The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is an independent agency of the United States government. Its primary mission is to protect consumers and promote fair competition in the marketplace. Or at least it was supposed to, but now it seems like the federal agency is doing President Donald Trump’s bidding.
Omnicom’s $13.5 billion acquisition of rival Interpublic can move forward on the condition that the new company does not enter into agreements with others to steer ad dollars toward or away from publishers based on political content, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission said on Monday.
Though on the surface the deal might look like the FTC is trying to protect free speech and prevent political bias in advertising, a closer look will show how FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson is carrying out President Trump’s agenda through enforcement actions, while it also appears that by using antitrust laws, he is trying to appease the conservatives, who have been crying about how they are being treated by corporations.
READ: The Federal Trade Commission sues Uber, after Google and Meta(April 22, 2025)
The agreement with the agency would reportedly still allow individual advertisers to specify where their ads are shown, the FTC said. It would also settle potential claims from the FTC’s nascent probe into possible coordination with media watchdogs who have been accused by Elon Musk of helping orchestrate advertiser boycotts of social media platform X.
“Today’s settlement does not limit either advertisers’ or marketing companies’ constitutionally protected right to free speech,” Ferguson said.
Ferguson went on to say that the history of collusion in the market for media-buying services, and the increased potential for collusion post-merger, made this a rare instance where the imposition of a behavioral remedy was appropriate.
For the FTC, this decision signals a shift in how the agency applies antitrust law—not purely as a tool to regulate competition, but increasingly as a means of intervening in politically sensitive areas like media and content moderation. While the agency frames its actions as protecting free speech and preventing politically motivated ad steering, critics argue that the move aligns closely with conservative grievances about corporate bias and censorship. This suggests a politicization of FTC enforcement under Chairman Andrew Ferguson, who appears to be advancing Trump’s agenda of confronting perceived liberal dominance in media and tech sectors.
READ: Google enters final phase of antitrust trial with FTC(April 21, 2025)
For President Trump, the FTC’s stance can be viewed as a strategic win. It allows his administration to claim that it is standing up for conservatives, protecting their access to platforms and ad revenue, and punishing what it sees as liberal bias in corporate America. By framing antitrust enforcement around political neutrality in advertising, Trump can argue that his administration is using government power to correct ideological imbalances—something that appeals strongly to his base.
Ultimately, this case sets a precedent that antitrust actions may be shaped not just by economics, but by political considerations. It raises concerns about the independence of regulatory agencies and opens the door to future interventions where ideological motives may influence business oversight. For the FTC and Trump alike, it reflects a convergence of law, politics, and media power.