Written by Benjamin Hayes.
On February 20, 2025, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson, recently tapped by President Donald Trump to replace Joe Biden’s appointee Lina Khan, launched a sweeping investigation into Big Tech censorship, urging victims to submit reports by May 21. Announced via a post on X and an FTC press release, this probe aims to unearth how tech giants stifle free speech—a practice Ferguson deems “un-American” and potentially illegal. For everyday users who’ve faced bans or shadow bans—or distrust Silicon Valley’s grip—this marks a pivotal push against a long-contested power.
Ferguson’s Investigation Blueprint
Ferguson spelled out the mission on X: “Big Tech censorship is not just un-American, it is potentially illegal. The FTC wants your help to investigate these potential violations of the law.” He invited submissions from anyone hit by platform censorship—bans, demonetization, shadow banning—plus tech employees or others with insight into practices that might breach legal lines. The process, he noted, is straightforward: comments go to a regulations.gov link with questions on censorship policies, due by May 21, 2025, at 11:59 p.m. EST, with options to attach evidence and file anonymously or publicly.
For private reports, Ferguson directed users to reportfraud.ftc.gov, clicking “Report Now.” The FTC’s press release echoed this, framing the inquiry as a dive into how platforms “deny or degrade” access based on speech or affiliations—acts that “may harm consumers, affect competition,” or stem from “anti-competitive conduct.” For a small business owner in Texas dinged by YouTube’s algorithm, this could mean a voice; for regulators, it’s a trove of data to weigh.
Scope and Context of the Probe
The FTC’s move isn’t narrow. It targets a swath of censorship—bans (e.g., Trump’s 2021 Twitter ouster), shadow banning (quiet reach cuts), demonetization (ad revenue slashes)—practices tech firms like Meta, Google, and X wield via murky internal rules. Ferguson told Fox Business’s Edward Lawrence these often lack appeal options, leaving users “bullied” with no recourse. “Tech firms should not be bullying their users,” he said, vowing to probe if laws—antitrust or consumer protection—were broken.
This lands amid a trust crisis—Pew’s 2024 data pegs public faith in tech at 34%, down from 50% a decade ago, fueled by COVID-era curbs and election meddling claims. For a teacher in Ohio muted on Facebook for a vaccine post, Ferguson’s call might resonate—platforms’ “confusing or unpredictable” processes, per the FTC, hit hard. The probe builds on Ferguson’s FTC stint since April 2024, where his 35 dissents against Khan’s broad antitrust swings hinted at this focus—Big Tech, not non-competes, tops his list.
Ferguson inherits Khan’s cases—Google, Amazon, PBMs—but pivots here. His axing of DEI programs and public comment requests signals a leaner FTC; this censorship hunt, though, promises aggression, tapping a vein Trump’s base cheers—free speech over Silicon Valley’s reins.
Media Reaction and Ferguson’s Vision
Big Tech’s allies bristled fast. Critics—unnamed but vocal—called it a vendetta, not justice. The FTC release framed it as a consumer and competition safeguard, but skeptics see Trump’s hand—Ferguson’s May 21 deadline aligns with a post-Khan reset. “Today’s announcement marks an important step forward in restoring free speech,” Ferguson posted on X, eyeing a permanent end to “the tyranny of Big Tech”—a nod to Trump’s “un-American” jab from the 2024 trail.
Ferguson’s past—as Virginia solicitor general, Clarence Thomas clerk—grounds this. His 35 Khan-era dissents railed at FTC overreach; now, he flips the script, targeting tech’s “internal procedures” that “cut users off.” For a retiree in Florida banned from X over a meme, this probe might feel like relief—someone’s listening. Yet, the scale—millions censored since 2020—daunts; sifting reports by May demands manpower Khan’s FTC stretched thin.
The stakes loom large. If violations stick—say, unfair practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act—fines or breakups could hit. If not, it’s a Trump flex that fizzles—either way, it’s a loud salvo in a speech war simmering since COVID.
Our Take
FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson’s Big Tech censorship probe lands as a bold jab at a real beast—platforms’ bans and cuts, from Trump’s 2021 exile to everyday shadow bans, throttle speech in ways Pew’s 34% trust crash proves folks feel. His call for victim reports—due May 21—smartly crowdsources evidence, a move that could nail illegal acts if the FTC sifts well. For users silenced—like that Florida retiree—it’s a shot at justice; for competition, it might crack open tech’s chokehold.
Yet, risks lurk. Ferguson’s Trump tie and “tyranny” line hint at politics, not just policy—Khan’s foes cheer, but skeptics see a vendetta that could overstep into speech policing itself. The FTC’s bandwidth, post-DEI cuts, might buckle under this load; if it flops, trust dips lower. It’s a gamble worth taking—censorship’s un-American tinge demands it—but execution, not intent, seals the deal.
