How election lies, libel law were key to Fox defamation suit

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 18/04/2023 (1265 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Fox News settled a major defamation lawsuit for $787.5 million on Tuesday, according to the voting machine company that sued the top cable news network.

The settlement avoids a trial that could have shed additional light on former President Donald Trump’s election lies, revealed more about how the right-leaning network operates and even redefined libel law in the U.S. Here are some things to know about the case.

___

THE CASE

Dominion Voting Systems sued Fox for $1.6 billion, claiming the news outlet repeatedly aired allegations that the company’s voting machines were rigged against Trump in 2020 while knowing the accusations were untrue. Fox contended that it was reporting newsworthy charges made by supporters of the Republican president. The network said it was supported legally by libel standards.

The judge in the case announced that the two parties had resolved the matter Tuesday, just as opening arguments were scheduled to begin. Fox did not reveal settlement terms, but Dominion said the deal was for $787.5 million.

___

ELECTION DISCONNECT

Denver-based Dominion produced evidence that prominent people at Fox didn’t believe the fraud allegations, even as the network gave Trump’s allies airtime to repeat them. Multiple staffers texted and emailed in disbelief as Trump latched onto increasingly tenuous claims of being robbed by voter fraud. Fox’s Sean Hannity said in a deposition that he did not believe the fraud claims “for one second” but wanted to give accusers the chance to produce evidence.

Fox founder Rupert Murdoch, questioned under oath, agreed that the 2020 election, won by Democrat Joe Biden, was free and fair: “The election was not stolen,” he said. Murdoch even wrote on Jan. 5, 2021, to a top executive urging that prominent Fox personalities issue a statement acknowledging Biden’s legitimate win. At the same time, Murdoch acknowledged that Fox hosts such as Lou Dobbs and Jeanine Pirro at times endorsed false claims of election fraud.

___

FOX’S FEAR

The court papers laid out a profound concern at Fox over the impact of its election night call that Biden had beaten Trump in the battleground state of Arizona — a call that was accurate. Fox scooped its rivals on the call, but it infuriated Trump and many Fox viewers, who expressed their anger and began tuning in to rival conservative media outlets such as Newsmax. Emails and memos released in the case show Fox executives were highly aware of a drop-off in their network’s viewership at the same time that Newsmax was gaining viewers, and the executives viewed that dynamic as a potential threat.

___

LIBEL LAW

In its defense, Fox relied on a doctrine of libel law that has been in place since a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. The doctrine has made it difficult for some plaintiffs to prove defamation by news outlets. Public figures, and Dominion fits that standard in this case, have to prove not only that the information reported was incorrect but that the news organization acted with “reckless disregard” about whether it was true or not.

Some First Amendment advocates suggested the voting machine company had a strong argument. But they worried that a prolonged legal battle would give the Supreme Court a chance to change libel laws that would weaken protection for all media.

___

JUDGE’S IRE

The run-up to the trial was rocky for Fox, and not just because the public got a look at such private chatter as primetime host Tucker Carlson saying he “passionately” hated Trump. The trial judge has scolded the network for 11th-hour disclosures about Murdoch’s role at Fox News and about some evidence involving Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, including recordings of her talking off-camera with Trump’s lawyers.

Fox lawyers later apologized to the judge about the Murdoch matter, saying it was a misunderstanding not intended to deceive. Fox, meanwhile, won some legal fights over limiting what jurors could hear, including a ruling that barred testimony about the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

___

TRUMP’S INTEREST

Trump took a keen interest in the case, judging by his social media posts. Always concerned about loyalty, and nursing a grudge about the Arizona call, he expressed anger at revelations in the case that many people at Fox not only did not support his fraud allegations but privately disdained them. Trump stepped up his criticism of Fox as the 2024 Republican presidential race gained steam, but he gave recent interviews to Carlson and Hannity.

___

THE ELECTION

Federal and state election officials, exhaustive reviews in multiple battleground states where Trump challenged his loss, and Trump’s attorney general found no widespread fraud that could have changed the outcome of the 2020 election. Nor did they uncover any credible evidence that the vote was tainted. Trump’s allegations of fraud also have been roundly rejected by dozens of courts, including by judges he appointed.