? I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

What I was trying to convey was that the FBI could have exerted some kind of pressure to get Google to run the anti-booter ads of their own volition instead of the FBI (presumably) buying the ads like anyone else would buy ads. I have no idea what that kind of pressure would entail cuz I don't work for the feds and couldn't say what their "do this or else" strategies are like, lol.

It doesn't cost that much compared to their budget, so it's easier to pay for ads than get into a fight with Google lawyers.

What do you mean by pressure?

I think that you are making an assumption about how the FBI operates.

Right, I am assuming, because I'm not particularly familiar with the workings of the FBI lol.

Surely it's obvious that by "pressure" I'm referring to the threat of some sort of nebulous legal-y action if Google didn't comply with [xyz request]. Is that not how law enforcement functions? (I'd be shocked if they were asking very nicely and offering to take Google out to dinner.)

The point is that the real world is not a thriller movie. No, the FBI doesn't do that.

What exactly do they do, then?

Of course they do, though not to a big company like Google for something trivial like this when they could pay a bit of money. Threats aren't cost free.

Correct, the fbi never breaks the law or does anything not strictly above board.