Behind the Scenes: Why The Washington Post Pulled the Plug on the Anti-Musk Ad Campaign After Initial Acceptance

The Washington Post recently pulled a print ad that had been scheduled to run from two advocacy groups aiming for Elon Musk’s removal as head of the Department of Government Efficiency.

The ad, purchased by Common Cause and the Southern Poverty Law Center Action Fund for $115,000, was meant to ask a provocative question: “Who’s running this country: Donald Trump or Elon Musk?” It featured a striking image of the White House overlaid with Musk’s face against a bright red background. The ad claimed Musk had “created chaos and confusion” and highlighted that “the Constitution only allows for one president at a time.”

This ad is part of a larger campaign by Common Cause and SPLC, aiming to gather public support to demand accountability from lawmakers. As of now, the petition backing this cause has attracted more than 95,000 signatures.

The ads come amidst discussions about Musk’s influence over federal operations as he collaborates closely with Trump to reduce the federal budget. While Trump insists Musk operates under his direction, there is speculation about Musk’s substantial power in the administration.

After supplying the artwork on February 11, Common Cause learned just a few days later that The Post would not run the wrap. Though they had a signed contract, the group was left in the dark about the reasons for the cancellation. Even when they sought alternatives to modify the ad for approval, they were simply told it could not be published.

The second ad, intended for the inside of the publication, featured a large image of Musk with the words “no one elected Elon Musk to any office.” While The Post was willing to print this ad, Common Cause chose to withdraw instead.

The Post, owned by Jeff Bezos, has not commented on this decision or if outside influence played a role. However, the newspaper’s ad policy allows it to refuse any advertisements that do not meet their guidelines or for other unspecified reasons.

Virginia Kase Solomón, President of Common Cause, expressed concern over the decision, stating that it reflects a troubling trend where the press may hesitate to challenge powerful figures. She noted that if a prominent outlet like The Washington Post can be pressured into silence, smaller, local news organizations would likely struggle even more.

The timing of this decision is particularly interesting. President Trump has actively worked against media outlets that he does not favor. For instance, he has cut subscriptions for certain publishers and consequences have already emerged for the Associated Press regarding its coverage.

The controversial ad could have reached around 500 subscribers who opted for special wrap editions at the White House. Running such an eye-catching ad might have put The Post in direct conflict with the administration, especially given their recent struggles after detrimental subscription losses linked to editorial decisions.