That’s what Laura Coates, senior legal analyst at CNN, told Erin Burnett Thursday night as she discussed Smartmatic’s $ 2.7 billion defamation case against Fox News, three of the network’s hosts (Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro. ), Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell.
“When you make statements that are knowingly incorrect, and you make them with malice, and you are actually damaging reputation and it has financial consequences – that’s why you have defamation lawsuits in the first place,” said Coates, who expresses the seriousness of explained the matter. lawsuit.
Coates isn’t alone in believing Smartmatic’s suit poses a real threat to Fox. Jonathan Peters, professor of media law at the University of Georgia listed on Twitter that “the defamation law makes it difficult to triumph when the plaintiff is a public figure and / or when the speech was a matter of public interest. In several ways, these will be important issues in litigation.” But Peters added that he believed the “smart money” is on Smartmatic.
That seemed to be the general consensus among legal experts who commented on the case on Thursday. Despite Fox describing the lawsuit as “worthless,” Powell called it a “political maneuver,” and Giuliani said he was looking forward to discovery, most legal experts believed it had a bite. “This lawsuit is a legitimate threat – a real one,” said CNN legal analyst Ellie Honig. “There are real teeth in this.” And Roy Gutterman, who leads the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, reiterated to WaPo: “This complaint produces a compelling story across its 270-plus pages. It will certainly be interesting to see how the defendants formulate their answers. “
This is not a nuisance suit
Brian Stelter writes: “Defamation lawsuits against media organizations are usually brought on a slippery slope. Journalists have good reason to be concerned about these types of cases. And nuisance lawsuits against newsrooms are a real problem. But I think it’s safe to say that the action of Smartmatic against Fox is not a nuisance suit, and it has little to do with news. It will be difficult for Fox to wrap his hosts in a press freedom flag. This case is about entertainers fueling lies in a desperate attempt to put Trump in power to hold . “
“Disinformation now has free rein”
When I discussed the case with Smartmatic’s attorney, Erik Connolly, about the fame of “pink slime,” I urged him if he was concerned that his lawsuit would set a precedent that could ultimately harm press freedom. His response was that the lawsuit would actually benefit legitimate news organizations. “I think this is the kind of case that should be brought now to try to keep us away from disinformation,” Connolly told me. “Disinformation is now at hand. Cases like this can be a bull’s eye that courts can deliver, saying, ‘Let’s get back to reality. Let’s get back to actual reporting.” ”
A world of people who ‘tell outright lies’
Stelter writes, “I was struck by something that Roberta Kaplan, a lawyer representing author E. Jean Carroll, told the NYT. Carroll is suing Trump for defamation. Kaplan” stated that the profusion of defamation circumstances related to the previous president was remarkable, “because there is the impression that such cases are difficult to win.” What has changed, “Kaplan said,” and why we see so many more defamation cases today than ever before is that frankly we live in a world where people with legitimacy and authority, don’t seem to feel any remorse about telling outright lies. ”This is, in part, why other legal experts say Smartmatic has a strong argument – the lies are explicit and easy to debunk.” And that’s why it may not be so hard to prove that Fox and his hosts knew or should have known they were telling lies – that’s the ‘real ke malice ‘standard that public figures must meet in defamation cases … “
The lies have consequences
It is crucial to point out the impact that the series of conspiracy theories against Smartmatic have had on the company. In his lawsuit, Smartmatic outlined some of the consequences: a wave of threats against its employees, a “rapid rise” in cyber attacks, and hundreds of millions of dollars in expected revenue losses. CEO and founder Antonio Mugica told me the company had “no choice” but to file the lawsuit. “The disinformation campaign launched against us is a devastating one. For us this is existential, and we need to take action.”
