Even Twitter isn’t claiming that Media Matters somehow broke their algorithm (unsurprisingly, since that makes Twitter look terrible):
The lawsuit filed Monday accuses Media Matters of publishing a report that distorted the likelihood of ads appearing beside extremist content on X, a move the social media company says led major and influential advertisers to suspend their campaigns en masse. The company alleges that the group’s testing methodology was not representative of how real users experience the site and calls for a judge to force Media Matters to take down the analysis.
The case appears to be a “bogus” attempt to chill criticism in a way that “flatly contradicts basic First Amendment principles,” Ted Boutrous, a First Amendment attorney with years of experience dealing with the tech industry, told CNN. Boutrous added that the case could backfire for X in the discovery phase, as Media Matters could demand internal information that, if presented at trial, could prove embarrassing or highly damaging to the social media company.
The lawsuit also contains “fatal flaws” by conceding that ads did, in fact, appear beside extremist content, regardless of how Media Matters achieved that result, according to Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas and a CNN contributor.
“The complaint admits that the thing Media Matters was making a big deal about actually happened,” Vladeck said. “Most companies wouldn’t want their ads running next to neo-Nazi content even once, and wouldn’t care about the exact percentage of users who were encountering such side-by-side placement.”
Contrary to the complaint, Media Matters “never claimed that what it found was typical of other users’ experience,” Vladeck added.
vivadanang@lemm.ee 6 months ago
it was completely organic. no outside-twitter resources were used to achieve the result - they literally used twitter’s tools and proved it could happen readily. That’s all advertisers need to see to bug the fuck out.
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
We have different definitions of organic. I think the fact that only they saw some of the pairings shows it’s something no legitimate user did.
You don’t have to modify a lawn mower to flip it upside down and throw cats in it my friend.
vivadanang@lemm.ee 6 months ago
no you just have to be a psychopath to suggest it.
did they break twitter, inject code, falsify user records, hack anything? No.
They used the service as it’s intended - picked some people and brands to follow then refreshed their feed. Buddy, that’s as organic as manure - and even if it somehow was gamed, dozens of other instances of hate shit being positioned aside brands THAT RIGHTFULLY DON’T WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH HATE SHIT have been posted - it’s not just media matters.
it’s not just the ADL’s criticism.
GET IT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING MELON - Musk’s the problem. Your refusal to see the obvious is sad.
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Ah. Miss the point and make a stupid medical diagnosis? Not the best start. I’ll get back to this.
If it’s organic why did nobody else see the combo? They literally behaved in a way no other user has, and it was contrived to find edge cases in the ad service. It’s not organic use.
We’re talking about facts and definitions. There’s no reason for you to be this worked up, angry or vile to other people.
vxx@lemmy.world 6 months ago
If your lawnmower is faulty and you find out after a couple of uses, I don’t claim it only counts if the lawnmower was used by each person once.
PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
When nobody has a problem with your millions of mowers except one guy, we usually ask what’s wrong with the guy rather than the mower.