Brian Fung and Clare Duffy, CNN
Mon, November 20, 2023
After a devastating advertiser exodus last week involving some of the world’s largest media companies, X owner Elon Musk is suing the progressive watchdog group Media Matters over its analysis highlighting antisemitic and pro-Nazi content on X — a report that appeared to play a significant role in the massive and highly damaging brand revolt.
The lawsuit filed Monday accuses Media Matters of distorting how likely it is for ads to appear beside extremist content on X, alleging that the group’s testing methodology was not representative of how real users experience the site.
“Media Matters knowingly and maliciously manufactured side-by-side images depicting advertisers’ posts on X Corp.’s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white-nationalist fringe content and then portrayed these manufactured images as if they were what typical X users experience on the platform,” the complaint filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas said. “Media Matters designed both these images and its resulting media strategy to drive advertisers from the platform and destroy X Corp.”
The lawsuit simultaneously names Media Matters and Eric Hananoki, its senior investigative reporter, as defendants. It calls for a judicial order forcing Media Matters to remove its analysis from its website and accuses Media Matters of interfering with X’s contracts with advertisers, of disrupting their economic relationships and of unlawfully disparaging X.
In a statement Monday evening, Media Matters President Angelo Carusone vowed to defend the group against the suit.
“This is a frivolous lawsuit meant to bully X’s critics into silence,” Carusone said. “Media Matters stands behind its reporting and looks forward to winning in court.”
On Monday evening, X CEO Linda Yaccarino chimed in defending the social media site.
“If you know me, you know I’m committed to truth and fairness,” Yaccarino posted. “Here’s the truth. Not a single authentic user on X saw IBM’s, Comcast’s, or Oracle’s ads next to the content in Media Matters’ article.”
Following the lawsuit’s filing, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton piled on, announcing he would be investigating Media Matters to determine whether its study of content on X might constitute “potential fraudulent activity” under Texas law. He also called the group a “radical left-wing organization” that “would like nothing more than to limit freedom by reducing participation in the public square.”
A number of major companies stopped their advertising on the platform after Musk endorsed the antisemitic claim that Jewish communities push “hatred against Whites.”
Musk had teased the litigation on Saturday after those major brands including Disney, Paramount and CNN’s parent, Warner Bros. Discovery, halted their advertising on X. Musk threatened a “thermonuclear lawsuit” against Media Matters and “ALL those who colluded in this fraudulent attack on our company,” including, he said in a follow-up post, “their board, their donors, their network of dark money, all of them…”
In previewing X’s argument, Musk appeared not to dispute the results of Media Matters’ analysis, instead targeting the group for having created a test account and allegedly refreshing the account until X’s advertising systems ran an ad for a major brand beside extremist content. The result generated by the test would almost never happen in the real world, Musk’s complaint alleged.
Legal experts on technology and the First Amendment widely characterized X’s complaint on Monday as weak and opportunistically filed in a court that Musk likely believes will take his side.
“It’s one of those lawsuits that’s filed more for symbolism than for substance—as reflected in just how empty the allegations really are, and in where Musk chose to file, singling out the ultra-conservative Northern District of Texas despite its absence of any logical connection to the dispute,” said Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas and a CNN legal analyst. “The choice of venue can best be described as trying to shore up a weak claim on the merits with a bench more likely to be sympathetic even to weak claims.”
“This reads like a press release, not a court filing to me,” said Joan Donovan, a professor of journalism and emerging media studies at Boston University. “X does admit the ads were shown next to hateful content, but argues it was ‘rare.’ This is the same strategy employed by advertisers that got YouTube to demonetize political content in 2017.”
Ken White, a First Amendment lawyer and criminal defense attorney based in Los Angeles, said the decision to file in Texas may have been intended to circumvent laws passed by California, the District of Columbia and dozens of states barring frivolous lawsuits meant to stifle public criticism.
“X filed this in federal court in Texas to avoid application of an anti-SLAPP statute,” White said on the X alternative BlueSky, using the acronym that refers to so-called “strategic lawsuits against public participation.”
In the federal appeals court that oversees Texas, anti-SLAPP statutes do not apply, White added.
“X’s purpose is to harass and abuse and maximize the cost of litigation, and anti-SLAPP statutes interfere with that aim,” he wrote.
Monday’s case has been assigned to District Judge Mark Pittman, a Donald Trump appointee who has previously been at the center of some of the nation’s biggest legal battles. Last November, Pittman blocked President Joe Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt, one of two such decisions to reach the Supreme Court.
Last August, Pittman ruled that a Texas law that bans people ages 18 to 20 from carrying handguns in public is unconstitutional and inconsistent with the Second Amendment and US history.
Contributing: CNN’s Jon Passantino and Dan Berman
Winston Cho
The Hollywood Reporter
Mon, November 20, 2023
In the wake of major advertisers pausing their spending on X shortly after Elon Musk’s reply to an antisemitic conspiracy theory, the social media service formerly known as Twitter has sued left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for allegedly defaming the platform by reporting that ads for major companies appeared next to antisemitic content.
The lawsuit, filed in Texas federal court on Monday, claims that the media watchdog group “knowingly and maliciously manufactured” the report to mislead advertisers into believing that the ad pairings were organic. X seeks monetary damages, as well as a court order directing Media Matters to “immediately delete” the report that led to the exodus of advertisers.
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Linda Yaccarino: "Deceptive Attacks" Are Fueling X Advertiser Exodus
Disney Joins Advertisers In Pausing Spend On X Amid Reported Rise in Antisemitic Speech
White House Condemns Elon Musk for Promoting "Antisemitic and Racist Hate" on X
The filing of the lawsuit comes on the heels of Musk posting Saturday that X would file a “thermonuclear” complaint against Media Matters. The message came in response to the organization issuing findings that the platform was placing ads for major companies such as Apple, NBCUniversal, IBM, Bravo and Oracle “next to content that touts Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party.” Many of those firms — plus Apple, Lionsgate, Warner Bros. Discovery and NBCUniversal — halted ad spending with the service.
Media Matters didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The complaint centers on allegations that the organization “systematically manipulated the X user experience” to issue its report. The social media service claims that Media Matters artificially manufactured the findings by exploiting user features.
“Media Matters did not find pairings that X passively allowed on the platform,” states the suit. “Media Matters created these pairings in secrecy, to manufacture the harmful perception that X is at best an incompetent content moderator, or even worse that X was somehow indifferent or even encouraging to Nazi and racist ideology.”
According to the complaint, users control the content on their feeds by showing interest in certain topics, which in turn generates ads related to those topics. X takes issue with Media Matters representing a “exceedingly (and demonstrably) rare” ad pairing as commonplace. It points to methodology in the report in which the group made a profile that only followed 30 accounts belonging to fringe figures or major national brands, which allegedly tricked the algorithm into thinking that user “wanted to view both hateful content and content from large advertisers.”
“Media Matters exploited these features by creating a secret X account precision-designed to evade normal safeguards, manipulating every aspect of the system through which posts and advertisements appear, ultimately creating the side-by-side images of objectionable content and advertisements,” writes John Sullivan, a lawyer for X, in the suit.
An internal review by X revealed that the Media Matters account altered its scrolling and refreshing activities in an “attempt to manipulate inorganic combination of advertisements and content” when the group didn’t get its desired result, the suit says.
X claims that Media Matters “intended to harm” its revenue stream because it’s the “most prominent online platform that permits users to share all viewpoints, whether liberal or conservative.”
The complaint claims interference with contract, business disparagement, and interference with prospective economic advantage.
Elon Musk Sues Media Matters for ‘Knowingly and Maliciously’ Misrepresenting Amount of Antisemitic Content on X
Sharon Knolle
Mon, November 20, 2023
Elon Musk has followed through on his threat to sue watchdog organization Media Matters, albeit later in the day than he threatened over the weekend. In a suit filed on Monday, Musk claims that the group “knowingly and maliciously” misrepresented the amount of antisemitic content on the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.
Watchdog organization Media Matters released a report on Thursday that accused X of placing ads for brands next to pro-Hitler and white nationalist accounts. Musk announced on Saturday that he would be filing a “thermonuclear lawsuit” against Media Matters the “split second court opens on Monday.”
“Not a single authentic user on X saw IBM’s, Comcast’s, or Oracle’s ads next to the content in Media Matters’ article,” Linda Yaccarino asserted in a post on X. “Only 2 users saw Apple’s ad next to the content, at least one of which was Media Matters.”
While not naming a specific dollar amount, the suit seeks “actual and consequential damages caused by Defendants’ misconduct,” along with an injunction to take down its article from both its site and social media that alleged X was placing ads for major brands next to antisemitic content.
In Musk’s weekend post, he threatened to sue “ALL those who colluded in this fraudulent attack on our company.” However, the only codefendant named on the suit, besides Media Matters, is the report’s author: Eric Hananoki, a senior investigative reporter for the organization. Media Matters journalist Kat Abu posted on X following the suit’s filing defending her colleague, but has since deleted her post.
The day after the article, which was titled “As Musk endorses antisemitic conspiracy theory, X has been placing ads for Apple, Bravo, IBM, Oracle, and Xfinity next to pro-Nazi content,” a number of high-profile companies halted ads on the platform. Among those boycotting X are entertainment companies Disney, Warner Bros., Paramount, Sony and Lionsgate. IBM and Apple are also among those suspending ads.
After advertisers started leaving, Musk called those advertisers “oppressors” of “free speech” and pushed X’s premium subscription service.
Following the filing of Musk’s suit, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that he is opening an investigation into Media Matters for what his office describes as “potential fraudulent activity.” Paxton, a Republican, said in a statement, “We are examining the issue closely to ensure that the public has not been deceived by the schemes of radical left-wing organizations who would like nothing more than to limit freedom by reducing participation in the public square.”
The legal paperwork calls the Media Matters article “false, defamatory and misleading.” Musk alleges that the outlet did not “find” the offensive ads next to more reputable ones, but “created” them via “inorganic” use of the site to “manufacture the harmful perception that X is at best an incompetent content moderator … or even worse that X was somehow indifferent or even encouraging to Nazi and racist ideology.”
In a statement over the weekend, Media Matters president/CEO Angelo Carusone wrote, “Far from the free speech advocate he claims to be, Musk is a bully who threatens meritless lawsuits in an attempt to silence reporting that he even confirmed is accurate. Musk admitted the ads at issue ran alongside the pro-Nazi content we identified.”
Carusone concluded, “If he does sue us, we will win.” Since the suit was filed, Carusone has made several posts linking to pages for those who want to donate to the media watchdog, as well as retweeting a post showing X brand ad placements next to more antisemitic content.
Musk himself was called out on Friday for agreeing with a post that boosted the conspiracy theory that “Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.”
“You have said the actual truth,” replied the SpaceX founder in a post that has since been deleted.
The White House condemned the post, calling it “unacceptable to repeat the hideous lie behind the most fatal act of Antisemitism in American history at any time.”
Musk’s suit charges Media Matters with “interference with prospective economic advantage.” The X owner has asked for a jury trial.
Earlier in the day, right-wing host Megyn Kelly was among those defending Musk and attacked Media Matters, claiming that the organization was intent on getting conservatives “fired, ruined, canceled.”
This month, it was announced that a biopic would be produced about the controversial businessman. It looks like his career keeps producing new potential material.
The post Elon Musk Sues Media Matters for ‘Knowingly and Maliciously’ Misrepresenting Amount of Antisemitic Content on X appeared first on TheWrap.
Bill Ackman defends Elon Musk against antisemitism accusations after leading the charge against Harvard students who slammed Israel
Eleanor Pringle
Mon, November 20, 2023
Left: Christopher Goodney/Bloomberg - Getty Images. Right: Nathan Laine/Bloomberg - Getty Images
Elon Musk hasn't got many people in his corner at the moment: the White House has accused him of spreading a "hideous lie," major advertisers have pulled their spending and investors are slamming his actions.
Musk's troubles come after he endorsed an antisemitic post on X—the social media site formerly known as Twitter—which Musk bought last year.
"Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them," the post on X read, which Musk responded was "the actual truth."
The Tesla CEO has been hit with a wave of backlash—as well as veteran investors in his EV maker turning against him—though some high-profile individuals have come to his defense.
Among those who are backing Musk is billionaire investor Bill Ackman, who has been a vocal critic of Harvard University's response to claims of antisemitism on its campus.
Writing on X, Ackman declared: "Elon Musk is not an antisemite."
"It is remarkable how quickly the world stands ready to attack Musk for his shoot-from-the-hip commentary," Ackman continued. "Musk is not perfect, but the world is a vastly better place because of him."
In the post, the founder of Pershing Square Capital Management added he agreed with conservative podcaster Ben Shapiro, who said Musk's comments had been taken out of context.
Shapiro highlighted that following his "actual truth" response, Musk had added: "This does not extend to all Jewish communities, but it is also not just limited to ADL."
The ADL—Anti-Defamation League—is a Jewish nonprofit fighting the spread of bigotry and anti-Semitism, which Musk previously said he plans to sue for defaming the reputation of X publicly.
Late last night Musk doubled down on his denial of antisemitism, saying: "This past week, there were hundreds of bogus media stories claiming that I am antisemitic. Nothing could be further from the truth."
"I wish only the best for humanity and a prosperous and exciting future for all," he finished.
It's not the first time Ackman has shown his support for Musk—just last month the billionaire said he would "absolutely" be interested in a deal with X Corp following the launch of his new investment vehicle.
Ackman vs Harvard
Ackman, worth roughly $2.2 billion according to Bloomberg, has pushed his alma mater hard to eradicate antisemitism on the Harvard campus.
The investor asked Harvard University to reveal the names of students who signed a statement holding Israel “entirely responsible” for the deadly conflict in the country, saying he—and other high-profile CEOs—wanted to see the names so that “none of us inadvertently hire any of their members.”
Harvard University has condemned the violence in Israel and distanced itself from the statement from student society Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) holding Israel solely responsible for the deadly conflict.
Ackman later wrote to Harvard to urge it to suspend students who were involved in an alleged attack on a Jewish individual during a demonstration on Oct. 18.
In the letter shared on Nov. 4 he also called on university president Claudine Gay to take immediate steps to reduce antisemitism on campus, a situation he called “dire” after meeting with students and faculty a week prior week.
A Harvard spokesperson pointed to the university’s prior comments over campus safety and community conduct but declined to directly address Ackman’s letter.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Jeff John Roberts
Mon, November 20, 2023
In a one-week period this fall, Elon Musk was hit with three separate lawsuits. The Securities and Exchange Commission sued to compel him to testify about his acquisition of Twitter shares before he purchased the company. The lawsuit came a day after a Jewish man filed a defamation lawsuit alleging Musk had labeled him a neo-Nazi. And the day before that, the singer Grimes had sued the billionaire for the right to see their three children.
Getting hit by three unrelated lawsuits in one week is highly unusual for a CEO—unless that CEO is Musk. In his case, the trio of lawsuits are just a few of the dozens of legal claims that have piled up against Musk and his companies in recent years, and are a reflection of both the man and how he does business. (Musk did not respond to a request for comment sent via Tesla.)
While most people, including CEOs, regard litigation as stressful and expensive and do their best to avoid it, Musk treats lawsuits as an extension of his outsize personality. Ashlee Vance, a journalist who has written a popular biography of the Tesla CEO, says this has always been the case. “Elon has long had a pronounced litigious streak. He tends to feel very strongly about his version of the truth and goes to any and all lengths to stand his version of the truth up in court,” Vance noted.
Legal experts say that for now, Musk has come out a winner in his legal gambits, but in a handful of cases he faces an “existential” threat that could make a courtroom the potential site of his undoing.
Musk’s legal exposure
Musk’s 2022 takeover of Twitter, which he has rebranded as X, led to trouble with the SEC but also lawsuits from workers who claim he failed to pay their severance. Meanwhile, other employees filed a spate of suits alleging illegal dismissals on the basis of age, gender, and disability. Workers at Musk’s other companies, Tesla and SpaceX, had previously filed similar lawsuits.
While employment-related lawsuits are not uncommon at big companies, the nature of the claims at Twitter and the other firms suggests they arose not from Musk stumbling over a legal trip wire—but from his explicit contempt for regulations related to labor and discrimination laws that he has displayed on social media.
Musk has expressed a similar contempt for regulators themselves. When the SEC sued him in 2016 for allegedly misleading investors with a Tesla-related tweet, he settled the case two years later under pressure from his lawyers, but then promptly took to Twitter to mock the agency as the “Shortseller Enrichment Commission.” Since then, Musk has returned to court multiple times in a bid to undo the settlement’s requirement for him to run any Tesla-related tweets by a lawyer—known colloquially as his “Twitter sitter”—before he publishes them.
All of this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Musk’s legal predicaments. He is also facing consumer class actions over insider trading and his pay package, a criminal investigation over Tesla fatalities, and an investigation by the National Labor Relations Board—plus numerous other lawsuits and regulatory probes. Meanwhile, Musk has filed lawsuits himself, including one against a nonprofit group that opposes hate speech, alleging the organization hurt the site formerly known as Twitter by driving away advertisers. He also threatened to sue a high-profile Jewish group, the Anti-Defamation League, for billions of dollars on similar grounds. Legal observers have described Musk’s claims against the groups as far-fetched.
The torrent of litigation, much of it unnecessary, is frightfully expensive—senior lawyers in some of these cases reportedly bill as much as $2,000 an hour—and often highlights the worst aspects of his character. So why does Musk engage in this behavior?
Musk’s motivations
As the richest man in the world, Musk is far wealthier than most CEOs and, in many aspects of life, can operate entirely within his own set of rules. That includes his legal strategy.
“He’s very wealthy, and so he can do this,” said Ann Lipton, a corporate and securities law professor at Tulane University. “It works because individual actors in the legal system don’t have the resources, time, and motives as Musk.”
Unlike other CEOs, Musk also enjoys a large cult following among his customers and the general public—most of whom are indifferent to his crass or insensitive behavior, or even relish the sight of their billionaire hero thumbing his nose at critics and the law.
“His audience for this isn’t bothered by him being in litigation. There’s no reputational cost for him, unlike there might be for a company like Walgreens,” said Verity Winship, a business law professor at the Illinois College of Law.
Senior lawyers in some of these cases reportedly bill up to $2,000 an hour.
Winship noted that Musk’s eagerness to pick legal fights is unusual for a CEO, but that there are other examples—typically involving those who operated their companies since the very early days. She cites the since-ousted chief executives of Uber and WeWork.
But even as much of Musk’s behavior may be driven by impulse, observers say it also has a strategic purpose. Lipton, the Tulane professor, says his reputation for being litigious serves as a deterrent to critics who might challenge him. She says that over his career, Musk has regularly “stiffed contractors” who, along with other adversaries, have often simply walked away rather than tangle with a billionaire—an assessment shared by his biographer. “He certainly does seem to use lawsuits as a tool to keep his detractors at bay. It’s effective. For as long as I’ve been reporting on Musk, people have been cautious to speak out of fear of litigation,” said Vance.
There is one further reason likely driving Musk’s penchant for litigation: So far, he has been winning.
Musk is victorious—for now
In two of Musk’s most high-profile legal battles—one against angry Tesla shareholders, and another a defamation case against a cave diver—he has gone to court and come out on top. Lipton, however, maintains that two ongoing cases do pose an existential threat to the billionaire and his companies. One of these is a claim in Delaware where investors say his $56 billion pay package at Tesla is unreasonable, in part because Musk has at times required employees at the carmaker to work on projects at his other companies. If the claim succeeds, Musk could be compelled to hand back some of his fortune and potentially to reconsider his cavalier view of legal threats.
Lipton says the other potentially existential case confronting Musk comes in the form of the Justice Department’s investigation into Tesla’s autopilot and “full self-driving” features that have allegedly caused numerous fatalities. The company disclosed in late October that the agency has expanded the scope of its probe with additional subpoenas, and that the investigation could result in material losses. This means criminal charges against both Tesla and its CEO are a real possibility—a development that could hobble the carmaker and result in a massive loss to Musk’s personal fortune.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
