> I am honestly surprised at the hostile response to this from HN. The right to associate freely is not what is being debated here - the article clearly says th

> I am honestly surprised at the hostile response to this from HN. The right to associate freely is not what is being debated here - the article clearly says this is about anti trust. Ads say that if I change a few shopping decisions I’ll be at the popular shows surrounded by attractive people who are totally into me, but it’s worth entertaining the possibility that’s not true. They are presenting an argument they think is going to do best but the fact that they had to shop for the most sympathetic judge in the country suggests a certain lack of confidence in the merits. In the absence of involvement by an actual competitor it’s hard to see a successful antitrust case especially when anyone who dislikes their current ad agency has many alternatives, including simply buying ads directly – it’s hardly like there’s some law requiring Twitter to refuse payment from anyone who doesn’t go through one of these groups.