In a plot twist that absolutely no one saw coming except perhaps everyone, Elon Musk’s X, formerly known as Twitter but now apparently the spiritual successor to late-night infomercials and gladiator coliseums, is suing Media Matters for what it calls a “maliciously fabricated” report that suggested major advertisers were cozying up next to Nazi content like it was a first date at a dive bar.
The lawsuit, filed in the Northern District of Texas, claims that Media Matters intentionally manipulated the X platform to create juxtapositions of hate speech and blue-chip brand ads, then splashed those pairings across a widely circulated report faster than you can say “X is not Twitter.” The report led to several major companies including IBM, Apple and Disney pulling their ads faster than a cat fleeing a vacuum cleaner.
X contends that these ad pairings were not just unlikely but so statistically implausible that a reasonable person would be more likely to stumble upon Bigfoot tending bar at a Starbucks than see those ads next to Nazi content in the wild. Media Matters, on the other hand, stands by its work, calmly clutching its press statement like a journalist clutches their ethically-sourced cold brew and asserting that X’s algorithm serves up these pairings with alarming consistency for real users, not just motivated testers.
Media Matters president Angelo Carusone responded with the kind of bravado usually reserved for courtroom dramas, declaring the lawsuit to be “frivolous” and “meant to bully critics.” Legal scholars have noted that while “free speech absolutism” is one thing, suing watchdog groups for watchdogging might be another entirely, and that Texas courts may soon find themselves navigating the philosophical terrain where content moderation, advertising algorithms and intentional outrage intersect in a puff of digital confusion.
Meanwhile, Musk, seemingly unbothered by the firestorm, continues to alternate between vague free speech crusades and casually retweeting conspiracy theorists like a man caught between running a social media company and LARPing as the First Amendment. X insists it’s a platform for everyone, including brands who do not wish to appear beside posts extolling the virtues of the Third Reich and users who definitely didn’t ask for any of this.
The court will now have the unenviable task of determining what constitutes manipulation, what represents organic user experience and what, if anything, still makes sense about online advertising in the year 2024.
Even in the digital Wild West, some tumbleweeds just sue back.