🔗 Share this article

During a key court hearing on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology company Smartmatic contended that senior leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious strategy to adopt baseless claims of voting fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, deserted 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 disinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election story and the election fraud claims was the ideal vehicle for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Massive Libel Lawsuit Is at Stake

In oral arguments, both sides urged with Judge David B Cohen to rule on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7bn defamation lawsuit before a potential trial in the coming year. The plaintiff argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “shift” to Trump's claims to recapture angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

K Winn Allen, speaking for the network, vigorously denied these accusations. “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 lawyers on the other side.”

He further asserted that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the company must prove that important personnel at Fox News knew the allegations were false but allowed them to be broadcast anyway. In its filings, Smartmatic cited internal communications showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated financial losses from the coverage. Fox contends its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy allegations 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 effort to capitalize on remarks made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Looms Large

The arguments strongly resemble the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, finding 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 previous Fox legal officer noted that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's ability to defend itself at trial.

Judge Cohen's Stance

Judge Cohen gave no clear indications of his leaning but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He stated he intended to review all pertinent television segments before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have more than enough information, data, briefings, charts, charts and all I need to reach a verdict,” he informed the two sides in the case.