Murdochs Reportedly Endorsed Fox News Strategy to Broadcast 2020 Election Fraud Claims, Court Hears.
In a key legal proceeding on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology firm Smartmatic argued that senior leaders at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious plan to embrace false assertions of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.
“Their core viewers, their primary audience, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They return back to what they know best: they return back to misinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the election fraud claims were the ideal vehicle for them to return to their core messaging.”
A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Hangs in the Balance
In oral arguments, both sides urged with Judge David B Cohen to decide on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7bn legal action ahead of a potential trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox executives devised a plan to “shift” to the former president's allegations to win back angry viewers.
The Network's Strong Rebuttal
K Winn Allen, speaking for the network, strongly contested these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was authorized,” he stated. “It is completely false. The evidence does not support it. It is hogwash. It was fabricated by lawyers on the other side.”
He further asserted that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”
The Central Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”
For Smartmatic to prevail, the company will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but allowed them to be aired regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to private messages showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.
The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its value and the projected damages from the coverage. Fox maintains its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's allies, not endorsing them.
“This lawsuit really isn't about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It's about Smartmatic's attempt to seize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its business viability.”
A Previous Case Looms Large
Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the successful legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions proved critical, ruling that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.
That ruling was later cited as a key factor in Fox's choice to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox executive noted that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.
Judge Cohen's Position
Judge Cohen offered no clear hints of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He said he planned to examine all pertinent television segments before making a decision.
“I think I have more than enough material, data, legal briefs, diagrams, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he told the two sides in the lawsuit.
