The defamation case between Dominion Voting Systems and the Murdoch-controlled Fox News has been delayed by one day amid reports that both parties are considering a possible settlement.
The highly anticipated trial was delayed on Sunday by Judge Eric Davis of Delaware’s Superior Court, who according to reports said in a statement that jury selection would begin at 9am Tuesday (local time), pushing back the beginning of the trial 24 hours without explanation.
The Wall Street Journal, another Murdoch media asset, was the first to break the news of possible settlement talks on Monday (AEST), reporting that the network was “looking for a possible way” into a late settlement, citing people familiar with the situation. The newspaper was followed by Reuters, citing one source, and The Washington Post, which cited two sources familiar with the matter.
Dominion is suing Fox News for damages of US$1.6 billion over claims that Fox knowingly or recklessly broadcast lies suggesting that the voting machines company facilitated voter fraud at the 2020 US presidential election that saw Donald Trump removed from office.
The blockbuster trial is expected to call Fox Corp chairman Rupert Murdoch to testify in person, along with his son Lachlan, who serves as the company’s chief executive. Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott and high-profile hosts Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson are also expected to testify, as well as former host Lou Dobbs.
Last week, Bloomberg reported that Rupert Murdoch could be the second witness called to testify, and appear as early as the first or second day of the trial. The first witness is likely to be a constitutional First Amendment expert, according to the report, which cited sources familiar with the matter.
On Monday it reported that sporadic settlement talks had grown “more serious” over the weekend as Rupert Murdoch, 92, weighed the prospect of testifying before a jury in defence of the network’s decision to allow hosts to peddle false claims of election fraud on air.
In response to the allegations, Fox claimed it was exercising its right to report on newsworthy allegations levelled by Trump, who was president at the time, and that those claims were protected by the First Amendment as opinion.
As it stands, it will be on Dominion to prove that Fox knowingly spread information it knew to be false, or that it did so with reckless disregard for the truth, an exceedingly high bar set for defamation cases in the US.
That high bar was set by a landmark Supreme Court ruling on The New York Times v Sullivan in 1964, which reinforced freedom of the press protections under the First Amendment, after civil rights leaders ran a full-page ad in The New York Times to raise funds while Martin Luther King Jr was facing indictment.
The ad described “an unprecedented wave of terror” of police actions against peaceful civil rights protesters, and the judge ruled in the Times’ favour, essentially enshrining freedom of the press into the US constitution.
For Dominion to beat Fox, legal analysts said it would have to prove that Fox acted with “actual malice”. Dominion had already obtained a ruling from Davis that it was “crystal clear” Fox News’ statements about Dominion were false. Now it must demonstrate both malice and that those false statements caused harm.
A settlement offers big advantages to both sides so it’s realistic. It would though be a heavy blow to the public interest which would be far better served by having these matters aired in public and reported. The only other way would be some form of judicial inquiry the way Fox News operated and there’s no chance of that.
I agree with both your points SSR. I’m saddened that we might all miss out on seeing Rupert and Lachlan on the stand, and also their senior staff and presenters. To watch them getting a good old-fashioned American court-room-drama style grilling would be rivetting viewing. (Yep, pure schadenfreude. Could it become “the most humble day” of Rupert’s life?) And we’ll also miss out on arguments about the first amendment and freedom of the press.
My take would be that the argument would run something like this: The press’s business is reporting news. That news is new information, the facts as they appear, that it is in the publics’ interst to know. If an organisation that claims to be part of “the press” publishes material it thinks is false, or knows to be false, without qualifiers like “alleged” “unproven” or “claims made without a shred of evidence”, does what is being published fall outside the definition of “news”? And does the publication and the publisher therefore lose the protection of the First Amendment? I hope it goes to trial so there is a chance of finding out how the court rules.
Dominion would be mad to settle now.
He Who Must Not Be Named obviously knows that he is in deep doodoo.
I would hope that Dominion are stringing him along to find out just how far he will go……………
……..he already started laying the groundwork for a settlement a few days ago by implying that Dominion were worth nowhere near $1.6 billion (trying to talk the price down).
I only hope that he keeps breathing long enough to witness the destruction of his empire.
Bugger…………..
Oh, well……. on to the next loonytoons station in the frame.
At least Smartmatic are going to have a walk-up start…………………
……..and I’d say Crikey’s case just got a real boost.
How can you allege defamation when your old Dad just admitted lying through his teeth?
Really? You mean I may not get to see Rupert explain why he chose to propagate lies and conspiracy over fact? I am truely disappointed. However, I think I already know the sad, turgid answer – money. Oh, well, perhaps the outcome will be just as good – Rupert paying out money. One can but hope.
It’s not about the money. Rupert already has all the money he can spend for the rest of his life. The same is true for Lachlan.
It’s about the power, which is an aphrodisiac.
I don’t see how a settlement could be ‘just as good’. News Corp is only going to agree a settlement on terms that suit its interests. So the most likely possibilities are:
I’m quite sure either of the last two is better for the public interest than the first, but the first is better than going to court for whichever party would lose.
With today’s settlement ( and critically, the admission that it was all bollocks), He Who Must Not Be Named just waved goodbye to his core audience – and made a lifetime enemy of Trump.
Now for Smartmatic’s turn to suck up some more dough.
One America Network is next cab off the rank for Dominion, and I’m sure OAN would be trying to do a deal before the case even gets under way – a settlement of this size would wipe them out.
I can only hope that today’s deal includes an on-air apology from all the talking heads……………..
How sweet it is.
No, not sweet. It’s not a disaster, but once again Fox and the family-that-must-not-be-named have not been held accountable. They bought their way out of the difficulty at a price they judged acceptable. No apologies, no regrets. As The Atlantic put it today:
Not a disaster – there are several critical things that have come out of this so far:
The “sweet” comment was at the prospect of seeing Tucker Carlson admit on air that it was all bollocks.
One extra (long-shot) potential occurs to me……………
……………by making the admission that it has, Fox has opened itself up to an action by shareholders against Management. They have knowingly destroyed serious shareholder value, both monetary and reputational.
Whether some enterprising class-action specialist may be able to drum up a few stakeholders or not remains to be seen. Hope springs eternal.
I’m struggling to see what admission you think Fox has made. So far all I can see is Fox has paid money to make the case go away and admitted nothing. As for hope, I’m with the ancient Greeks on that. In the earliest version of the Pandora myth her jar contained all manner of misery and evil. And nothing but; so Hope, the last of the contents that was released from the jar, was the ultimate misery and evil. Later on Hope was re-cast as something that compensates for the rest, but that’s just silly.
This from the New York Times today:
I think you struggle with a lot of things.
Good luck.
This is sad, but predictable. It looks like Fox/News Corpse broke first, so they must figure the damage would be immense. I can only hope that N/C has to get the Fox anchors to issue groveling apologies to Dominion, but they’ll probably weasel their way out of that as well.
I am hoping that Dominion does not sign some non-disclosure agreement with Fox so that we never get to know how much was paid to settle the matter. Although other comments are correct – the unmentionable family is too rich to be worried about a $1.6billion payout – I would like to know the humbling details that the out of court settlement would signify.
Dominion will sign it. Money speaks with a loud voice, but it tells you who is scared of being exposed – Merde-och.
Murdoch’s second ‘most humbling day’. I’d like to write the front page retraction that will inevitably be just one of the grovel demands.
It was Alan Rusbridger who wrote that the “official position is to ‘not admit’ any unlawful activity, while simultaneously shelling out enormous sums so that this position can never be tested.”
Freedom of press for the Merdochs means being free to publish information (accurate or not) from which money and favours can be wrung, while also being free to bury information that their partnered elites wish to be buried.
That was of course a reference to the phone hacking scandal whose origins are lost back in the mists of the last century. This year the total paid out in settlements with alleged victims passed £1 billion, and still no court gets to decide what happened and News Corp does not admit it did anything wrong. So we must presume Rupert just feels rather generous, and he can afford it. Still, you might think, a few billion here, a few billion there, and after a while we might be talking about real money.