🔗 Share this article

During a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that senior leaders at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to embrace false assertions of election fraud promoted 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 return back to what they know best: they return back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the fraud allegations was the perfect vehicle for them to return to their central messaging.”

A Massive Libel Case Is at Stake

During oral arguments, both sides urged with Judge David B Cohen to rule on critical aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion legal action ahead of a possible trial in the coming year. The company maintains that Fox executives devised 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 completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It is made up by opposing counsel.”

He added that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”

The Central Challenge: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

To win its case, the company must prove that important personnel at Fox News knew the allegations lacked truth but permitted them to be aired anyway. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited internal communications showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also expressing a desire to assist Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its worth and the estimated damages from the coverage. Fox contends its hosts were simply reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's allies, not endorsing 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 rescue its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

The arguments strongly resemble the successful legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, finding that Fox's broadcasts were false and defamatory per se.

That ruling was later cited as a major reason in Fox's decision to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous 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 Stance

The presiding judge gave no clear indications of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “difficult task.” He said he planned to review all relevant television segments before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have sufficient information, evidence, briefings, charts, charts and everything I need to reach a verdict,” he informed the parties in the case.