🔗 Share this article

During a key court hearing on Tuesday, a attorney for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to adopt false claims of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their primary audience, deserted 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 misinformation, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the fraud allegations was the ideal tool for them to get back onto their central messaging.”

A Massive Defamation Case Is at Stake

In oral arguments, both sides pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to decide on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7bn legal action ahead of a possible trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to recapture disaffected viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

K Winn Allen, speaking for the network, vigorously denied these accusations. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he said. “It is completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is nonsense. It was fabricated 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 Legal Hurdle: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the company must prove that important personnel at Fox News were aware the fraud claims lacked truth but allowed them to be aired regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited private messages showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

The network's attorney countered that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its worth and the projected damages from the coverage. Fox maintains its personalities were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's allies, not endorsing them.

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

A Precedent Looms Large

Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions were decisive, finding that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.

That ruling was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox legal officer noted that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's ability to defend itself at trial.

Judge Cohen's Position

The presiding judge gave few indications of his thinking but told Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He stated he intended to review all relevant broadcasts before issuing his rulings.

“I think I have more than enough information, evidence, legal briefs, diagrams, graphs and everything I need to reach a verdict,” he informed the two sides in the case.