🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to adopt false assertions of election fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned 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, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the election fraud claims were the ideal tool for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Massive Defamation Case Is at Stake

During oral arguments, both parties urged with Judge David B Cohen to decide on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7bn defamation lawsuit before a possible trial in the coming year. The plaintiff argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to recapture angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Rebuttal

A lawyer for Fox News, speaking for the network, vigorously denied these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he said. “It is completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is nonsense. It was fabricated 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 election fraud allegations.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

To win its case, the voting firm must prove that important personnel at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but permitted them to be aired regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to internal communications showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to assist Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the projected financial losses from the coverage. Fox contends its personalities were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not promoting them.

“This lawsuit is not truly about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It concerns Smartmatic's attempt to seize on remarks made by the president's lawyers to salvage its financial livelihood.”

A Previous Case Is Highly Relevant

The arguments closely mirror the successful defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's pre-trial rulings were decisive, finding that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.

That ruling was later cited as a major reason in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox legal officer remarked that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “hamstrung” the company's ability to defend itself at trial.

Judge Cohen's Position

Judge Cohen gave few hints of his leaning but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He said he intended to examine all pertinent broadcasts before making a decision.

“I believe I have more than enough information, data, legal briefs, diagrams, charts and all I need to reach a verdict,” he told the parties in the case.