🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that senior executives at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a conscious strategy to adopt false claims of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their bread and butter, deserted them,” stated J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they return back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the election fraud claims were the ideal vehicle for them to get back onto their core messaging.”

A Massive Libel Lawsuit Hangs in the Balance

In oral arguments, both sides pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to rule on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion legal action before a possible trial in the coming year. The plaintiff maintains that Fox executives devised a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to win back angry viewers.

The Network's Strong Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, speaking for the network, vigorously denied these claims. “No disinformation campaign was authorized,” he said. “It is completely false. The evidence does not support it. It is nonsense. It is made up by lawyers on the other side.”

He added that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

To win its case, the company must prove that important personnel at Fox News knew the fraud claims lacked truth but allowed them to be aired anyway. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to private messages showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to assist Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its worth and the estimated financial losses from the coverage. Fox contends 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's about Smartmatic's effort to seize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its financial livelihood.”

A Previous Case 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 pre-trial rulings were decisive, finding that Fox's broadcasts were false and defamatory per se.

That legal decision was later cited as a major reason in Fox's decision to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox executive noted that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.

Judge Cohen's Position

The presiding judge offered few indications of his leaning but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He said he intended to review all relevant television segments before issuing his rulings.

“I believe I have sufficient information, data, legal briefs, charts, graphs and everything I need to make my ruling,” he informed the parties in the case.