New court documents have exposed internal dynamics at Fox News amid the ongoing $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit brought by Smartmatic. These revelations center around conversations among key figures at the network, shedding light on how they navigated their relationship with former President Trump after the 2020 election.
Lachlan Murdoch, son of Rupert Murdoch, warned Sean Hannity that Trump’s relationship with Fox was at risk. In a critical text message dated October 1, 2020, he stated, “Sean, sorry, but the president is not coming back on air if he uses it to attack us.” This message emphasized a “golden rule” that Fox had in place—any aggressive stance toward the network from Trump could shut the door on future appearances. Hannity, in response, articulated his concerns in an email: “Trump people hate Fox. Hate hate hate.” The exchanges reveal a growing rift and fear among Fox personalities regarding their connection to Trump’s base.
Rupert Murdoch himself weighed in on the situation, expressing alarm about falling audience numbers. In an email to a producer, he noted, “Getting killed in audience numbers. All day long.” His worries highlighted an emerging conflict between the network’s financial interests and its engagement with the Trump-centric viewership. His comments also suggested a willingness to consider removing prominent hosts like Lou Dobbs, whose endorsement of contested election claims became a liability. “Just take him off the air and negotiate later,” he proposed, a stark admission of the pressure the network was under.
During depositions, Rupert Murdoch was asked if he took steps to limit the promotion of false election claims. He dismissed the notion, saying unequivocally, “No. No.” He stated he was satisfied with how Fox handled the situation, despite the backlash against the network. His remarks illustrate a striking contradiction: while acknowledging the Trump-oriented audience, he admitted a pivot away from supporting Trump post-election. “Our very large audience tended to be Trump supporters. We didn’t want to upset them totally,” he said, revealing an awareness of the risks involved in straying from the former president’s narrative.
Further complicating matters, Rupert suggested the claims surrounding the January 6 events contributed to the turmoil but reframed the narrative by denying it was a “riot,” calling it instead “just a rally outside the Capitol.” Such statements highlight an attempt to mitigate backlash from both sides—those who supported Trump and critics of the violence that unfolded.
Lachlan Murdoch also sought to steer the conversation away from perceived endorsements of fraud claims. He argued, “I can’t imagine a more newsworthy story than the sitting president of the United States calling into question the election results.” This echoes concerns shared among network executives about their credibility and the accusations levied against them.
The Fox News spokesperson defended the network against Smartmatic’s accusations, claiming the evidence illustrates that Smartmatic’s issues began long before any statements made by Trump’s lawyers. They denounced Smartmatic as inflating its damage claims to gain leverage and stifle free speech. “We are eager and ready to continue defending our press freedoms,” stated the spokesperson, maintaining a posture of defiance amidst the legal challenges.
In contrast, a Smartmatic spokesperson characterized the recent court decision as a significant victory in their battle for accountability, emphasizing that Fox’s attempts to delay facing the consequences of their actions would ultimately fail. “The court made clear that Fox’s attempts to delay accountability won’t work, and its day of reckoning is coming,” they declared, indicating a firm intent to pursue the case aggressively.
As these legal proceedings continue, the contrasting narratives from both Fox News and Smartmatic underline the complex landscape of media, politics, and power in America today. The internal communications within Fox illustrate a network grappling with its identity and responsibilities as it balances business interests against political allegiances.
"*" indicates required fields
