View this email in your browser

Received this email from a friend? Subscribe here.

Nine minutes after Meta announced that it will allow Donald Trump back on its platforms, the disgraced ex-president was on his own Truth Social app posting about supposed election fraud in the 2020 election. 

It's nothing unusual for Trump. A research report published earlier this month by the watchdog group Accountable Tech found that Trump had written more than 200 posts containing "harmful election-related disinformation" since he was banished from Meta's platforms.

But now, once again, Trump is Meta's problem. The social media giant announced on Wednesday, unsurprisingly, that Trump will be permitted back on Facebook and Instagram, setting the stage for some thorny content moderation calls in the weeks, months, and years ahead.

And those content moderation calls are likely to be contentious.

For instance, a Meta spokesperson told me that Trump will be permitted to attack the results of the 2020 election without facing consequences from the company. However, the spokesperson said, if Trump were to cast doubt on an upcoming election — like, the 2024 presidential race — the social giant will take action. In those cases, Meta might limit the distribution of the violative post or restrict access to advertising tools.

But attacks on the 2020 election will only serve to cast doubt on the integrity of future elections. And Meta will undoubtedly face scrutiny for its high-stakes decisions on the issue as Trump inevitably approaches the line.

But this is only one aspect of the murky content moderation waters that Meta will find itself in. As Accountable Tech noted in its report, Trump has posted a number of things in recent years on Truth Social that would seemingly violate the company's community standards. Accountable Tech found that Trump had attacked racial minorities (remember when he posted that racist attack last year on Mitch McConnell's wife?) and amplified the deranged QAnon conspiracy theory to his followers more than 100 times.

And then there will surely be reprehensible, antidemocratic comments that Trump will make on Facebook that perhaps don't outright violate the company rules, despite how ugly they may be, but which ignite outrage and throw Meta into the spotlight. For example, last week, Trump raged on Truth Social that he believed the reporters, and perhaps editors, of Politico's scoop on the leaked Roe v. Wade decision should be jailed until they disclose their source(s).

Nick Clegg, president of global affairs at Meta, previewed how the company will respond to those sorts of nasty posts when he — and notably not Mark Zuckerberg — announced the return of Trump. Clegg argued that "the fact is people will always say all kinds of things on the internet."

"We default to letting people speak, even when what they have to say is distasteful or factually wrong," Clegg added. "Democracy is messy and people should be able to make their voices heard. We believe it is both necessary and possible to draw a line between content that is harmful and should be removed, and content that, however distasteful or inaccurate, is part of the rough and tumble of life in a free society."

———  BELOW THE FOLD  ———

Disclose The Docs: The New York Times and NPR asked a judge on Wednesday to unseal a trove of documents in Dominion Voting Systems $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against right-wing channel Fox News. “This lawsuit is unquestionably a consequential defamation case that tests the scope of the First Amendment,” the pair of news organizations said in the filing. Spokespersons for Dominion and Fox News did not immediately provide a comment. But David McCraw, deputy general counsel of The Times, told me in a statement, "The public has a right to transparent judicial proceedings to ensure that the law is being applied fairly. That is especially important in a case that touches upon political issues that have deeply divided the country." Here's my full story.

WaPo Waffles: The Washington Post is apparently happy to do business with companies that engage in the censorship of journalists. On Wednesday, I noticed that the newspaper was advertising on Twitter, despite the platform having baselessly banned a number of journalists — including Drew Harwell, one of its own reporters — late last year.

Twitter has not only failed to fully restore the accounts of journalists it banned (which include CNN's Donie O'Sullivan and The NYT's Ryan Mac), but owner Elon Musk effectively smeared the reporters in the immediate aftermath of the bans by falsely claiming they had "basically" posted "assassination coordinates" by sharing his "exact real-time location" (they did not). At the time, WaPo Executive Editor Sally Buzbee put out a strongly worded statement, demanding Harwell be reinstated on Twitter. But, as they say, actions speak louder than words. And WaPo's willingness to send its ad dollars to a billionaire who regularly bashes the press — well, that says a lot.

🤫 Mum is the word: A WaPo spokesperson did not provide a comment when reached Wednesday night about the paper's move to advertise on Twitter.

Murdoch's Margins: Wall Street reacted positively on Wednesday to Rupert Murdoch's decision to withdraw his proposal to reunite both Fox Corp. and News Corp. Fox shares ended the day up nearly 3% and News Corp. popped almost 6%. But the question still lingers: Why precisely was the deal called off? Was it because of the potential sale of News Corp.'s Move for $3 billion? Or was it something else? THR's Georg Szalai reported that, behind the scenes, James Murdoch had raised concerns about the proposed merger. Cowen analyst Doug Creutz said he believed the deal was abandoned because of pushback from investors. Meanwhile, Wolfe Research analyst Peter Supino said he believed Dominion Voting Systems' lawsuit against Fox "was a meaningful obstacle" as well. Szalai has more here.

CNET Comes Clean: Yikes! CNET said on Wednesday that it had completed its review of stories it published using an AI tool — not ChatGPT — and found errors in many more of them. The Verge's Mia Sato and Emma Roth reported that CNET issued corrections on 41 of its 77 stories. CNET's editor-in-chief, Connie Guglielmo published a note to readers coming clean with the errors. But Guglielmo defended the process of using AI and said the outlet will "continue exploring and testing" how the technology "can be used to help our teams as they go about" doing their jobs. "The process may not always be easy or pretty, but we're going to continue embracing it – and any new tech that we believe makes life better," Guglielmo wrote, adding CNET has introduced new steps to catch potential mistakes. We'll see if that works.

Newsmax Gets The Boot: The right-wing channel Newsmax was in 13 million fewer homes on Wednesday. That's because DirecTV pulled the plug on the network after the two sides could not reach a renewal agreement. In short, DirecTV refused to pay Newsmax a carriage fee, noting that the channel's content is free to viewers and provided at no charge on streaming platforms such as Roku. Newsmax responded to getting boot by accusing DirecTV of bias and censorship. "This is a blatant act of political discrimination and censorship against Newsmax," CEO Christopher Ruddy said in a statement. Bloomberg's Todd Shields has details here. 

► Of note: Newsmax has strong support among Republican lawmakers. Dozens have sent a letter to the company and warned that congressional hearings could take place on the matter. And the network is seeking to capitalize on this support, with hosts telling viewers to contact members of Congress and demand an investigation into "potential discrimination against conservative networks." The Daily Beast's Justin Baragona has more.

Musk's Debt Dilemma: Elon Musk has explored "using as much as $3 billion in potential new fundraising to help repay some of the $13 billion in debt tacked onto Twitter for his buyout of the company," The WSJ's Berber Jin and Alexander Saeedy reported Wednesday, citing sources. The reporting duo added that in December Musk considered selling up to $3 billion in Twitter shares. Read the full story here.

► Kara Swisher's reaction: "Looking forward to seeing who swallows this deal ... he will get the $ — it’s just a question of what he has to do to get it."

WGA Nominations Arrive: It's not just the Academy announcing nominations this week. The Writers Guild of America also unveiled nominations on Wednesday for three categories. Among those who got the nod were, "Everything Everywhere All at Once," "Top Gun," "The Menu," "Nope," "Tár," and "Black Panther." THR has the full list here. 

Thank you for reading! This newsletter was edited by Jon Passantino. Have feedback? Send us an email here. We will see you back in your inbox this time tomorrow.