Murdochs Reportedly Endorsed Fox News Plan to Air 2020 Election Fraud Claims, Court Hears.
In a pivotal legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic argued that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a deliberate plan to embrace baseless assertions of voting fraud championed by Donald Trump.
“The conservative viewers, their primary audience, abandoned them,” stated J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “So what do they do? They return back to what they know best: they go back to misinformation, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the fraud allegations were the perfect tool for them to get back onto their central messaging.”
A Multi-Billion Dollar Defamation Lawsuit Hangs in the Balance
In oral arguments, both sides urged with Judge David B Cohen to decide on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7bn defamation lawsuit ahead of a potential trial next year. The company maintains that Fox leaders hatched a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.
Fox's Vehement Rebuttal
A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, vigorously denied these claims. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he stated. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It is made up by opposing counsel.”
He added that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”
The Core Legal Hurdle: Proving “Knowing Falsity”
To win its case, the company must prove that important personnel at Fox News were aware the allegations were false but permitted them to be aired regardless. In its filings, Smartmatic has pointed to internal communications showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also expressing a desire to assist Trump.
The network's attorney countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated damages from the coverage. Fox maintains its hosts were merely reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not promoting them.
“This suit really isn't about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It concerns Smartmatic's attempt to seize on comments made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”
A Precedent Looms Large
Smartmatic's case closely mirror the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's pre-trial rulings were decisive, finding that Fox's statements were untrue and defamatory per se.
That legal decision was later cited as a major reason in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox legal officer remarked that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.
Judge Cohen's Stance
Judge Cohen gave few hints of his leaning but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He said he intended to review all relevant broadcasts before issuing his rulings.
“I think I have sufficient material, data, briefings, diagrams, graphs and all I need to reach a verdict,” he informed the two sides in the case.
