Murdochs Allegedly Blessed Fox News Strategy to Broadcast 2020 Election Fraud Allegations, Court Hears.
During a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that top leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious strategy to embrace false claims of voting fraud championed by Donald Trump.
“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “What was their response? They return back to what they know best: they go back to misinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the election fraud claims were the ideal tool for them to return to their central messaging.”
A Massive Libel Case Hangs in the Balance
During oral arguments, both sides pleaded with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to decide on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7bn legal action before a potential trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox leaders devised a plan to “shift” to the former president's allegations to recapture disaffected viewers.
Fox's Vehement Rebuttal
A lawyer for Fox News, speaking for the network, strongly contested these claims. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he stated. “It is completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It was fabricated by opposing counsel.”
He added that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”
The Central Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”
For Smartmatic to prevail, the voting firm must prove that key figures at Fox News knew the fraud claims lacked truth but allowed them to be aired anyway. In its filings, Smartmatic cited private messages 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 argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated damages from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its hosts were merely discussing newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not promoting them.
“This suit is not truly about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” the Fox lawyer stated. “It concerns Smartmatic's effort to seize on comments made by the president's lawyers to rescue its business viability.”
A Precedent Looms Large
The arguments closely mirror the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, ruling that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.
That ruling was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox executive remarked that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.
Judge Cohen's Position
Judge Cohen offered few hints of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “hard sell.” He stated he planned to review all relevant television segments before making a decision.
“I think I have sufficient material, data, briefings, diagrams, charts and all I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the lawsuit.
