News
Attorney General files suit against Media Matters over alleged anti-X initiatives
Attorney General Andrew Bailey has filed a lawsuit against Media Matters of America in an attempt to force the nonprofit to turn over documents that are allegedly related to its efforts to bully advertisers out of social media X. Media Matters published a report last year claiming X was showing advertisements from major corporations alongside extremist content.
X has defended itself against Media Matters’ claims, arguing that the nonprofit essentially manipulated the social media platform’s system by specifically following accounts only known to produce provocative content and accounts of the company’s big-time advertisers. X noted that Media Matters then reportedly scrolled and refreshed its feed an unnatural number of times until a screenshot could be taken showing paid posts from a major advertiser next to controversial content.
In a press release, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey noted that he launched an investigation into Media Matters’ practices after alleged evidence came to light suggesting that the nonprofit was soliciting “donations from Missourians under false pretenses to target X.” This, the Attorney General argued, was “in direct violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act.”
“My office has reason to believe Media Matters used fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to bully advertisers into pulling out of X, the last social media platform dedicated to free speech in America, so we launched an investigation to get to the bottom of it. However, Media Matters has a sordid history of refusing to cooperate with investigations. I’m not going to let this activist group stonewall us. If there has been any attempt to defraud Missourians in order to trample on their free speech rights, I will root it out and hold bad actors accountable,” Bailey wrote.
X owner Elon Musk has praised the Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey‘s legal action.
Much appreciated!
Media Matters is doing everything it can to undermine the First Amendment. Truly an evil organization.— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 25, 2024
Following is a pertinent portion of the Missouri Attorney General’s press release.
Media Matters came under fire after allegations surfaced that the organization deceitfully manipulated X’s algorithm to place advertisers’ content next to contrived controversial posts, causing X to suffer astronomical financial losses when affected advertisers pulled their money from the site. Media Matters has been outspoken in its attempts to defame X for its refusal to censor disfavored viewpoints.
General Bailey’s lawsuit details how, “Media Matters, a self-styled not-for-profit ‘progressive research and information center,’ envisions itself monitoring, analyzing, and correcting ‘conservative misinformation’ in the U.S. media. In fact, this description falls far short of reality for this political activist organization. Instead, rather than passively ‘monitoring,’ Media Matters has used fraud to solicit donations from Missourians in order to trick advertisers into removing their advertisements from X, formerly Twitter, one of the last platforms dedicated to free speech in America.”
The suit further notes, “Media Matters has pursued an activist agenda in its attempt to destroy X, because they cannot control it. And because they cannot control it, or the free speech platform it provides to Missourians to express their own viewpoints in the public square, the radical ‘progressives’ at Media Matters have resorted to fraud to, as Benjamin Franklin once said, mark X ‘for the odium of the public, as an enemy to the liberty of the press.’ Missourians will not be manipulated by ‘progressive’ activists masquerading as news outlets, and they will not be defrauded in the process.”
The suit asserts, “Based on serious allegations of false and deceptive behavior, the Attorney General’s Office has issued a Civil Investigative Demand (‘CID’), as authorized by Missouri Law, to Media Matters to investigate possible violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. Because Media Matters has refused such efforts in other states and made clear that it will refuse any such efforts, the Attorney General seeks an order from the Court, 2 pursuant to section 407.090, compelling Media Matters to comply with the CID within 20 days.”
Media Matters has responded to the Missouri Attorney General’s legal action. In a comment, Media Matters President Angelo Carusone criticized Elon Musk, stating that the investigation is meritless and it is a way for the CEO to punish his critics. He also noted that the lawsuit is part of an attempt to curb free speech.
“Far from the free speech advocate he claims to be, Elon Musk has actually intensified his efforts to undermine free speech by enlisting Republican attorneys general across the country to initiate meritless, expensive, and harassing investigations against Media Matters in an attempt to punish critics. This Missouri investigation is the latest in a transparent endeavor to squelch the First Amendment rights of researchers and reporters; it will have a chilling effect on news reporters,” Carusone noted.
Following is the Missouri Attorney General’s Investigative Demand, as well as his lawsuit against Media Matters.
Final CID to Media Matters by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Final Media Matters Petition by Simon Alvarez
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
