🔗 Share this article

In a key legal proceeding on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology company Smartmatic contended that senior leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a deliberate strategy to embrace baseless assertions of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their primary audience, abandoned 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 misinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election story and the fraud allegations was the ideal vehicle for them to return to their central messaging.”

A Massive Libel Case Is at Stake

In oral arguments, both parties pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to decide on essential elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a potential trial in the coming year. The plaintiff maintains that Fox leaders devised a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, strongly contested these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he stated. “It is completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It is made up by opposing counsel.”

He further asserted that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”

The Core Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”

To win its case, the company must prove that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but permitted them to be broadcast anyway. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited internal communications showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also showing an interest to assist Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated damages from the coverage. Fox contends its personalities were simply reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's associates, not promoting them.

“This suit is not truly about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It's about Smartmatic's attempt to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its business viability.”

A Precedent Looms Large

Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions proved critical, finding that Fox's broadcasts were untrue and inherently damaging.

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

Judge Cohen's Position

Judge Cohen offered few indications of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He said he intended to review all relevant television segments before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have more than enough information, data, legal briefs, diagrams, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he told the two sides in the lawsuit.