🔗 Share this article

In a key legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic contended that top executives at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a deliberate plan to adopt false claims of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their bread and butter, deserted them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “What was their response? They return back to what they know best: they go back to disinformation, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the election fraud claims were the perfect vehicle for them to get back onto their central messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Hangs in the Balance

During oral arguments, both parties pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to rule on essential elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a potential trial next year. The plaintiff argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “shift” to Trump's claims 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 ordered,” he stated. “It is total bunk. The evidence does not support it. It is hogwash. It is made up by opposing counsel.”

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

The Central Challenge: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

To win its case, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but allowed them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also expressing a desire to help Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated damages from the coverage. Fox maintains its personalities were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not endorsing them.

“This suit really isn't 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 rescue its business viability.”

A Previous Case Looms Large

Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's summary judgment decisions were decisive, ruling that Fox's broadcasts were untrue 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 previous Fox executive remarked that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.

The Judge's Stance

Judge Cohen gave few hints of his thinking but told Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He stated he planned to examine all pertinent television segments before making a decision.

“I believe I have more than enough material, evidence, briefings, charts, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the lawsuit.