YouTube is about to dive even deeper into the AI age—and not everyone is excited about it. During his keynote at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity on Wednesday, YouTube CEO Neal Mohan revealed that the platform will soon introduce a new tool that uses Google’s Veo 3 generative AI to create YouTube Shorts from scratch.

In essence, it’s an AI-powered factory line for vertical video content, capable of assembling fully generated Shorts with little to no human input. Google’s Veo 3, revealed earlier this year at Google I/O 2024, is capable of producing high-fidelity, 1080p video up to one minute long from a simple text prompt. The tool uses multimodal deep learning models that allow it to generate scenes, characters, motion, and even stylized visual effects—capabilities that are now being integrated into YouTube’s Shorts format.

“The possibilities with AI are limitless,” Mohan said during the keynote. “A lot can change in a generation. Entertainment itself has changed more in the last two decades than any other time in history. Creators led this revolution.”

While YouTube presents this as a groundbreaking innovation for creators, critics say it opens the floodgates to what many are calling a coming wave of “AI slop”—content so disconnected from real human storytelling that the lines between authenticity and fabrication will become even more blurred.

But Mohan struck an optimistic tone during his speech, per the Hollywood Reporter.

“Communities will continue to surprise us with the power of their collective fandom. And cutting-edge AI technology will push the limits of human creativity,” he said. “My biggest bet is that YouTube will continue to be the stage where it all happens.”

“YouTube has always been the home for creative experimentation,” he added. “Now, we’re giving more people the tools to create content at the speed of imagination.”

However, outside the Cannes auditorium, the sentiment is not as utopian. Many believe that far from empowering creators, tools like these could dilute the creative ecosystem by flooding it with synthetic, low-quality, and indistinguishable content—most of it likely designed to chase views, game algorithms, or mimic trending formats without any human nuance.

The unveiling comes amid ongoing industry tension over the role of AI in media. YouTube has already inked a deal with the Creative Artists Agency (CAA), allowing certain high-profile artists and athletes to control how their likeness is used by AI. This move comes as a partial response to growing concern across Hollywood that generative AI tools could be used to digitally clone actors and performers without consent.

This concern came to a head during the 2023 SAG-AFTRA and Writers Guild of America strikes, where one of the key demands was the regulation of AI in content creation, particularly regarding digital likeness rights and compensation. Though those strikes concluded with concessions on AI clauses, they did not stop the momentum of generative tools being rolled out in commercial platforms like YouTube, Meta, and TikTok.

YouTube’s AI tool announcement also follows broader Google efforts to push generative AI across its services. Veo 3 is the successor to Google’s earlier video generation models like Phenaki and Imagen Video and is part of a suite of new generative tools launched under Google DeepMind and Google Labs, which also include music generation, text-to-image synthesis, and large multimodal models.

For creators who depend on YouTube for income and audience engagement, the tool could be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it lowers the barrier to entry. On the other, it threatens to saturate the platform with auto-generated content that could make discovery harder and widen the gap between top-earning creators and new entrants.

YouTube’s new AI Shorts tool isn’t live yet, but the company confirmed it is currently being tested internally and will be offered to select creators before a wider rollout later this year. It will likely be integrated into YouTube Studio and the Shorts creation suite on mobile.

Many consider this not just a new feature but a signal—a sign that the platform once built by people with cameras and stories is evolving into something harder to define, harder to trust, and possibly, harder to care about.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission, now under an all-Republican leadership, has given conditional approval to a $13.5 billion merger between advertising giants Omnicom and Interpublic Group—on the unusual condition that the newly formed company cannot direct advertisers to avoid media platforms based on political or ideological viewpoints.

The FTC’s proposed consent order, made public Monday, targets concerns that media-buying power could be weaponized to block ad spending on platforms such as Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter), which lost major advertisers in 2023 after some ads appeared next to pro-Nazi and extremist content.

The merger combines the third- and fourth-largest ad-buying agencies in the U.S. and could reshape how billions of dollars in digital ad spending are allocated across media platforms.

“With one fewer major competitor in the Media Buying Services industry… the remaining competitors have fewer impediments to coordinating the placement of advertisements,” the FTC wrote in its complaint, warning against consolidated control that could stifle dissenting platforms.

A Victory for Musk, A Warning to Advertisers

The order is widely seen as a win for Elon Musk, who has claimed that advertisers engaged in an “illegal boycott” against X for ideological reasons. Musk has repeatedly targeted the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM)—a World Federation of Advertisers initiative that guided brands on “brand safety” by avoiding ads alongside harmful or politically extreme content.

GARM, which played a central role in ad content moderation, recently disbanded due to lack of resources and growing legal pressure, including a pending antitrust case filed by Musk’s X.

The FTC referenced GARM in its complaint, raising concerns that consolidating Omnicom and IPG would give them similar power to control advertising access through coordinated policies that could edge out controversial but legal content.

What’s In the FTC Order?

The proposed consent decree, spearheaded by Republican Chair Andrew Ferguson and Commissioner Melissa Holyoak, bars Omnicom-IPG from:

• Maintaining any internal policy that refuses to do business with advertisers based on political or ideological views.
• Steering ad dollars away from media publishers based on the publishers’ political or ideological alignment, unless explicitly requested by the client.
• Punishing platforms like X for their content unless clients independently demand such exclusions.

Advertisers will still be allowed to instruct the company to avoid certain websites or platforms for brand safety reasons. However, Omnicom cannot proactively enforce those exclusions across clients based on political content alone.

“Omnicom-IPG may choose with whom it does business and follow any lawful instruction from its customers,” Ferguson said in a statement. “No one will be forced to have their brand appear in venues they do not wish. But the firm cannot impose those values unilaterally.”

A Politicized FTC—and a Legal Gray Zone

The decision comes amid a political reshaping of the FTC under President Donald Trump. The agency, typically comprised of five members representing both parties, now operates with just three Republicans after Trump attempted to fire the remaining Democratic commissioners. Commissioner Mark Meador recused himself from the Omnicom-IPG decision, leaving Ferguson and Holyoak to approve the order.

This partisan alignment has raised concerns that the FTC’s traditionally bipartisan antitrust oversight is increasingly reflecting Republican cultural grievances—especially as the order leans into longstanding GOP complaints of “viewpoint discrimination” by Big Tech and mainstream media.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the right to boycott, especially in political contexts, the FTC appears to be drawing a distinction between coordinated business decisions by dominant players and individual brand choices.

Ripple Effects on the Ad Industry

The ruling will likely ripple through the $1 trillion global advertising industry. Media buyers, brands, and publishers now face a less predictable regulatory landscape. The case may also set a precedent for future government intervention in content moderation and ad placement decisions, blurring the lines between business discretion and viewpoint discrimination.

Advertisers already wary of reputational risk must now tread carefully: while they retain the right to choose their media platforms, agencies like Omnicom cannot enforce blanket bans on platforms like X unless the advertiser explicitly instructs them to.

Bottom Line

The FTC’s greenlight of the Omnicom-IPG merger comes with a sharp caveat: ad giants must serve clients, not ideologies. As ideological debates reshape the digital economy, the future of ad placement may now rest on the fine print of agency contracts—and the ideological preferences of clients themselves.

Coinbase announced it will suspend trading for Helium Mobile (MOBILE), Render (RNDR), Ribbon Finance (RBN), and Synapse (SYN) on June 26, 2025, at 2 p.m. ET. The delisting is due to newer versions of these tokens being released, rendering the original versions non-compliant with Coinbase’s listing standards. Trading for these assets is currently in limit order mode, allowing users to place, cancel, or match orders until the suspension date. Users can still withdraw these tokens to external wallets after trading halts.

The decision led to price drops, with SYN falling up to 15%, RNDR 8%, MOBILE 12%, and RBN 14%. Coinbase has not confirmed support for the upgraded token versions. Investors should monitor updates and consider transferring assets to platforms supporting the new versions or selling before the deadline to avoid liquidity issues. The delisting of these tokens from Coinbase, effective June 26, 2025, has significant implications for investors, projects, and the broader crypto market.

The announcement triggered immediate price drops: SYN (-15%), RNDR (-8%), MOBILE (-12%), and RBN (-14%). These declines reflect reduced investor confidence and anticipated liquidity challenges. Post-delisting, trading on Coinbase will cease, potentially limiting liquidity as investors may struggle to find alternative platforms supporting these legacy tokens. This could lead to further price depreciation if holders rush to sell before the deadline.

Users retaining these tokens after June 26 can withdraw them to external wallets, but without Coinbase’s trading support, market access may be restricted, particularly for retail investors unfamiliar with decentralized exchanges (DEXs) or other platforms. The delisting stems from newer token versions being released, which the original tokens (MOBILE, RNDR, RBN, SYN) no longer meet Coinbase’s listing standards. This suggests projects are migrating to updated protocols or blockchains (e.g., RNDR’s planned shift to Solana as RENDER).

Projects must communicate clearly about token swaps or migration processes to maintain community trust. Lack of clarity could harm their reputation and adoption. Coinbase’s decision not to confirm support for the upgraded tokens introduces uncertainty, potentially forcing projects to seek listings on other exchanges, which may have less reach or credibility. Investors face a tight window (until June 26, 2025, 2 p.m. ET) to trade these tokens on Coinbase in limit order mode. They must decide whether to sell, hold, or transfer to wallets/exchanges supporting the legacy or upgraded tokens.

Risks include missing the trading deadline, leading to stranded assets, or transferring to platforms with lower security or liquidity. Investors unfamiliar with token migrations may face losses if they fail to swap for new versions. The delisting highlights the importance of staying informed about project updates, as token upgrades often require proactive action (e.g., swapping tokens via official project channels).

Coinbase’s delisting reinforces its commitment to regulatory compliance and listing standards, which may strengthen its position amid U.S. regulatory scrutiny. However, it risks alienating users who prefer access to a wider range of tokens. The move could drive trading volume to competing exchanges (e.g., Binance, Kraken, or DEXs like Uniswap) that support these tokens or their upgraded versions, fragmenting liquidity across platforms.

It underscores the challenges of token upgrades in crypto, where technical improvements can disrupt market access and user experience, particularly for retail investors. Retail Investors often less informed about token migrations, retail users on Coinbase may panic-sell or miss migration deadlines, incurring losses. They rely heavily on centralized exchanges for simplicity, and delistings complicate their experience.

Institutional Investors likely better equipped to navigate delistings, institutions may already hold tokens in private wallets or have access to alternative platforms. They may view price dips as buying opportunities for upgraded tokens on other exchanges. Teams behind MOBILE, RNDR, RBN, and SYN may feel pressured to accelerate token migration processes and secure listings for new versions elsewhere. They risk losing credibility if migrations are poorly executed or if major exchanges like Coinbase don’t support the upgrades.

Coinbase prioritizes compliance and user protection, but its conservative approach may alienate projects and users seeking broader token access. Competing exchanges could capitalize by listing both legacy and upgraded tokens, gaining market share. Delistings like this highlight the gatekeeping role of CEXs, which control token access based on their standards. This can frustrate users but reinforces trust in regulated platforms.

DEXs like Uniswap or SushiSwap may see increased activity as users seek alternatives to trade these tokens. However, DEXs require technical know-how and carry risks like high gas fees or scams, creating a barrier for less experienced users. Coinbase’s alignment with regulatory standards appeals to users and regulators in jurisdictions like the U.S., where compliance is critical. Delistings signal a maturing market prioritizing stability over speculative assets.

Decentralized finance (DeFi) enthusiasts may view Coinbase’s decision as overly cautious, preferring platforms that embrace innovation and support all token versions. This divide reflects broader tensions between centralized control and crypto’s ethos of decentralization. Monitor project announcements for token migration details. Consider selling before June 26 if uncertain about future liquidity, or transfer tokens to wallets/exchanges supporting the assets. Research platforms like Binance, Kraken, or DEXs for continued trading.

This delisting highlights the evolving nature of crypto markets, where technical upgrades, regulatory pressures, and platform policies create both challenges and opportunities. The divide between stakeholders underscores the need for clear communication and adaptability in navigating these changes.