Axel Springer reportedly has its eye on The WSJ, Tucker Carlson goes too far even for Elon Musk and Joe Rogan, newsrooms struggle to candidly describe Marjorie Taylor Greene, TikTok vows to fight divest-or-ban legislation, a Russian court convicts Meta spokesperson Andy Stone, Taylor Swift shatters records (what else is new?), and so much more. But first, the A1.

The National Conspirer

CNN Photo Illustration/Marion Curtis/AP

David Pecker is breaking his silence.

The former National Enquirer boss on Monday became the first witness called to testify in Donald Trump's historic hush-money trial. Sitting in the Manhattan courtroom, Pecker offered illuminating details into how the infamous tabloid operated and conducted so-called "catch and kill" operations.

"We used checkbook journalism," Pecker candidly confessed, "and we paid for stories."

It was the first time that Pecker has spoken publicly about the secret practice — buying exclusive rights to a story for the express purpose of never publishing the information — since the tactic gained widespread notoriety during the 2016 presidential election. The Wall Street Journal, which led the way reporting on the story, first broke news in November 2016 — just days before the election — that Enquirer-parent American Media Inc. had paid former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for the rights to a story about an affair she alleged with Trump.

Pecker also allegedly alerted the Trump camp to adult film star Stormy Daniels' decision to go public with her alleged affair with Trump, which was then captured in a $130,000 hush payment.

But while The Journal and other news outlets reported heavily on how Pecker shielded Trump from the embarrassing affair allegations by purchasing the rights to damaging stories and then never letting them see the light of day, Pecker has never spoken a word about it — until now.

The one-time Trump ally, who was granted immunity by prosecutors to testify in the case, only took the stand for a short period Monday, as court wrapped in the early afternoon. But during his brief time on the witness stand, Pecker confirmed a number of details that news organizations had previously reported about his operation.

Pecker said editors could spend upwards of $10,000 on a story, but that anything more required his explicit approval. And he said that stories of significance had to be approved by him. In other words, as then-chairman of AMI, he was read in on the stories that would have touched Trump. Given their nature, they would have certainly arrived on his desk.

As Pecker testified, Trump sat emotionless as he looked at his one-time ally divulge details about the scheme that has put him in serious legal jeopardy, the CNN team at the courthouse reported. Pecker smiled and said "hi" to Trump's table after stepping down from the witness stand. But the former president, who finds himself forced to sit in a New York court, instead of campaigning across the country, cannot be happy with how this has all played out.

And the trial is only getting underway.

Pecker will be back on the witness stand Tuesday, when court resumes. And over the course of his testimony, he is expected to offer far more information about how the Enquirer, which boosted Trump's candidacy in the 2016 election, protected the Republican frontrunner from the damaging stories. 

While the tawdry details of tabloid journalism are sure to be put on full display, by selecting Pecker as the first witness in the case, prosecutors are clearly banking on his testimony to lay bare the conspiracy to influence the election. On the stand Monday, Pecker said he maintained two email addresses, one for general work and another private one for emails that "I didn't want my assistant to see." 

Given his close friendship with Trump, Pecker's private inbox of salacious tabloid secrets could hold the key to Trump's legal fate. 

CNN Photo Illustration

Creativity in Lieu of Cameras: Without cameras in the courtroom, news networks had to get creative on Monday to relay details from Trump's hush-money trial to audiences. CNN and MSNBC both dedicated a portion of their screens to delivering short live-updates from the courtroom to keep audiences abreast of what was transpiring behind the Manhattan court's closed doors. In effect, live-blogs — which all major newsrooms featured on their homepages — were broadcast on television. "For the next several weeks, networks will have to convey important developments from the trial with one hand tied behind their back," The NYT's John Koblin observed. "During Monday’s broadcasts, cable network anchors and correspondents often sounded like they were on the radio, taking an occasional stab with some play-by-play." The AP's David Bauder also has more here.

Two other notes on the coverage:

► After court concluded, Trump delivered one of his trademark lie-filled rants outside of court, this one lasting almost 10 minutes. He falsely said the New York case has been orchestrated by President Joe Biden, claiming it is "coming out of the White House" and that it's a "Biden witch hunt," neither of which are true. Trump also lashed out at the presiding judge, calling him "conflicted," while also opining on a number of topics, including violent crime. On cable news, CNN took all of it live, followed by a panel which fact-checked the unhinged remarks. MSNBC also took the majority of it live before cutting away to a fact-check. Fox News aired it all and, instead of running a fact-check, praised the GOP frontrunner.  

► While actual news outlets were in wall-to-wall special coverage mode covering opening arguments in the historic and unprecedented trial, Fox News was not. Instead, the right-wing network, which even in 2024 still purports to cover the news in a nonpartisan manner, was carrying its standard fare of programming, running through a list of stories as if the trial did not warrant special attention. It goes without saying the channel would be apocalyptic if Biden were facing criminal charges.

CNN Photo Illustration/Joe Rogan Experience

Carlson's Cocktail of Conspiracies: Did you catch Tucker Carlson on Joe Rogan's Spotify show? If not, you didn't miss anything but the right-wing extremist and one-time Fox News host peddling a deluge of absurdities. In one breath, Carlson asserted there was no evidence to support Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. And in another breath, Carlson argued there was plenty of evidence aliens are living amongst us on Earth. Carlson's comments were so ridiculous that they prompted pushback from Rogan and generated mockery from Elon Musk, who rarely meets a conspiracy theory that he does not find appealing. Yikes! Mediaite's Zachary Leeman has more on that here.

🔎 Zooming in: The comments from Carlson show how desperate the one-time GOP kingmaker has become to draw attention to himself. While Carlson exploited shock-jock type commentary to generate headlines during his time at Fox News, he has really jumped the shark since being fired by the right-wing network, swimming deep in the conspiratorial waters on subjects ranging from aliens to immigration.

Newsrooms Can't Handle the Truth?: News networks are avoiding the honest truth when reporting on Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. The proper descriptor for Greene is not "ultra-conservative" or some offshoot of that. House Speaker Mike Johnson is an ultra-conservative. Greene and some of her allies in Congress are something else: right-wing extremists. Why is that so hard for major newsrooms to say? Most news outlets would not call Alex Jones an "ultra-conservative." They would (rightly) call him a right-wing conspiracy theorist, among other things. But too many journalists appear afraid to even-handedly apply the same label to elected officials and other, more popular right-wing media personalities. Whatever the reason, it is giving audiences an incomplete — and arguably inaccurate — understanding of the ideas these people are espousing.

CNN Photo Illustration/Celal Gunes/Anadolu/Getty Images

TikTok Vows to Get Tough: TikTok is preparing to fight. The company behind the short-form video app declared Monday that it will file a lawsuit should Congress pass its divest-or-ban legislation, which is expected to swiftly sail through the Senate and ultimately be signed into law by President Joe Biden. "At the stage that the bill is signed [by Biden], we will move to the courts for a legal challenge," TikTok policy chief Michael Beckerman wrote to staff in a memo, describing the legislation as "an unprecedented deal worked out between the Republican Speaker [Mike Johnson] and President Biden.” Beckerman added that the likely passage of the legislation will mark "the beginning, not the end" of what he described as a "long process." CNN's Brian Fung has more here.

► Meanwhile, Donald Trump, who has shifted his position 180º on TikTok and now opposes banning the app, is using the issue in an attempt to get younger voters to coalesce behind him.

CNN Photo Illustration/Taylor Swift

The Tortured Poets Sensation: She might not be Patti Smith, but Taylor Swift has no trouble getting people to listen to her music. Swift's latest album, "The Tortured Poets Department," became the most-streamed album across Spotify, Amazon Music, and Apple Music. On Spotify alone, "TTPD" amassed 300 million streams on Friday, breaking the streaming platform's record for the most-streamed album in a single day. After only three days, Amazon was ready to declare it the service's "most-streamed album worldwide in its first week." CNN's Liam Reilly has more here.

► While the world is spinning Swift's album, some critics have been less than impressed. The NYT's Lindsay Zoladz said Swift "could use an editor," effectively arguing the 31-track album could have been cut down. And The New Yorker's Amanda Petrusich also declared the album "suffers from being too long and too familiar," adding that it suggests "after a decade, her partnership with [Jack Antonoff] has perhaps run its course."