View this email in your browser

Received this email from a friend? Subscribe here.

It's a big — and potentially pivotal — week for Section 230. 

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Gonzalez v. Google. And on Wednesday, justices will hear arguments in the case of Twitter v. Taamneh. 

The two cases are, of course, different. But Section 230 lies at the heart of them. The challenges to the law, which offers broad protections to technology giants when it comes to liability for user-generated content, could have far-reaching consequences for the internet and how it operates.

In the case of Gonzales, the plaintiffs have argued that Section 230 protections should not extend to the algorithm YouTube uses to sort content. The plaintiffs have contended that the algorithm violated the Anti-Terrorism Act by promoting ISIS videos through its recommendation engine.

But Google has hit back that it is critical Section 230 protect algorithmic rankings. The search engine giant's lawyer, Lisa Blatt, noted Tuesday that "all publishing requires organization" and that "helping users find the proverbial needle in the haystack is an existential necessity on the internet."

"Exposing websites to liability for implicitly recommending third-party context defies the text and threatens today’s internet," Blatt said.

The justices on Tuesday also appeared hesitant to restrict the legal shield that has shaped the internet as we know it. Across ideological lines, justices on the court voiced concern over the potential consequences of narrowing the scope of the Communications Decency Act's key provision.

"Lawsuits will be nonstop," Justice Brett Kavanaugh said.

"You are creating a world of lawsuits," Justice Elena Kagan echoed. "Really, anytime you have content, you also have these presentational and prioritization choices that can be subject to suit."

The attorney representing the plaintiffs, Eric Schnapper, attempted to downplay the ramifications a ruling might have. "The implications are limited," Schnapper insisted to the panel of judges.

But supporters of Section 230 disagree. They have argued that peeling back its protections could have massive implications and unravel the structure holding up the internet. Even some of Google's fiercest critics, such as Yelp, submitted amicus briefs warning about the potential damage that could be wrought.

The crucial decision will now rest in the hands of the Supreme Court's nine justices — justices who on Tuesday openly expressed some confusion and conceded that they are not necessarily experts on the subject matter.

"I mean, we’re a court. We really don’t know about these things," Kagan acknowledged to some laughter. "You know, these are not like the nine greatest experts on the internet."

———  BELOW THE FOLD  ———

Don Returns: CNN anchor Don Lemon will be back on the air Wednesday. His return to "CNN This Morning" will mark his first appearance on the network since he made sexist comments last week about when women are supposedly "in their prime." The comments, which came during a discussion about Nikki Haley's campaign, have sparked internal and external backlash. CNN boss Chris Licht said late Monday night in a memo to staffers that Lemon has "agreed to participate in formal training" and will continue to "listen and learn." But, Licht said he wanted to foster "a culture in which people can own, learn and grow from their mistakes." So Lemon, Licht said, will return Wednesday. It goes without saying that eyes will be on Lemon to see how — or if — he addresses his comments.

Murdoch's Message Move: Last month, when Rupert Murdoch announced that he would abandon his bid to reunite Fox Corporation and News Corporation under one roof, anonymous sources told some news outlets that the latter company was in talks to sell its real-estate division Move Inc. to CoStar Group for roughly $3 billion. The sources helped propel a narrative that the sale was a key factor — perhaps the key factor — for the deal's sudden demise, and not the more likely reason that it had run into strong opposition from key investors.

Fast forward a few weeks and the talks to sell Move to CoStar have now been abandoned. NewsCorp confirmed Tuesday that "it is no longer engaged in discussions" with CoStar to sell Move. The company said it will "continue to actively assess opportunities" to "optimize the value" of its real-estate arm, but declined to comment further on the matter. While the talks are now dead, it offered Murdoch a convenient way to avoid embarrassment as he faced the reality that his merger would not actually happen. 🤔

The Temple of Tucker: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries expressed dismay Tuesday that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy granted Tucker Carlson access to security footage taken during the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, calling it "an egregious security breach." Carlson, a 1/6 truther and one of the biggest proponents of conspiracy theories about the attack, regularly uses his prime time perch to sow doubt about the reality of the insurrection. So it's clear what he will do with the footage. McCarthy has effectively provided Carlson ink to rewrite the history of that horrible day. Or, to be more clear: McCarthy is effectively Carlson's accomplice, helping the Fox News talk host mislead the American public about the 1/6 attack.

🔎 Zooming In: McCarthy's move to bow to Carlson's demand to release the tapes reflects the reality of the Republican Party. Carlson is the one calling the shots and setting the agenda — not the old guard represented by lawmakers like McCarthy. In fact, most Republicans are terrified of Carlson and getting on his bad side. Which is why you see them regularly grovel to him.

Dominion Voting Systems' explosive legal filing detailing the inner workings of Fox News has arguably exposed one of the biggest media scandals in modern times. Starting with tonight's edition, and in the days ahead, we will explore the revelations that the document has brought to light.

Murdoch's Mission: In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Rupert Murdoch had a directive to Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott. The Fox boss emailed Scott on November 16, telling her to avoid antagonizing Trump. Instead, Murdoch said, "We should concentrate on Georgia, helping any way we can." Murdoch didn't mention a specific political party or candidate. But it's pretty clear what he meant: Fox News should help Republican incumbent Kelly Loeffler defeat Democratic candidate (and now senator) Raphael Warnock. That instruction from Murdoch, while not shocking, underscores the lack of basic news ethics he has instilled at the right-wing channel. If any executive at an actual news network ordered staffers to help a political party, it would be a fireable offense. But at Fox News? It comes from the top boss.

► Bill Grueskin's latest: "In the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election, Fox was not so much a finely tuned business as a Fortune 500 clown car."

Meta's Money Move: How successful will Meta's new verification business be? Well, it could generate a whopping 12 million subscribers by 2024, a Bank of America research note said Tuesday. That translates to what BofA said could be $1.7 billion in "high-margin revenue in 2024." CNBC's Jonathan Varian has more here.

► Gizmodo's Thomas Germain argues: "Meta copying Twitter Blue proves Elon Musk right." 

► WIRED's Chris Stokel-Walker counters: "Meta Verified shows a company running out of ideas." 

The End of Marvel Magic?: By the box office numbers, the latest "Ant-Man and the Wasp" film is a success. But THR's Pamela McClintock pointed out in a smart piece Tuesday that the film, which earned a mere B CinemaScore from audiences, should still give Marvel some reason to worry. "Through the years, MCU movies have almost always drawn glowing CinemaScore grades from audiences, with nearly 70 percent of titles earning an A CinemaScore from audiences, or some variation thereof (A+, A and A-)," McClintock wrote. "That has been changing in recent years. Of the five films with a B or a B+ (none have earned a B- or below) four are among Marvel’s most recent six pics." That's not good for the billion-dollar franchise. As one rival studio exec told McClintock, "You have to start worrying about Marvel franchise fatigue."

Going For The Gold: The Golden Globe Awards will return to Sunday night for its next telecast, which is set to be held on Jan. 7, 2024. (This year it aired on a Tuesday.) Variety's Matt Donnelly reported Tuesday that a distributor for the show hasn't been finalized yet, but that the Golden Globes "are entertaining multiple offers from potential distribution partners." Will NBC, which historically has broadcast the event, score the rights once again? Or will a streamer, such as Netflix, sneak in and ink a deal. We'll see.

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 tomorrow.