Add Meta and Comcast to the list of media companies censoring XX-XY Athletics

You may have heard we got banned from Tik Tok. But the censorship runs even deeper. Meta and Comcast are also censoring the brand, in far sneakier ways.

As you may have heard by now, on June 18^th the brand I recently started — XX-XY Athletics — was permanently banned from advertising on Tik Tok. For this ad:

For running an inspiring ad that simply encourages women and girls to stand up for fairness, privacy and safety — and paying Tik Tok good money to run it — we were told we violated their advertising policies for “offensive content.”

Apparently, now it is offensive to stand up for women and girls.

But it doesn’t end there. There’s more! Meta and Comcast are getting in on the action!

---

META

Meta — owner of Facebook and Instagram — has handicapped our brand as well. This one is a bit more complicated but equally condemnatory of our message and disadvantaging to our business. But it’s done in a much more insidious way, in that it is hidden from view.

Most brands are able to target the followers of relevant influencers. Nike can target Megan Rapinoe’s 2 million followers, for instance.

But when we try to target Riley Gaines’ followers — our own brand ambassador — the advertising platform doesn’t allow it. You put her name in to the ad manager machine and it just doesn’t show up! Despite Riley’s 400k+ followers on Instagram, it’s like she simply doesn’t exist.

We can’t target Tulsi Gabbard’s close to 1M followers either. Former United States representative from Hawaii, Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. Army Reserve Officer. Nope. She doesn’t exist either.

Clay Travis, founder of Outkick? Nope.

Isabel Brown, young conservative leaning influencer with 982k followers? Nope.

A list of the top Christian influencers . . . ~90% of them . . . nope. (We had to try just to validate our hypothesis.)

Watch, we screen recorded what happens.

But if we wanted to target Joe Biden’s followers. Or Megan Rapinoe’s . . . that’s just fine. Here’s Megan’s profile.

So I think it’s pretty clear, if not overtly stated, why Rapinoe’s fans can be targeted but Gaines’ can’t.

I know this is a little inside baseball, but essentially Meta is handicapping our ability to reach likely buyers. In a way that they don’t do to brands that deliver the “right” message. And by “right”, I mean Left.

It is also worth noting that targeting the followers of influencers who align with a brand’s message increases return on ad spend by 3 to 4x. So in disallowing us to do this, we are forced to spend more to drive the same amount of business. Again, really bad for business.

Any brand that isn’t furthering a left-wing narrative, will be put at a significant disadvantage by Meta, blocked from finding and engaging their potential fanbase. Or, at the very least, making it MUCH more difficult.

Go woke or get the heck out of here, Meta seems to be saying.

This is viewpoint discrimination in way that is hidden from public view. It’s like shadow banning for businesses. And it is all part of censoring wrong think and manufacturing consensus.

See . . . everyone agrees with us! Yes, it appears that way when media companies censor individuals and brands that don’t further the “approved narratives.”

---

COMCAST

XX-XY Athletics just attempted to execute a television media buy for this month with Comcast. Same ad as above. We want to run it on television. Like brands do.

While Comcast is willing to run it, they won’t run it without a disclaimer required for political ads saying:

“This ad is paid for by . . .”

Have you ever seen a brand ad with this kind of disclaimer?

From Nike? With their One Day We Won’t Need This Day ad? Or their Dream Crazy Kaepernick ad, encouraging us all to Believe in something even if it means sacrificing everything?

No. That ad won an Emmy. No political disclaimer.

Always’ Run Like A Girl ad? No disclaimer.

Gillette taking on “toxic masculinity” and aligning with the #metoo movement? No.

Dove tackling women in sports? No.

I’ve run TV ads for over thirty years. Some less product focused and more values or mission led. Never have I encountered such a requirement.

Now you might say: What, they let you run it? What are you complaining about?

Sure. But we get pigeonholed and diminished as a political ad. When we aren’t. We’re a brand selling athletic clothing. With a message that champions female athletes. Just like Nike. And Dove. And Always. And countless other athletic brands which aren’t required to make their ads lamer by slapping on a disclaimer!

The only ads that have these disclaimers are ads for political candidates and campaigns, as required by law.

Why are we the only brand being put in this category of being “political”? (Rhetorical question.) We aren’t touting a candidate. We aren’t aligned with any politician’s campaign.

It diminishes the impact of our ad. And it is yet another form of censorship. It obstructs and weakens a brand’s message and business potential. And, of course, the censorship always goes one way.

---

Honestly, I’m astonished that it keeps happening in more and more subtle but insidious ways. But it is a stark reminder of the challenge we are up against as a new business, with a message that strays from the left-wing narrative (but not from common sense or public approval). The deck is stacked against us. Big Tech and corporate media will seemingly do anything to limit our ability to get our message out there.

But the good news is, we are reaching fans anyway. Seemingly, people are fed up with the censorship of one viewpoint and they are seeking us out. It doesn’t hurt that our product is world-class. And people love it.

Tomorrow is the 4th of July. And I’m reminded of the founding principles of this country. And freedom of speech is at the core of those principles. It is the most fundamental freedom. Without it, we do not live in a free country.

To quote my own husband, Daniel Kotzin:

You are only defending freedom if you defend the rights of people who are saying and doing things with which you do not agree. Otherwise you are merely defending your own interests.

I suppose Tik Tok and Meta and Comcast are defending their own interests. We can only surmise as to why and how they may be incentivized to do so. And why limiting the potential of XX-XY Athletics would be in their interests anyway? Good questions, right?

Daniel has also said:

My freedom protects you; your freedom protects me.

The best way to protect all of our freedoms is to speak up.

And like our ad says: Stand up.

Stand up for truth. And for freedom. Do it now. Do it always.

Happy fourth.