X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#2https://www.oag.state.tx.us/news/releases/attorney-general-k...
Looks like criminal charges have been filed as well. Great first step against embedded propaganda in US Media.
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#3Corrected title: X sues Media Matters to silence alleged fraudulent manipulation and libel
It's not just X suing, it's also the Texas AG opening an investigation.
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#4This headline is extremely biased.
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#5Alternately: X sues Media Matters for unsubstantiated slanderous remarks triggering unwarranted financial setback
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#6Media matters followed a few major brands, a few extremist groups, and then refreshed until they saw a combination that people would get upset about. I think that is why they are being sued
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#7https://www.oag.state.tx.us/news/releases/attorney-general-k... Looks like criminal charges have been filed as well. Great first step against embedded propaganda in US Media.
> Attorney General Paxton was extremely troubled by the allegations that Media Matters, a radical anti-free speech organization, fraudulently manipulated data on X.com (formerly known as Twitter).
Hilarious. Is the AG opening themselves up to a lawsuit with this characterization?
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#8It sounds like X did serve ads next to pro-nazi tweets, it just took them 10-15 refreshes to get it to happen.
https://twitter.com/justinhendrix/status/1726772923841552784...
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#9This headline is extremely biased.
...towards reality. The "free speech absolutist" guy got his little feelings hurt again.
Re: X sues Media Matters to silence moderation criticism
#10Unfortunately, Musk filed the suit in a state which has a worse anti-SLAPP law, which makes it harder for him to be forced to pay to defend free speech. Although Media Matters might have a good shot at effecting a change-of-venue by arguing that it should be brought in CA (where eX-Twitter is headquartered) or DC (where Media Matters is located).
Scrolling to causes of action:
> Interference With Contract
Lolnope. How did Media Matters interfere with advertisers' contracts? As I understand it, the advertisers willingly pulled their advertising (which I assume the contracts give them the right to do so). There's no allegation that it was specifically the MM report that caused them to pull the advertising either, so even if you want to view a willful termination of contract as interference, you haven't even plead enough to get there.
> Business Disparagement
Again, lolnope. You concede that the facts are true--you did in fact serve up the ads next to misleading content, and you admit that. Perhaps they are misleading, but when you're trying to argue that "they only demonstrated 5 ad views, so it doesn't count," my sympathy is not with you. And misleading usually isn't enough to get you to disparagement anyways.
> Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage
Hey, here's a claim that actually makes legal sense. But see last bullet point, this isn't going to hold any water.
For someone who claims to be pro-speech, he really seems to not be in favor of speech about him.