4 ms·

Missouri AG sues Media Matters over its X research, demands donor names

35 points by colinprince 3y ago

spacechild1 3y ago
> Bailey's lawsuit claims that "Media Matters has used fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to trick advertisers into removing their advertisements from X, formerly Twitter, one of the last platforms dedicated to free speech in America." The last sentence really says it all. They don't even try to hide their agenda.
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  > They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. — JCAS Luckily the US legal system —at least as I remember it— prefers sound argument to being misused by bad-faith actors.
  - sidibe 3y ago
    These culture warrior AGs aren't usually worried over the legal battles they are fighting for attention and Elon will definitely notice this
- MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - locopati 3y ago
    Do you really believe X, Musk, and the Republican Missouri AG are committed to free speech?
    - palmfacehn 3y ago
      What does it mean to "be committed to free speech" ?
      - LocalH 3y ago
        Certainly not what any of the involved parties are doing
  - latexr 3y ago
    It’s been shown over and over that that “commitment” is nothing more than lip service. https://www.vice.com/en/article/88xqnv/elon-musk-censors-twitter-in-turkey https://www.vice.com/en/article/88xqnv/elon-musk-censors-twi... https://text.npr.org/1239549276 https://text.npr.org/1239549276 You can search for more examples. He’s frequently suing, banning, and firing people who say things he doesn’t like. It has become abundantly clear that he has very thin skin and all that barking about “free speech” means “speech he wants”.
  - harimau777 3y ago
    Republicans have started using "committed to free speech" as a euphemism for "doesn't censor hate speech or misinformation". The problem with that isn't that it's impossible to make an argument that "protecting free speech" should cover that, the problem is that they are hiding that controversial argument behind the less controversial argument to protect free speech.
    - 36236233 3y ago
      Is this really unique to Republicans though? This seems like the kind of sleight of hand that is just the current norm in American public discourse. The equivalent from the Democrats would be basically any article about politicians legislating against something like "healthcare for trans teens" when what they really mean is "puberty blockers for teenagers" or "sex change operations for teenagers". Hiding the controversy to pretend at normalcy is just the present state of dialogue in America.
- rayiner 3y ago
  [flagged]
beardyw 3y ago
> Musk previously sued Media Matters over the article, claiming the group "manipulated the algorithms governing the user experience on X to bypass safeguards and create images of X's largest advertisers' paid posts adjacent to racist, incendiary content." So Is this saying X has "racist, incendiary content"? I never knew.
ametrau 3y ago
I can see both sides here but I think media matters is mostly in the wrong. All platforms can be smeared like this if you set up perfect conditions. How many times has this happened with Facebook?
- qarl 3y ago
  If you check the dictionary, the definition of "smear" requires that the accusations must be false.
  - sparky_z 3y ago
    Okay, I'll bite. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smear https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smear Noun: "a usually unsubstantiated charge or accusation against a person or organization—often used attributively" Verb: "to vilify especially by secretly and maliciously spreading grave charges and imputations" Don't see a definition that "requires" the accusations are literally false. Maybe you're using a different dictionary?
    - qarl 3y ago
      I didn't cherry-pick my dictionary; I just used plain old Google. "damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander."
      - palmfacehn 3y ago
        >>"... if you set up perfect conditions" >"I didn't cherry-pick..."
        qarl 3y ago
        Who said "if you set up perfect conditions"? Why are you trolling me?
        palmfacehn 3y ago
palmfacehn 3y ago
[flagged]
foogazi 3y ago
Nothings says “committed to free speech” like “seeking names and addresses of all Media Matters donors who live in Missouri” lol at these culture warrior hacks

35 points by colinprince 3y ago

> Bailey's lawsuit claims that "Media Matters has used fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to trick advertisers into removing their advertisements from X, formerly Twitter, one of the last platforms dedicated to free speech in America." The last sentence really says it all. They don't even try to hide their agenda.

082349872349872 3y ago
> They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. — JCAS Luckily the US legal system —at least as I remember it— prefers sound argument to being misused by bad-faith actors.
- sidibe 3y ago
  These culture warrior AGs aren't usually worried over the legal battles they are fighting for attention and Elon will definitely notice this
MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
[flagged]
- locopati 3y ago
  Do you really believe X, Musk, and the Republican Missouri AG are committed to free speech?
  - palmfacehn 3y ago
    What does it mean to "be committed to free speech" ?
    - LocalH 3y ago
      Certainly not what any of the involved parties are doing
- latexr 3y ago
  It’s been shown over and over that that “commitment” is nothing more than lip service. https://www.vice.com/en/article/88xqnv/elon-musk-censors-twitter-in-turkey https://www.vice.com/en/article/88xqnv/elon-musk-censors-twi... https://text.npr.org/1239549276 https://text.npr.org/1239549276 You can search for more examples. He’s frequently suing, banning, and firing people who say things he doesn’t like. It has become abundantly clear that he has very thin skin and all that barking about “free speech” means “speech he wants”.
- harimau777 3y ago
  Republicans have started using "committed to free speech" as a euphemism for "doesn't censor hate speech or misinformation". The problem with that isn't that it's impossible to make an argument that "protecting free speech" should cover that, the problem is that they are hiding that controversial argument behind the less controversial argument to protect free speech.
  - 36236233 3y ago
    Is this really unique to Republicans though? This seems like the kind of sleight of hand that is just the current norm in American public discourse. The equivalent from the Democrats would be basically any article about politicians legislating against something like "healthcare for trans teens" when what they really mean is "puberty blockers for teenagers" or "sex change operations for teenagers". Hiding the controversy to pretend at normalcy is just the present state of dialogue in America.
rayiner 3y ago
[flagged]

beardyw 3y ago

> Musk previously sued Media Matters over the article, claiming the group "manipulated the algorithms governing the user experience on X to bypass safeguards and create images of X's largest advertisers' paid posts adjacent to racist, incendiary content." So Is this saying X has "racist, incendiary content"? I never knew.

ametrau 3y ago

I can see both sides here but I think media matters is mostly in the wrong. All platforms can be smeared like this if you set up perfect conditions. How many times has this happened with Facebook?

qarl 3y ago
If you check the dictionary, the definition of "smear" requires that the accusations must be false.
- sparky_z 3y ago
  Okay, I'll bite. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smear https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smear Noun: "a usually unsubstantiated charge or accusation against a person or organization—often used attributively" Verb: "to vilify especially by secretly and maliciously spreading grave charges and imputations" Don't see a definition that "requires" the accusations are literally false. Maybe you're using a different dictionary?
  - qarl 3y ago
    I didn't cherry-pick my dictionary; I just used plain old Google. "damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander."
    - palmfacehn 3y ago
      >>"... if you set up perfect conditions" >"I didn't cherry-pick..."
      - qarl 3y ago
        Who said "if you set up perfect conditions"? Why are you trolling me?
        palmfacehn 3y ago

palmfacehn 3y ago

[flagged]

foogazi 3y ago

Nothings says “committed to free speech” like “seeking names and addresses of all Media Matters donors who live in Missouri” lol at these culture warrior hacks