CEO's Corner®-By K.L.P Entertainment™-"February 28th Edition"

CEO’S CORNER

The conservative media tycoon Rupert Murdoch testified last month under oath in a $1.6 billion defamation case brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. According to court documents released on Monday, Rupert Murdoch, the head of the conservative media conglomerate that owns Fox News, acknowledged in a deposition that several hosts for his networks promoted the myth that the 2020 election was stolen from the outgoing president Donald J. Trump and that he could have stopped them but didn't.

Rubert Murdoch

According to a lawsuit document by Dominion Voting Systems, Mr. Murdoch responded to direct inquiries regarding the Fox hosts Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, Lou Dobbs, and Maria Bartiromo by saying, "They endorsed," while under oath. He continued, "In hindsight, I would have preferred us to be tougher in our condemnation of it. He also revealed that he had never believed Mr. Trump's assertions of rampant voter fraud.

When asked if he had any doubts about Mr. Trump, Mr. Murdoch said, "Absolutely. We really did believe that everything was the claim that Fox News as a whole had supported the claim of a stolen election. Not Fox, he remarked. “No. Fox not.

The statements provided by Mr. Murdoch last month as part of Dominion's $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox increased the body of proof that Dominion has gathered in an effort to support its main accusation: Despite knowing that Mr. Trump's allegations of voting fraud in the 2020 election were bogus, the executives of the nation's most well-known news network recklessly disseminated them. the pursuit of money and ratings. Dominion would be able to overcome the challenging legal hurdles set by the Supreme Court in defamation proceedings with proof to that effect. In order to win, Dominion must demonstrate both that Fox intentionally disseminated incorrect material and that it did so. An April trial that will last one month has been scheduled by a judge in Delaware state court. The newly disclosed documents, along with a similar batch made public last month, offer a dramatic insider picture of the network's desperate efforts to win back its sizable conservative audience after ratings plummeted in the wake of Mr. Trump's defeat. On election night, Fox was the first network to predict Joseph R. Biden would win Arizona, effectively crowning him the next president. When Donald Trump objected

elections and that its voting machines could run a secret algorithm that switched votes from one candidate to another. These rumors were repeatedly uttered by guests and hosts of Fox programs. Little changed regarding the content of programs like Mr. Dobbs' and Ms. Bartiromo's in spite of these reservations. Following the election, viewers of Fox News and Fox Business heard a story that was very different from what Fox executives acknowledged in private that. Fox News' legal team claimed that its commentary and reporting following the election did not constitute defamation because its hosts had not endorsed the falsehoods about Dominion, despite Mr. Murdoch's deposition testimony to the contrary. This was the argument made by Fox News' legal team in a response to Dominion that was submitted to the court on Monday. So, according to the network's legal representatives, Fox's reporting is protected under the First Amendment.

Viewers started

Nulla nunc lectus porttitor vitae pulvinar magna. Sed et lacus quis enim mattis nonummy sodales.

"Hosts warned their audiences at every point that the charges were only allegations that would need to be proven in court in no time if they were going to have an impact on the election outcome," Fox lawyers wrote in their petition. "Far from reporting the allegations as true." Also, some hosts made comments regarding the claims, which Commentary is free speech that is protected.

According to a Fox News spokeswoman, Dominion's argument "has always been more about what would make headlines than what can survive judicial examination," she said in reaction to the filing on Monday. She continued by saying that the business had adopted "an extreme, unjustified interpretation of the defamation legislation that would restrict journalists from conducting basic reporting."

Fox hosts did occasionally present the charges as unverified and voice their opinions. Additionally, Fox lawyers have cited on-air interactions where hosts disputed these assertions and pressured Mr. Trump's attorneys Sidney Powell and Rudolph W. Giuliani to provide evidence that never did.

Yet the investigation is also likely to center on inquiries into who knew what and how Fox's on-air content was shaped.

claim that Fox backed the accuracy of what was being said." He stated that some of the allegations made by Dominion were more strongly refuted by Fox's arguments than others. Nonetheless, Mr. Levine stated, "I'd much prefer be in Dominion's shoes than Fox's right now" based on what he has seen of the case thus far.

According to Dominion's petition, Mr. Murdoch was a chairman who was both actively discussing election coverage with his senior leadership and functioning at a of a distance, unwilling to get involved. When asked by Justin Nelson, an attorney for Dominion, if he could have directed Fox News to stop airing Trump attorneys like Ms. Powell and Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Murdoch replied, "I could have. But I refrained. to change course, Dominion stated.

Nulla nunc lectus porttitor vitae pulvinar magna. Sed et lacus quis enim mattis nonummy sodales.

way to end the Trump narrative that the election was stolen." Ms. Scott reportedly stated in the document that the hosts were present in private but cautioned that "we need to be careful about exploiting the shows and upsetting the viewers." No such assertion was made on the air.

Dominion reveals how, at times, Fox helped shape the news it was presenting by describing the intimate contact its hosts and executives had with prominent Republican Party figures and members of the Trump inner circle. It explains how Mr. Murdoch called Mitch McConnell, the head of the Senate's Republican party,

Nulla nunc lectus porttitor vitae pulvinar magna. Sed et lacus quis enim mattis nonummy sodales.

Mr. Trump's son-in-law and top adviser, secret knowledge regarding the advertising the Biden campaign would be airing on Fox.

Eventually, Dominion's attorneys accuse Ms. Pirro of "washing her own conspiracy beliefs via Powell," the host of a Saturday night talk show. Ms. Pirro boasted to her acquaintances, according to the statement, "that she was the source for Powell's assertions." This was "something she never shared with her audience," according to Dominion.

Nulla nunc lectus porttitor vitae pulvinar magna. Sed et lacus quis enim mattis nonummy sodales.

Viet Dinh, the top legal officer of Fox Corporation, was one of many senior executives who expressed concern about the nature of Fox's reporting in a

guests." Mr. Dinh responded in his deposition when asked if Fox executives had a duty to prevent and correct known falsehoods from being broadcast by show hosts.

In a Monday filing, Fox's attorneys charged Dominion with cherry-picking evidence indicating some Fox News employees knew the accusations against Dominion were untrue and acted out of genuine malice, the legal level required to prove defamation, as a result of this knowledge.

The attorneys claimed that the great majority of the witnesses used by Dominion in support of its claims bore no connection to the assertions that

Nulla nunc lectus porttitor vitae pulvinar magna. Sed et lacus quis enim mattis nonummy sodales.