Sullivan

• Fox issued a vaguely worded statement confirming the merits of Dominion’s defamation claims – “We acknowledge the Court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false” – but was not required to make on-air apologies or corrections.
• With that, the lawsuit that captured public attention for two years ended.
• The issue is not truth, alone, but whether false statements harmed the plaintiff’s reputation, and whether the news organization was at fault for publishing those statements.
• All that remained for a jury to decide was whether the statements were made with actual malice.
• Actual malice is the legal standard established by the Supreme Court in 1964 in New York Times v. Sullivan that applies to public officials and public figures.

The facts were on Dominion’s side

• Dominion had a tremendous advantage on the eve of trial.
• Pretrial discovery revealed a trail of texts and email messages that documented the doubts of executives, editors and pundits at Fox about the veracity of the claims of a conspiracy to steal the 2020 elections, of which Dominion was supposedly an integral part.
• Those critics must be dismayed that Fox and its employees will not be raked over the coals and otherwise humiliated in the court of public opinion, as well as in the courtroom.

Disinformation was at the heart of the case

• But those who are disappointed may have been seeking more from this case than a libel suit can deliver.
• For many, it had become a surrogate for their unhappiness – or even incandescent rage – directed toward Fox for its editorial positions.
• In other words, it was about disinformation and the people who are persuaded by it.
• Many people would like to ban disinformation.
• Smartmatic, which builds electronic voting systems, has a pending libel suit against Fox and is poised to continue the battle.