
3:32:02happens to be the biggest problem with
3:32:03the label hate speech that it has no
3:32:05specific definition and we've seen it
3:32:06weaponized by some people on the other
3:32:08side of the aisle today to sort of
3:32:09broadly cover everything from things
3:32:11that we would all agree are disgusting
3:32:12and terrible uh to to things that are
3:32:15essentially Main World Views like for
3:32:17example the idea that biological men and
3:32:18biological women are separate categories
3:32:20these have all been lumped together and
3:32:21this is the danger in setting up what
3:32:23are purportedly objective pseudo
3:32:25objective standards that are far too
3:32:27broad and subjectively applied I love
3:32:29how one of the W uh members of the
3:32:31committee while ago said she is a
3:32:33woman you know all I'll yield back Mr
3:32:35chairman gentleman yields back gentleman
3:32:37from
3:32:38California thank you Mr chair I find it
3:32:40interesting that earlier today uh a
3:32:42congresswoman on the other side of the
3:32:43deis uh was justifying Advertiser
3:32:46boycotts of Twitter or x uh based upon
3:32:49how unsavory the content is I uh logged
3:32:52into X as she was speaking it turns out
3:32:54she has two active accounts uh and we
3:32:56have I think one of the most
3:32:58ideologically diverse uh committees in
3:33:00Congress here and I haven't found anyone
3:33:02who isn't on the platform I'll yield
3:33:04right now if there anyone who isn't on
3:33:05the platform and you'd like to identify
3:33:07yourself but President Biden is on on X
3:33:09AOC is on Alexandro Casio Cortez is on X
3:33:13Gavin Newsome spends a ton of money
3:33:14advertising on x uh and you would think
3:33:16that if there was any group that was
3:33:17going to be sensitive to these sort of
3:33:19you know risk of being associated with
3:33:21content you disagree with it would be
3:33:23elected officials and we had essentially
3:33:250% of elected officials drop off of X
3:33:28whereas we had 80% of advertisers pull
3:33:30back from X so why is this well the
3:33:32committee's report shows why it is there
3:33:34was a organized centralized mechanism uh
3:33:38for causing advertisers to leave the
3:33:40platform we have an email where one uh
3:33:42member company uh to WFA uh executives
3:33:45says based on your recommendations we
3:33:47have stopped all paid advertisement on
3:33:49Twitter and one of those Executives
3:33:50later boasted of causing an 80% uh below
3:33:53revenue forecast result uh for Twitter
3:33:57so uh you know you you've been brought
3:33:59in uh Mr Waller by the the minority to
3:34:02talk about how none of this raises any
3:34:05real antitrust concerns but I think the
3:34:08issue is and I I think it's certainly a
3:34:10legitimate business interest to have uh
3:34:12brand related concerns about where your
3:34:14content appears but when you decide to
3:34:16withdraw from a platform you have to
3:34:18balance that consideration against the
3:34:20loss of Economic Opportunity for
3:34:22reaching a particular consumer base so
3:34:24just to ground it in a real world
3:34:26example Mr Shapiro how many people do
3:34:27you say access your platforms across all
3:34:29the different platforms you have again
3:34:31speaking on behalf of just my own
3:34:33YouTube channel we had about 50 million
3:34:35unique viewers over the last 90 days or
3:34:37so okay and so let's take the example of
3:34:39a brand we've heard many Brands today
3:34:41ice cream presumably some of those 50
3:34:43million like ice cream I would assume so
3:34:45yes
3:34:46and so if you're an ice cream company uh
3:34:48maybe you don't want to be associated
3:34:49with daily wire for whatever reason
3:34:51maybe you've cultivated a particular
3:34:52liberal image uh but if you decide not
3:34:55to advertise on his platform you have to
3:34:56weigh that brand related consideration
3:34:58against the loss of the opportunity to
3:35:00act to reach those 50 million people but
3:35:02maybe that decision becomes easier for
3:35:04you if you know that your competitors
3:35:05are also not going to be advertising to
3:35:07those 50 million people um I mean Mr
3:35:10Patel you said that you uh took your
3:35:12advertisements off of X for a Time did
3:35:15you consider at that time whether your
3:35:17competitors were going to do the same
3:35:18thing no sir you had no consideration of
3:35:21that at all no sir well it seems to me
3:35:23it's sort of inherent in this uh Global
3:35:26Association that now exists that that
3:35:28Assurance does exist to some degree so
3:35:30Mr Waller getting back to the antitrust
3:35:32issues I mean uh I'm looking at the
3:35:34ftc's own websites here it says uh
3:35:37competitor restrictions on the amount
3:35:39for content of advertising that is
3:35:41truthful and not deceptive may be
3:35:42illegal if evidence shows the
3:35:44restrictions of anti-competitive effects
3:35:46and lack reasonable business
3:35:47justifications they cite uh an order
3:35:50actually in a case involving the Arbiter
3:35:52Association uh that actually enjoined uh
3:35:55Communications that regulated restricted
3:35:57impeded declared unethical interfere
3:35:59with or advised against uh advertising
3:36:02uh or publishing so with that in View
3:36:05and with in view of the fact that we
3:36:06have sort of this coordinating mechanism
3:36:08that exists that's centralized that
3:36:10reaches uh different types of
3:36:12competitors and different types of
3:36:14Industries uh and you know we've seen
3:36:16action where they uh act in concert to
3:36:19stop competing in a given segment for
3:36:21example the 50 billion people uh that Mr
3:36:24Shapiro reaches and this Behavior
3:36:27perhaps redounds to the detriment of
3:36:29consumers looking at the traditional
3:36:31consumer welfare standard and Anti-Trust
3:36:32law for example one of his listeners or
3:36:35readers might not learn about the latest
3:36:36ice cream flavor that's available and
3:36:38might go go on eating the same old
3:36:39flavors this is a consumer welfare uh
3:36:41consideration so why is this not a
3:36:44legitimate subject for antitrust
3:36:48scrutiny that's a lot to unpack um and
3:36:50also I'm just hearing my individual
3:36:52capacity and I don't speak for nor could
3:36:54I speak for the Federal Trade Commission
3:36:58um companies are allowed if I'll take Mr
3:37:02Patell his word that when he makes an
3:37:03advertising decision he may or may not
3:37:05take into account what his competitors
3:37:07are doing but the mere fact that even if
3:37:08he did does not make that an antitrust
3:37:10violation there's dozens of cases but if
3:37:13he was assured that there was an
3:37:14association that they all part of that
3:37:16is providing consistent advice as to
3:37:18where they should and should not
3:37:19advertise does that change it if he's
3:37:21making a truly independent decision no
3:37:23that would not change things from a
3:37:24point of view of antitrust law um also I
3:37:27wouldn't uh expect that um Mr Shapiro's
3:37:30many Watchers and and listeners would be
3:37:33unaware of ice cream options just
3:37:35because there are or not ads on that
3:37:37platform well that doesn't really matter
3:37:39they'd be more aware of them if they're
3:37:40available on the platform that they're
3:37:41using and so that's the consumer welfare
3:37:43question and so would you at least agree
3:37:45with me that if you're a company that
3:37:47has Brand related concerns about a
3:37:48particular platform uh it's a different
3:37:51calculus whether to continue advertising
3:37:52there if you know your competitors are
3:37:54also not going to continue to advertise
3:37:56there it's a different calculus at that
3:37:57point isn't it it may be but the most
3:37:59important thing is whether it's an
3:38:00individual calculous or a concerted
3:38:03agreement you back thanks it's hard to
3:38:05be an individual one when it's 90% of
3:38:07the advertising spend um the gentleman
3:38:10from Virginia is recognized thank you Mr
3:38:12chairman we've heard a lot today about
3:38:14how large corporations advertising
3:38:16agencies and Industry associations
3:38:17through garm participated in boycotts
3:38:19and other coordinated actions to
3:38:21demonetize platforms podcasts news
3:38:23outlets and other content deemed
3:38:25disfavored by garm and its members um
3:38:28but I'm equally concerned by
3:38:30the Insidious relationship between garms
3:38:34partners and the government censorship
3:38:37by sisa uh what we've learned is that
3:38:41G's adtech partner Channel Factory
3:38:45collabor op at on a common lexicon uh
3:38:47for Miss and
3:38:49disinformation Mr juel did garms ad Tech
3:38:53partner collaborate on this
3:38:58lexicon um I can't speak to that I happy
3:39:01to speak to group M and what we do with
3:39:03our customers but I can't speak to G's
3:39:06adte partners and third parties that
3:39:08they've solicited it's an independent
3:39:10company well sisa use utilized garm
3:39:14adtech partner Channel Factory to
3:39:15collaborate and although garm documents
3:39:18are unclear uh what is clear is that the
3:39:21Channel Factory lexcon was developed in
3:39:23conjunction with sisa we have Global
3:39:26Chief strategy officer of Channel
3:39:27Factory Phil cow sharing the Lexicon
3:39:30with Mr rakowitz and writing the
3:39:32industry will need a common lexicon and
3:39:34detailed definition in order to make
3:39:35progress as an industry attached is the
3:39:37Lexicon we developed with cissa and DHS
3:39:40which may provide a useful starting
3:39:43point are you aware that DHS a cyber
3:39:45security and infrastructure Security
3:39:47Agency helped to develop this
3:39:51lexicon no I'm
3:39:53not well the Lexicon detailed
3:39:56definitions that contribute to or cause
3:39:58miss or disinformation for example cheap
3:40:01fakes or malicious doctored video where
3:40:03content is selectively edited is listed
3:40:05as a contributing Force to the spread of
3:40:08of Miss or disinformation uh the methods
3:40:11by which these definitions can be abused
3:40:13especially through garm is clear uh the
3:40:16Biden Harris Administration for example
3:40:18has made claims that certain
3:40:20embarrassing videos of President Biden
3:40:22are so-called cheap fakes um which we
3:40:25now know many of which are not in fact
3:40:28cheap fakes but are in fact an an
3:40:31unfortunate reality and and a serious uh
3:40:35condition so uh Mr Shapiro do you have
3:40:38any concerns with Sis's collaboration
3:40:40with garm and the impact that that has
3:40:42on on uh censorship this is where I
3:40:46think my chief concern lies is is in
3:40:48context formal and informal between
3:40:49government actors and groups like garm
3:40:52and their third party contractors to
3:40:53Define standards that act as essentially
3:40:55a cutout for violations of of free
3:40:57speech if the government were to
3:40:59directly do this it would clearly be
3:41:00illegal if the government instead puts
3:41:03pressure on private companies to do it
3:41:05then that should also traditionally be
3:41:08illegal yep absolutely and we are seeing
3:41:11this collaboration come to light and um
3:41:14in fact being misused by this
3:41:18presidential Administration to suppress
3:41:21or redirect uh to what they alleg to be
3:41:25misinformation when in fact it's an
3:41:27effort by the press to get to the truth
3:41:30with that Mr chairman I'm going to you
3:41:32the balance in my time uh Mr Patel you
3:41:35li ever ever advertise on The Daily
3:41:37wire have you guys ever adverti
3:41:41there not
3:41:43sure if we've ever have advertised and
3:41:45don't have the answer to that Mr Julie
3:41:47any the companies you represent ever
3:41:48advertise on The Daily wire not that I
3:41:52know not that I know of but if they
3:41:54wanted to we would happily do it if they
3:41:56wanted to but you don't know that any of
3:41:57them have yeah is it is it like a I mean
3:42:01I think what what did he just say 50
3:42:02million viewers over the past 90 days
3:42:04what Mr Nadler say at the front end he
3:42:05said like 13 million followers uh that
3:42:08they have I mean there there's a real
3:42:09audience there what what did you say
3:42:10your target group is 18 to 48y old women
3:42:13Mr Patel yes sir yeah Mr Shiro you got
3:42:16any 18 to 48 year old women who of of
3:42:18those 50 million people watching your
3:42:20stuff or those 13 million followers any
3:42:21of them 18 to 48 year old women again
3:42:23according to our latest statistics about
3:42:2565% of my listeners are between ages 18
3:42:27and 44 and about a quarter of them are
3:42:29women yeah so that's a pretty big number
3:42:31Ian you guys advertise any companies you
3:42:33represent Mr Joel advertise say the
3:42:35Washington
3:42:36Post yes uh do you advertise on The View
3:42:40yes Mr
3:42:42Patel same same question we tend to
3:42:45invest less than 1% on any news that was
3:42:48the question do you advertise on The
3:42:49View do you advertise in Washington Post
3:42:51any any left leaning uh program or
3:42:54platforms out there do you advertise
3:42:56there yes sir okay so you do advertise
3:42:58there but you got a huge Market here you
3:42:59don't I mean that's sort of the point
3:43:00because someone earlier the Gent lady
3:43:02from Vermont said this is all about
3:43:03business sense really because it seems
3:43:06to me if you got platform where 50
3:43:08million people are going to YouTube to
3:43:10see Mr Shapiro's videos you got 13
3:43:12million followers that's a pretty good
3:43:14and bunch of
3:43:16bunch of them are women would the chair
3:43:17yield for a moment it's not my time it
3:43:18was yield to me by Mr Klein so Mr Klein
3:43:21yield for a
3:43:22moment if Mr Klein was here I'm sure he
3:43:25would but he's not so I will try to get
3:43:28time I know Mr Fry is give more the
3:43:30gentleman has 10 seconds thank you uh
3:43:32there was an allegation that garm and
3:43:34ciser were collaborating that is untrue
3:43:37there is no connection between garm and
3:43:38ciser are you back gentleman y's back
3:43:41okay um I think this is the point like
3:43:46chair now recognize the gentle lady from
3:43:49Wyoming this is an article that I'm
3:43:51reading from and it states there's a
3:43:52group of people who control what you are
3:43:54allowed to see the news you read the
3:43:56videos you watch the posts you engage
3:43:59with you haven't heard of them you don't
3:44:01know their names but they determine
3:44:03through methods both direct and indirect
3:44:05whether you are allowed to be exposed to
3:44:07particular messages their decisions can
3:44:09bankrupt companies silence voices and
3:44:12fundamentally shift cultural norms who
3:44:14are these people people and how do they
3:44:15do this well it's the world economic
3:44:17Forum the World Federation of
3:44:19advertisers and the Global Alliance for
3:44:22responsible media that was created by
3:44:25them I asked for unanimous consent to
3:44:27submit this article into the record
3:44:29there's a couple of things that I
3:44:31believe need to be corrected Mr Waller
3:44:33you indicated early in your testimony
3:44:36that these various companies do not
3:44:38compete with each other but that is in
3:44:39fact untrue uh unil lover competes with
3:44:42Proctor and Gamble for example and and
3:44:45there are many other examples where
3:44:47these companies in fact do compete
3:44:48against each other so when they are
3:44:50conspiring or colluding with each other
3:44:52to actually cut off conservative media I
3:44:55think that there are absolutely
3:44:56antitrust considerations and your
3:44:59willingness to just simply disregard
3:45:01that evidence is rather laughable in
3:45:03light of the information that has been
3:45:04brought to light today Mr Patel you
3:45:07stated that unil lover seeks to avoid
3:45:09despicable content that was what you
3:45:12stated in your testimony do you consider
3:45:15conservative Media or philosophy to be
3:45:17despicable content no ma'am okay and is
3:45:22garm engaged in a political boycott of
3:45:25conser conservative media
3:45:30sources garm is not intended to
3:45:33represent un and where it invests and
3:45:35where it doesn't that wasn't what my
3:45:36question was my question was is garm
3:45:38engaged in a political boycott of
3:45:41conservative media
3:45:43sources I'm not not I'm not able to
3:45:45answer that question Mr juel is gar
3:45:48engaged in a political boycott of
3:45:50conservative media
3:45:53sources not that I'm aware of okay so
3:45:57then the testimony that G's actions are
3:45:59protected activity is not relevant today
3:46:01to today's hearings that in fact G's
3:46:04operations likely constitute Anti-Trust
3:46:07violations Mr Shapiro the daily wire
3:46:09covered the boycott of Bud Bud Light and
3:46:12in this instance Bud Light supported
3:46:14social policies which did not align with
3:46:16the values of many Americans the facts
3:46:19were presented to the consumers and they
3:46:22used their options that were available
3:46:24to select a different brand which did
3:46:26not offend their personal beliefs this
3:46:29is different than when companies go into
3:46:31the shadows and use an organization such
3:46:33as garm to organize a boycott to deprive
3:46:37consumers of the choice of where they
3:46:38get their news without the consumers
3:46:41ever even knowing that their choices are
3:46:44being elim wouldn't you agree I do it's
3:46:46a very different circumstance when
3:46:48consumers engage in a boycott than when
3:46:51companies conspire to engage in a
3:46:54boycott based upon the content or the
3:46:57philosophy of the of the news
3:47:00organization that they're boycotting um
3:47:02is it appropriate for garm or its
3:47:04members to get involved with content
3:47:07moderation Mr Shapiro I believe that it
3:47:10is not companies should be able to do
3:47:12much of this on their own okay in March
3:47:15of 2022 there was an email from garm
3:47:18co-founder and initiative lead Rob
3:47:20rakowitz Mr Patel do you know Mr rawitz
3:47:23no ma'am Mr juel have you ever met Mr
3:47:27rakowitz no I have not but you both are
3:47:29on the board for garm is that correct
3:47:33we're on The Advisory Board you're on
3:47:34The Advisory board but you've never met
3:47:36the gentleman who put this organization
3:47:38together we have a in univa we have a
3:47:41senior member that sits on the board
3:47:43Okay so in in uh his email he talked
3:47:47about G's boycotting and strong arming
3:47:50of Twitter because it opposed Elon Musk
3:47:53and his Free Speech principles according
3:47:56to uh Mr rakowitz he wrote that unil
3:47:59lover has quote issues with partisan
3:48:02takes such as the hunter Biden laptop
3:48:05laptop expose Mr uh Patel was the hunter
3:48:10B Hunter information about the hunter
3:48:12Biden laptop was that a partisan
3:48:19take no it that's not what but G is
3:48:22designed to do and un should not be
3:48:24involved in that conversation okay did
3:48:27you was was did P did your organization
3:48:31did you don't lover uh avoid advertising
3:48:35on any type of a website that attempted
3:48:37to expose the truth about the hunter
3:48:39Biden laptop no that you're aware of you
3:48:44leave it no but garm did g doesn't
3:48:47represent unil but G but unil is a is is
3:48:51a member of garm yeah but G doesn't
3:48:54represent how we invest our
3:48:56money I'm out of time no further
3:48:59questions I yield back Mr chairman have
3:49:00unanimous consent request gent yields
3:49:02back gentleman from New York's recogniz
3:49:04rank M thank you Mr chairman I ask
3:49:05unanimous consent to enter into the
3:49:08record the portion of the garm
3:49:09transcript showing that all garm members
3:49:11make their decisions independently quote
3:49:14it's a tough position for advertisers
3:49:16because we have to respect Independence
3:49:18and freedom of companies every company
3:49:20needs to make their own policies unquote
3:49:22Mr chairman if the majority wanted to
3:49:24ask about G's policies they should have
3:49:26invited a witness from garm who would
3:49:28have testified that all its members act
3:49:30independently I you back we invited the
3:49:32witnesses who are the steer team who
3:49:34direct how gar operates so that's that's
3:49:36why Mr Patel and Mr juel are here the
3:49:37gentleman from South Carolina is
3:49:38recognized Mr chairman I yield to you
3:49:40two minutes sir oh I I appreciate the
3:49:42gentleman uh yielding I just want to go
3:49:43back to where we were so um Mr Patel
3:49:46unever uh advertises in the Washington
3:49:48Post on The View do you advertise on
3:49:51CNN very limited sir but you do so we're
3:49:55talking about 3 million of 850 million
3:49:58budget okay on news so 3 million just a
3:50:01little bit right just a little bit I
3:50:03guess that'll 850 okay uh do you
3:50:04advertise on Fox Breitbart or the daily
3:50:07wire just to be clear again we have a a
3:50:10partnership with Fox at his total level
3:50:13what does that mean so Fox is one of our
3:50:15strategic partners for sports and
3:50:17everything else okay uh do you advertise
3:50:19on Fox
3:50:21News no sir no not on Fox News okay and
3:50:24do you advertise in Breitbart no sir and
3:50:27do you advertise on The Daily wire No
3:50:29Sir Mr juules same questions do you
3:50:31advertise on Fox News breit barter daily
3:50:33wire not Fox
3:50:35Sports uh we have a large partnership
3:50:37with Fox News you do okay some of your
3:50:39so some of your people do some of the
3:50:41some of the clients you represent
3:50:42advertise there absolutely okay we have
3:50:44an ongoing dialogue with Murdo and Fox
3:50:46on a regular basis what about Brit
3:50:48Barton daily wire um they have not
3:50:50reached out to us directly to have a
3:50:52conversation okay well you'd welcome
3:50:55that if Mr shapir wanted to reach out to
3:50:56you and of course you'd welcome that
3:50:58okay that's good to know because the guy
3:51:00who you just fired it sounds like Mr
3:51:01Montgomery said that they should be
3:51:03blocking Fox blocking the daily wire and
3:51:05blocking Breitbart but now you want to
3:51:06reach out to him that's
3:51:08good okay we're open to having dialogues
3:51:10with anybody again garm doesn't decide
3:51:13where the money spends we don't spde
3:51:15where the money sends our clients decide
3:51:16it's their budgets they decide if that
3:51:18can help grow Their
3:51:20audience mhm okay great I yield back
3:51:23thank you Mr chairman just to piggy back
3:51:25and pick up off on that they make their
3:51:27own independent decisions but you advise
3:51:29them at least that was the case with Mr
3:51:30rasz is that
3:51:33correct our primary business is advising
3:51:35our clients on where they can connect
3:51:36with audiences that's so for for
3:51:38instance Mr rasit one-on-one can go to
3:51:41un lever or Coca-Cola or some somebody
3:51:43like that and talk about why
3:51:45uh it's reprehensible that Twitter does
3:51:47this or that uh that things aren't taken
3:51:49down and he can advise those particular
3:51:51clients on why it's important not to
3:51:54advertise on certain sites is that
3:51:57correct I can't really speak for what Mr
3:52:00rasovic can can't do I assume have those
3:52:02conversation speak to that why can't you
3:52:04speak to that I don't know what Mr rasit
3:52:06does well let me ask you this you you
3:52:09what what sites uh I think Mr Shapiro
3:52:12laid out a pretty good question earlier
3:52:14what conservative sites are considered
3:52:16brand safe according to your
3:52:19metrics name me like one two five Fox
3:52:23Fox News sure Fox News online or TV both
3:52:27okay what are any other
3:52:30sites um I don't have the full
3:52:33definition of what you would consider
3:52:34conservative versus Progressive like I
3:52:36said there's 600,000 different sites
3:52:39that are listed in those and the vast
3:52:40majority of those are illegal right
3:52:41they're they're public so I would assume
3:52:42that you have access to that just as
3:52:43much as I do correct sure so sites like
3:52:46John stell's website that's a mandatory
3:52:49exclude uh prageru the Federalist Town
3:52:52Hall Breitbart Daily Caller Newsmax
3:52:54Washington examiner one americ news
3:52:56Tucker carlson.com those are all on the
3:52:58mandatory exclusion
3:53:01list I'm not sure which sites are and
3:53:03are not on there but we're happy to get
3:53:05back to you well I mean I would assume
3:53:07that you you didn't just wake up out of
3:53:09bed and pop up into a congressional
3:53:10hearing today correct you prepared for
3:53:12this yes sir did you prep and this was
3:53:15not part of your pre preparation for a
3:53:17hearing today in front of this committee
3:53:19uh to defend uh the actions of these
3:53:22entities and organizations you you never
3:53:24thought your team never thought to look
3:53:25at and examine what sites were
3:53:27considered okay and not we've looked at
3:53:30that yes so you can't tell me today what
3:53:32what sites other than Fox News what
3:53:34conservative sites are considered brand
3:53:36safe not at this point
3:53:39no um what liberal sites have been put
3:53:42on your risky list
3:53:48uh I'm not aware of the specifics on the
3:53:50site sir see I just find that I mean
3:53:52this is deeply troubling and this is why
3:53:54we have such a problem with it with you
3:53:55and unver and every everybody that's in
3:53:57here is that you dance around this word
3:54:00salad that everything is okay uh in the
3:54:02meantime you have people like Mr rasz
3:54:04who call it reprehensible that uh a
3:54:06social media company won't take down
3:54:08what he deems harmful content do you see
3:54:11the problem here and why the American
3:54:12people are distrustful of enti like
3:54:14yours and others who decide what content
3:54:17is safe and not and what content is
3:54:19problematic and not it's the man behind
3:54:22the curtain it's The Wizard of Oz and
3:54:24you were right in the middle of that and
3:54:25that's why people are distrustful of you
3:54:27without Mr chairman I'll yield back
3:54:29gentem yield back gentleman from Ohio
3:54:30was
3:54:32recognized appreciate that chairman and
3:54:35appreciate all your times I know it's
3:54:37been a couple hours since we've all been
3:54:38here uh my point of focus is going to be
3:54:40directed at Mr Patel um the example used
3:54:43during the course of the day is Dove
3:54:46soap and so I had no plans on asking a
3:54:50question until I started really thinking
3:54:52about Dove soap so my family has owned
3:54:54grocery store since 1917 we have about
3:54:5645,000 SKS it's a product I know really
3:54:59well and growing up my mom favored Dove
3:55:02soap I don't think Dove soap has been in
3:55:04my house probably for over 15 years we
3:55:06use Irish Spring now and I was trying to
3:55:08think to myself when is the last time I
3:55:10saw a Dove soap ad I am a conservative
3:55:13family and and I look at a lot of
3:55:15different Outlets whether it's online or
3:55:16whether it's TV or radio or everything
3:55:19you can imagine I haven't heard a Dove
3:55:22soap ad in at least 10 to 15 or 20 years
3:55:27so if I was responsible to my
3:55:29shareholders and I had to go there and I
3:55:31had to answer to them if I'm doing the
3:55:33best job possible for your words the
3:55:36protection of the brand you're using
3:55:39these extreme examples of situations
3:55:42where the brand might be associated with
3:55:44a freak situation versus a normal family
3:55:49of kids we never see a dove so bad ever
3:55:53now so let's look at a couple different
3:55:55things in my
3:55:57family I have a couple Democrats that
3:55:59are brothers and I love them like I love
3:56:02everyone my mom made a rule in our
3:56:05grocery business we love Democrats as
3:56:07much as Republicans because she brought
3:56:09up the example of Michael Jordan Michael
3:56:12Jordan was asked to go against Ronald
3:56:13Reagan
3:56:15the big media said you got to you got to
3:56:16condemn M you know Ronald Reagan for all
3:56:18the wrongs that he's doing and Michael
3:56:20Jordan responded to even Republicans buy
3:56:24tennis shoes so Mr Patel even
3:56:27Republicans buy Dove soap so how do we
3:56:31sit here over hours and hours of
3:56:33testimony how do you go to these
3:56:36shareholders of the Dove soap company
3:56:38and explained to them that we left out
3:56:40half of the population of America that
3:56:42doesn't deserve to see an ad to tell you
3:56:45how delightful Dove soap could be in
3:56:47your life uh your response my
3:56:50friend firstly sir um it's disappointing
3:56:53that you haven't bought soap for 15
3:56:56years um Dove soap Dove soap I would
3:56:59like to address that at some point
3:57:00springett but what I would share is that
3:57:03you know Dove Dove as a brand has over
3:57:0662% penetration in the US so that's you
3:57:09know agnostic of any conservative or
3:57:11liberal perspective we advertise close
3:57:14to uh nearly 150 million on Dove so um
3:57:18it's not a lack of advertising on Dove
3:57:20on the dove brand
3:57:22um and we we we we we make it very
3:57:25specific who we target which is 18 to 49
3:57:28year old women I appreciate that um I
3:57:31will change my PO point of focus over to
3:57:34Mr Shapiro and any response to that type
3:57:36of a question the gentleman y for a
3:57:40second uh I will thank you uh I spring
3:57:44is owned by Colgate palal Colgate palal
3:57:47is a member of
3:57:49gorm thank you in response to that being
3:57:53in the grocery aisles every day the
3:57:54Irish Spring uh colorful box actually
3:57:57pops out and sells itself and I wish
3:57:59there were some dove uh advertisements
3:58:01to remind me how wonderful my life would
3:58:03be with Dove soap so with that point of
3:58:05focus we'll move back to Mr
3:58:08Shapero the soap battles were amusing I
3:58:10was enjoying that actually uh as far as
3:58:13you know the the general generalized
3:58:14point that you're making which is that
3:58:16half of the audience of the United
3:58:18States is largely being ignored by
3:58:20certain advertisers that that obviously
3:58:22is true that doesn't mean that
3:58:24conservatives don't watch sports or
3:58:25don't watch entertainment that is where
3:58:26presumably they're getting their
3:58:27exposure to Dove soap but when it comes
3:58:29to the the original question that the
3:58:31chairman was asking which is whether for
3:58:34example youil ever advertises on with
3:58:35the New York Times or with MSNBC or with
3:58:37CNN or with the view all of which have
3:58:39hosted to have said extraordinarily
3:58:40controversial things the answer was yes
3:58:42and when it comes to would advertise or
3:58:45have they advertised on conservative
3:58:46news outlets the answer typically is no
3:58:48I also should mention at this point that
3:58:50I've been told by by the advertising
3:58:52Department of my own company that group
3:58:53M's managing director actually told us
3:58:55explicitly that zy wire has an uphill
3:58:57battle based on our politically
3:58:58conservative content so again the idea
3:59:01this this that philosophy and ideology
3:59:03never take part in this the gentleman y
3:59:05with the gentleman yield Mr Ry gentleman
3:59:07yeld I will I just want I just want to
3:59:10clarify that so just a few minutes ago
3:59:12Mr juel said if you reached out to them
3:59:15they'd be willing to talk and consider
3:59:17advertis that actually happened uh we
3:59:19were I've been told by again the people
3:59:22who we have our own advertising
3:59:23Department that deals with advertisers
3:59:24obviously and they they did tell us that
3:59:26they'd spoken with the group and
3:59:27managing director who said that we would
3:59:29have a tough time breaking into their
3:59:30Market specifically because of our
3:59:31political orientation so Mr juel doesn't
3:59:33what what he said under Ro here doesn't
3:59:35doesn't they might have talk to Mr juel
3:59:36to be fair I understand that I'm not I'm
3:59:38not saying that Mr Joel but that doesn't
3:59:40comport with what what happened when Dy
3:59:43wire talked to group in that's what I've
3:59:44been told by that that's interesting I
3:59:46yeld back to the
3:59:47gentleman I yield my time back I should
3:59:50point out Mr R is a grocery store owner
3:59:51soon there's a little something about
3:59:52putting putting things in in the aisle
3:59:55uh does the ranking member have any
3:59:56closing
3:59:57comments all right gentlemen we want to
3:59:59thank you uh for for being here I I know
4:00:01yes yes I do okay then the gentleman's
4:00:03recognized Mr chairman we've heard a lot
4:00:05of talk today about garm allegedly
4:00:07taking down a trump 2020 campaign a ask
4:00:10anous consent to enter into the record
4:00:12the full email exchange Rel to that ad
4:00:15which shows that Facebook did not take
4:00:16down the ad and said quote while some
4:00:19may find the ad objectionable it doesn't
4:00:21violate any of these stated advertising
4:00:24policies unquote without objection um if
4:00:28I could uh real quick Mr juel you said
4:00:31you'd be happy to work with the daily
4:00:32wire if they reach out to you I don't
4:00:34know anything about how the advertising
4:00:36World works is that how it normally
4:00:38happens do do they reach out to you and
4:00:41say hey we'd like you guys to adver here
4:00:44or do you say wow this is a this is a
4:00:46platform with 15 million followers 50
4:00:49million views on YouTube that's some
4:00:52that's someplace we want to go as a
4:00:53potential to make our clients money how
4:00:55does it work
4:00:57normally generally um Publishers come to
4:01:00us and say this is the audiences that we
4:01:02have this is the type of content we have
4:01:04would this be approprate it's that way
4:01:05so it's it's from daily wire to you yes
4:01:08okay and then I just to be clear that
4:01:10happened apparently um but neither of us
4:01:13knew it yeah that happened and uh your
4:01:16people told his people group M People
4:01:19told the daily wire people sorry and
4:01:21ain't going to work you guys are too
4:01:23darn conservative which is the whole
4:01:25point of today's I can only go on what
4:01:27Mr Shapiro said I can only go on that
4:01:29too but he hadn't told us anything what
4:01:30he said was uphill battle I think not
4:01:32that it won't work well okay then I'll
4:01:35then I'll change it's an uphill battle
4:01:37right but it's not an uphill battle to
4:01:39get it on The View The Washington Post
4:01:40and CNN and everything else and that is
4:01:43the point
4:01:44that is the point we want to thank you
4:01:45all for being here in the oh I got to
4:01:47read something
4:01:49here that concludes today's hearing we
4:01:51thank our Witnesses for appearing before
4:01:52the committee without objection all
4:01:54members will have five leg sa days
4:01:55submit additional written question for
4:01:56the witness additional materials for the
4:01:58record without objection the hearing is
4:02:00a
4:02:12journey
4:02:42e for

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Collusion in the Global Alliance for Responsible Media by House Committee on the Judiciary, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 33,997 words across 5,275 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.