🔗 Share this article

During a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that top executives at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious strategy to embrace false assertions of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their primary audience, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They return back to what they know best: they return back to misinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election narrative and the election fraud claims were the perfect tool for them to get back onto their central messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Defamation Case Hangs in the Balance

In courtroom presentations, both parties urged with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to rule on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion legal action before a potential trial next year. The company argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to the former president's allegations to recapture angry viewers.

The Network's Strong Denial

K Winn Allen, representing the network, strongly contested these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is nonsense. It is made up 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 company must prove that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims lacked truth but allowed them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer argued that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its worth and the estimated financial losses from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its hosts were simply reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not promoting them.

“This lawsuit really isn't about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It's about Smartmatic's effort to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the prior defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, ruling that Fox's statements were false and defamatory per se.

That legal decision was later cited as a major reason in Fox's choice to resolve with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox executive noted that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.

The Judge's Position

Judge Cohen offered few hints of his leaning but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “difficult task.” He stated he intended to examine all pertinent television segments before issuing his rulings.

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