🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal legal proceeding on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that senior leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate strategy to adopt false assertions of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their primary audience, deserted them,” declared J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they go back to misinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election story and the fraud allegations was the perfect vehicle for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Defamation Case Is at Stake

During oral arguments, both parties urged with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to decide on critical aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7bn defamation lawsuit before a possible trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox leaders devised a plan to “shift” to the former president's allegations to win back angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Rebuttal

K Winn Allen, representing the network, strongly contested these claims. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he stated. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It was fabricated by opposing counsel.”

He further asserted 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 Legal Hurdle: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims lacked truth but permitted them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to private messages showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also showing an interest to assist Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its worth and the estimated financial losses from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its hosts were merely reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not promoting them.

“This lawsuit is not truly about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” the Fox lawyer stated. “It concerns Smartmatic's effort to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its business viability.”

A Previous Case Is Highly Relevant

Smartmatic's case 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 false and inherently damaging.

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

Judge Cohen's Position

The presiding judge offered few indications of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “difficult task.” He stated he planned to examine all relevant broadcasts before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have sufficient information, data, briefings, diagrams, charts and everything I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the case.