Money. Identity. Technology.
Follow the money. Find the decision.
Standards pressure
Adalytics research and CMA’s claimed advocacy precede the February 2025 requests to DV, MRC and TAG. TAG reports no investigated BSC violations; DV disputes interpretation and reports additional safeguards.
Solid lines: documented in a cited record. Dashed: reported or inferred. Hollow arrows: proposed powers. Choose a connection for its evidence.
The letters are requests, not subpoenas. CMA’s claimed contribution is not proof it drafted them. TAG’s determination is its own reported result, not independent exoneration; no MRC revocation is proved.
Adalytics Research LLC → provided research described as available before release → February2025 Blackburn–Blumenthal advertising inquiry
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
Reported by the cited source
Senate office announcement says senators received Adalytics research before public release. Underlying full technical report/methods were not inspected in this lane; no merits finding follows.
Check My Ads → claims advocacy contribution → February2025 Blackburn–Blumenthal advertising inquiry
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
Reported by the cited source
CMA says its advocacy helped the inquiry. Senate records independently establish requests but do not credit CMA with drafting; no sole-cause claim.
February2025 Blackburn–Blumenthal advertising inquiry → requests remediation, data-use and revenue answers → DoubleVerify — product and membership brand
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
Letter asks about blocking/remediation, advertiser notification, annual NCMEC-report use, authority reports and related revenue; answers requested by14February. Questions are not proof of underlying violations or completed compliance.
February2025 Blackburn–Blumenthal advertising inquiry → requests review, audit and possible revocation explanations → Media Rating Council
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
Letter challenges MRC about certification, audits, fee policies and revocation. Its cited2018guidance was not freshly acquired; no accreditor breach or executed revocation inferred.
February2025 Blackburn–Blumenthal advertising inquiry → questions certification and whole-website monetization → Trustworthy Accountability Group
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
TAG letter asks whether certified firms may monetize a website engaged in illegal activity while avoiding prohibited content itself, alongside review/revocation questions. This proposed broader responsibility is not a proven adopted ban.
DoubleVerify — product and membership brand → disputes interpretation and reports added safeguards → Adalytics Research LLC
2025-02-07 – 2025-02-07
Reported by the cited source
February7 company response disputes technical conclusions, reports extra blocking/review and a P2P category under development. It is interested-party response, not independently audited test data; temporal overlap with letters does not isolate causation.
Trustworthy Accountability Group → reports no investigated BSC guideline violations → TAG2025 BSC inquiry determination — reported
2025report; release3February2026
Reported by the cited source
TAG reports that none of investigated companies violated BSC guidelines, explains accreditation limits and cites a23-page response. This is TAG's own determination, not independent exoneration; named findings and reply remain not obtained.
DoubleVerify — product and membership brand → publishes technical and commercial rebuttal → Adalytics Research LLC
2025-04-07 – 2025-04-07
Reported by the cited source
7April company statement challenges bot/billing/code and detection claims, including alleged misleading government representations. Merits and actual billable adjustments were not independently audited; this predates the14April letter.