Several major companies paused or withdrew advertising on X during the November 2023 brand-safety controversy, but the available reporting does not show that all of them permanently left or remain absent today. For a business deciding whether to advertise there, the practical answer is conditional: compare X’s audience and campaign results with alternatives, then weigh those benefits against the placement and reputational risks your organization is willing and able to manage.
Which brands paused or withdrew advertising on X?
Axios reported these company actions in November 2023, following controversy over antisemitism and ads appearing beside far-right content. The report describes a mix of pauses and withdrawals, with different levels of attribution; it is not evidence of a permanent, coordinated boycott. Axios’s account of the advertiser actions and the Associated Press’s April 2024 report provide the documented context.
| Advertiser | What the reporting established |
|---|---|
| IBM | IBM told Axios it had immediately suspended all advertising while it investigated the situation. |
| Apple | Axios reported, citing sources, that Apple was pausing its ads. |
| Disney | A source confirmed to Axios that Disney would pause ads. |
| Comcast/NBCUniversal | Axios reported confirmation that Comcast was pausing advertising. |
| Lions Gate Entertainment | A spokesperson confirmed to Axios that it would pull all advertising from X. |
| Warner Bros. Discovery | Axios reported a pause in its presence, citing Variety. |
| Paramount | A spokesperson confirmed to Axios that it was pausing ads. |
The European Commission also froze its advertising during the same episode, according to a spokesperson quoted by Axios; it is a public institution, not a brand. AP separately reported in April 2024 that IBM and NBCUniversal/Comcast had stopped advertising in November after a report alleged their ads appeared beside material praising Nazis. The available reporting does not establish whether each advertiser later resumed spending or what any advertiser is doing now.
Why did advertisers pause?
The decisions came after Elon Musk endorsed an antisemitic conspiracy post and Media Matters for America published a report identifying company ads beside far-right posts. IBM’s statement to Axios directly tied its decision to hate speech and discrimination: “has zero tolerance for hate speech and discrimination, and we have immediately suspended all advertising on X while we investigate this entirely unacceptable situation.” That explanation is IBM’s; it should not be treated as a complete account of every other advertiser’s reasoning.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
#1 Best Overall
X’s chief executive at the time, Linda Yaccarino, told Axios that X was “extremely clear about our efforts to combat antisemitism and discrimination,” adding, “There’s no place for it anywhere in the world.” The statements show the contrast between advertisers’ stated risk concerns and X leadership’s public position; neither statement by itself verifies the safety of every placement or the effectiveness of enforcement.
What brand-safety controls does X describe?
X’s current brand-safety help page describes machine-learning and human review, contextual assessment of content, placement and adjacency controls, sensitivity settings, and keyword targeting. It also identifies Integral Ad Science (IAS) and DoubleVerify as third-party partners for post-bid measurement and reporting.
Rank #2
X reports that in 2025 it achieved 99.99% average brand safety and 97% average brand suitability across third-party measurement partners. Those are X-published averages, not a guarantee for a particular advertiser, campaign, or placement. In October 2023, X reported averages above 99% for safety and above 97% for suitability when controls were applied. The earlier figures are historical and should not be confused with the 2025 claims.
X’s industry-partnership page says it renewed its Global TAG Brand Safety Certification in March 2026 for the fourth consecutive year post-acquisition and has maintained certification since 2023. It also identifies IAS and DoubleVerify as providers of independent post-bid reporting. Certification and reporting can inform an advertiser’s due diligence, but they do not replace review of that advertiser’s own campaign data.
What do historical advertiser and market figures show?
They provide context, not a current verdict on X’s reach or value for an individual business.
- In an October 26, 2023 post, X said more than 1,700 advertisers had returned in the preceding quarter and that 90 of the 100 biggest ad spenders from a year earlier were among them. These were X’s historical claims; they do not establish current participation or restored budgets. X’s October 2023 post.
- AP reported in October 2023 that Insider Intelligence estimated X would earn $1.89 billion in advertising revenue in 2023, down 54% from its 2022 estimate of $4.12 billion. AP also cited Similarweb observations: global web traffic to Twitter.com was down 14% year over year, traffic to its ads portal was down 16.5%, and mobile monthly active users were down 17.8% year over year for the period covered. These are historical estimates and measurements, not current figures. AP’s October 2023 report.
- An ICCR proxy filing in 2025 summarized a Kantar study as finding that about 25% of advertisers planned to cut X spending in 2025, chiefly because of brand-safety concerns and declining trust. This is Kantar’s finding as summarized by ICCR, not a directly checked Kantar quotation. ICCR’s 2025 proxy filing.
How should your business decide whether to advertise on X?
There is no comparable independent evidence here that establishes a representative return on ad spend for a brand that stays versus one that leaves. Make the decision using your own audience, campaign evidence, risk limits, and ability to monitor and control placements.
Rank #4
- Confirm audience fit. Determine whether the people you need to reach are present and reachable in your target market. Use current, campaign-relevant audience evidence rather than older global traffic headlines.
- Compare performance with alternatives. Evaluate conversion, qualified reach, cost, incremental lift, and downstream outcomes across X and competing channels using the same attribution rules and time window. Historical platform revenue and traffic do not answer your campaign’s return-on-ad-spend question.
- Set placement boundaries. Define unacceptable content categories and adjacency situations. Review available X controls and exclusion settings, use IAS or DoubleVerify reporting where available, and inspect placements at the level your account can access.
- Assign oversight and stopping authority. Name who monitors the campaign, who can pause it, which conditions trigger escalation, and how quickly spending can be stopped. Record exceptions and reassess if platform policies or moderation practices change.
- Include stakeholder and market effects. Consider customer expectations, employee and partner concerns, regulatory context, and the reputational cost of association alongside the reach or performance you might forgo.
A limited test is defensible only if there is a concrete audience opportunity and your team can enforce controls, monitor placements, and stop spending at clear thresholds. A pause is reasonable if the risk exceeds your tolerance or monitoring cannot provide enough confidence. Neither choice is right for every advertiser.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
