Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch Reportedly Endorsed Fox News Strategy to Air 2020 Election Fraud Claims, Hearing Reveals.

During a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic contended that senior executives at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate strategy to embrace baseless claims of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their primary audience, deserted them,” stated J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They revert to what they know best: they go back to misinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election story and the fraud allegations was the ideal tool for them to return to their central messaging.”

A Massive Defamation Case Hangs in the Balance

During oral arguments, both sides urged with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to decide on essential elements of Smartmatic's $2.7bn legal action ahead of a potential trial next year. The company maintains that Fox leaders devised a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.

The Network's Strong Rebuttal

K Winn Allen, representing the network, strongly contested these claims. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he said. “It is completely false. The evidence does not support it. It is nonsense. 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 fraud claims.”

The Central Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the company will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the allegations were false but allowed them to be aired regardless. In its filings, Smartmatic has pointed to internal communications showing personalities like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also showing an interest to help Trump.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its worth and the projected damages from the coverage. Fox contends its hosts were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not endorsing them.

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

A Precedent Looms Large

Smartmatic's case closely mirror the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions proved critical, finding that Fox's broadcasts were false and inherently damaging.

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 noted that the court's initial decisions had “severely limited” the company's legal defense at trial.

The Judge's Position

The presiding judge gave few indications of his thinking but told Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “knowledge of falsity” for a summary judgment would be a “hard sell.” He stated he planned to review all relevant television segments before making a decision.

“I think I have more than enough information, evidence, briefings, diagrams, graphs and all I need to make my ruling,” he told the two sides in the case.