Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch Allegedly Endorsed Fox News Plan to Broadcast 2020 Voting Fraud Claims, Court Hears.
During a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic argued that senior leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to adopt baseless assertions of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.
“The conservative viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned them,” stated J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they return back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and xenophobia. The election narrative and the fraud allegations was the perfect tool for them to get back onto their core messaging.”
A Massive Defamation Case Is at Stake
During courtroom presentations, both parties urged with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to decide on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a potential trial in the coming year. The plaintiff argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.
Fox's Vehement Denial
K Winn Allen, speaking for the network, vigorously denied these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. The evidence does not support it. It is nonsense. It is made up by opposing counsel.”
He added that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”
The Central Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”
For Smartmatic to prevail, the company will have to demonstrate that important personnel at Fox News were aware the allegations were false but permitted them to be aired regardless. In its filings, Smartmatic has pointed to internal communications showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to assist Trump.
The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its value and the projected financial losses from the coverage. Fox contends its personalities were simply reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not promoting them.
“This suit really isn't about Fox's coverage 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 financial livelihood.”
A Previous Case Is Highly Relevant
Smartmatic's case closely mirror the successful defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions were decisive, finding that Fox's broadcasts were false and defamatory per se.
That ruling was later cited as a key factor in Fox's choice to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox legal officer remarked that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.
The Judge's Stance
The presiding judge offered few indications of his thinking but told Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “hard sell.” He stated he intended to examine all pertinent television segments before issuing his rulings.
“I think I have more than enough information, data, legal briefs, charts, graphs and everything I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the lawsuit.
