Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch Allegedly Endorsed Fox News Strategy to Air 2020 Election Fraud Claims, Hearing Reveals.
In a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic argued that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to embrace baseless assertions of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.
“The conservative viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “What was their response? They return back to what they know best: they return back to misinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and xenophobia. The election story and the election fraud claims was the perfect tool for them to return to their core messaging.”
A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Hangs in the Balance
During oral arguments, both sides urged with Judge David B Cohen to decide on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit before a potential trial next year. The plaintiff maintains that Fox executives hatched a plan to “shift” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.
The Network's Strong Denial
A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, strongly contested these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was ordered,” he stated. “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 fraud claims.”
The Core Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”
To win its case, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that important personnel at Fox News knew the allegations were false but permitted them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also expressing a desire to help Trump.
Allen, Fox's lawyer argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its value and the projected damages from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's allies, not endorsing them.
“This lawsuit is not truly about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It's about Smartmatic's effort to capitalize on remarks made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”
A Precedent Looms Large
The arguments strongly resemble the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's pre-trial rulings were decisive, finding that Fox's statements were false and inherently damaging.
That ruling was later cited as a major reason in Fox's decision to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox executive noted that the court's initial decisions had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.
Judge Cohen's Position
Judge Cohen gave few indications of his thinking but told Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He said he intended to review all pertinent broadcasts before making a decision.
“I believe I have sufficient information, data, briefings, charts, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he told the two sides in the case.
