Murdochs Allegedly Endorsed Fox News Strategy to Broadcast 2020 Voting Fraud Allegations, Court Hears.

During a pivotal legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that top leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious strategy to embrace baseless claims of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, deserted them,” declared J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they return back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the fraud allegations were the perfect tool for them to get back onto their central messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Defamation Case Is at Stake

During oral arguments, both sides pleaded with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to decide on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7bn legal action ahead of a possible trial next year. The plaintiff argues that Fox leaders hatched a plan to “shift” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, speaking for the network, strongly contested these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. 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, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”

The Central Challenge: 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 allowed them to be aired regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to internal communications showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated damages from the broadcasts. Fox contends its personalities were simply reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not endorsing them.

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

A Previous Case Looms Large

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

That legal decision was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox legal officer remarked that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.

Judge Cohen's Position

Judge Cohen gave no clear hints of his leaning but told Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “actual malice” for a summary judgment would be a “hard sell.” He said he planned to review all pertinent television segments before making a decision.

“I believe I have more than enough information, evidence, briefings, diagrams, charts and everything I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the case.