Podcast Summary: "The OTHER Lawsuit Involving the Murdochs"

Podcast: On the Media
Host: Brooke Gladstone and Micah Loewinger
Episode Title: The OTHER Lawsuit Involving the Murdochs
Release Date: March 1, 2023

Introduction

In the episode titled "The OTHER Lawsuit Involving the Murdochs," On the Media delves into the intricacies of defamation lawsuits surrounding the Murdoch family, particularly focusing on Lachlan Murdoch's legal actions against the Australian news website Crikey. The discussion provides listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the legal battles, their implications for media freedom, and the future of the Murdoch media empire.

Dominion Voting's Lawsuit Against Fox News

The episode begins with an overview of the ongoing defamation lawsuit filed by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News. David Folkenflik introduces the topic:

“Dominion Voting is suing Fox for defamation over the cable channels, what they describe as bogus allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 election.”
[00:10]

Folkenflik highlights recent allegations that Fox News hosts knowingly propagated unfounded conspiracy theories about Dominion Voting machines. This lawsuit not only scrutinizes Fox's role in spreading misinformation but also ties into broader narratives about media responsibility and the impact on democratic processes.

Lachlan Murdoch's Defamation Suit Against Crikey

The focus then shifts to a parallel but distinct legal battle involving Lachlan Murdoch, a prominent figure in the Murdoch media dynasty. Lachlan Murdoch has initiated defamation proceedings against Crikey, an Australian independent news and politics website. Bernard Keane, the writer behind the Crikey article in question, provides detailed insights:

“Crikey... published an article on June 29... labeled the Murdochs as the unindicted co-conspirators of the deadly US Capitol riots.”
[01:41]

Lachlan Murdoch's legal team asserts that Crikey's allegations falsely implicate him in the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election results. This lawsuit marks a significant escalation in the Murdochs' efforts to defend their reputation and counteract negative publicity.

Impact on the Fox Empire and Media Landscape

Lachlan Cartwright, editor at large of the Daily Beast, discusses the broader implications of these lawsuits:

“With these two suits, we're getting a peek into the future of the Fox empire.”
[01:32]

He emphasizes that these legal actions could signal a shift in how media conglomerates like Fox News respond to defamation claims, potentially setting precedents that affect journalistic practices and media accountability.

Bernard Keane adds context about the Australian media environment:

“Most of the Aussie media market is controlled by the Murdochs... around 70% of major newspapers.”
[03:17]

This concentration of media ownership underscores the significance of Lachlan Murdoch's actions against Crikey, as it challenges the dominant narrative within a tightly controlled media landscape.

Australian Libel Laws and the Public Interest Defense

A critical aspect of the lawsuit involves Australia's stringent libel laws, which traditionally favor plaintiffs—the individuals or entities being defamed. However, recent legal reforms introduced a public interest defense, which Crikey is leveraging in their defense strategy.

“The laws changed last July and it introduced a public interest offense... publications can now make the case that articles were in the public interest.”
[03:53]

Bernard Keane explains that although this defense was primarily designed to protect investigative journalism, it poses a significant challenge for Murdoch's defamation case. He notes:

“This article was an opinion piece... Murdoch will have a bit more of a leg to stand on but he also needs to prove that there was serious harm.”
[03:53]

The introduction of the public interest defense aims to balance the scales, allowing media organizations to publish controversial or investigative content without an overwhelming fear of legal repercussions, provided the content serves the public good.

Crikey's Strategic Response and Public Reaction

In response to the lawsuit, Crikey strategically reinstated the contentious article after initially removing it following Murdoch's legal threats. This move amplified public attention and arguably benefited Crikey by:

“They’ve added about 5,000 subs to their publication since this lawsuit.”
[04:41]

Bernard Keane points out the "Streisand effect" at play, where attempts to censor or suppress information lead to greater public awareness and interest.

“Krikey put the story back up... very much wanting the public to read.”
[04:50]

This approach not only challenges Lachlan Murdoch's claims but also reinforces Crikey's commitment to independent journalism and accountability.

Potential Outcomes and Future Implications

The legal proceedings in Australia could have far-reaching consequences beyond this specific case. Bernard Keane speculates on the broader impact:

“This could actually raise the bar for defendants and improve the prospects for plaintiffs.”
[07:43]

He suggests that a favorable outcome for Crikey might pave the way for more robust protections for journalists and could influence similar cases globally, including the Dominion vs. Fox lawsuit in the United States.

Lachlan Cartwright raises concerns about the potential consolidation of media power:

“If he was to take Crikey out, that would be a good outcome for him. But I think the Australian ecosystem, the Australian media landscape would be all the poorer for that.”
[07:43]

This sentiment underscores the delicate balance between protecting reputations and ensuring a diverse and free press.

Conclusion

The episode "The OTHER Lawsuit Involving the Murdochs" offers a deep dive into the complex interplay between media power, legal accountability, and journalistic freedom. Through detailed discussions and expert insights, listeners gain a nuanced understanding of how defamation lawsuits can reshape media landscapes and influence the future of free speech and transparency in both the United States and Australia.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• David Folkenflik:
  “Dominion Voting is suing Fox for defamation over the cable channels, what they describe as bogus allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 election.”
  [00:10]

• Bernard Keane:
  “Crikey... published an article on June 29... labeled the Murdochs as the unindicted co-conspirators of the deadly US Capitol riots.”
  [01:41]

• Lachlan Cartwright:
  “With these two suits, we're getting a peek into the future of the Fox empire.”
  [01:32]

• Bernard Keane:
  “This could actually raise the bar for defendants and improve the prospects for plaintiffs.”
  [07:43]

Attributions:

• David Folkenflik – NPR's media correspondent
• Lachlan Cartwright – Editor at large of the Daily Beast
• Bernard Keane – Writer for Crikey
• Ira Flatow – Host of Science Friday (mentioned in outro)

For a deeper exploration of these lawsuits and their implications, tune in to the On the Media episode released on March 1, 2023.