🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that senior executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate strategy to embrace baseless claims of election fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their primary audience, deserted them,” stated J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “What was their response? They return back to what they know best: they go back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the fraud allegations was the perfect vehicle for them to get back onto their core messaging.”

A Massive Libel Lawsuit Hangs in the Balance

In courtroom presentations, 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 maintains that Fox executives devised a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to recapture angry viewers.

The Network's Strong Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, strongly contested these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It was fabricated 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 Central Legal Hurdle: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that important personnel at Fox News were aware the allegations were false but allowed them to be aired anyway. In its filings, Smartmatic cited private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also expressing a desire to assist Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its value and the estimated financial losses from the coverage. Fox maintains its hosts were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not endorsing them.

“This lawsuit is not truly about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” the Fox lawyer stated. “It's about Smartmatic's attempt to capitalize on remarks made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

Smartmatic's case closely mirror the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions were decisive, ruling that Fox's statements were false and inherently damaging.

That legal decision was later cited as a key factor in Fox's choice to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox legal officer remarked that the court's initial decisions had “hamstrung” the company's ability to defend itself at trial.

The Judge's Stance

Judge Cohen gave no clear hints of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “hard sell.” He stated he intended to examine all relevant television segments before making a decision.

“I think I have sufficient information, data, legal briefs, diagrams, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the case.