favicon

T4K3.news

Newsmax settlement with Dominion

Newsmax agrees to pay Dominion 67 million to settle defamation claims over 2020 election coverage.

August 18, 2025 at 02:35 PM
blur Newsmax pays $67 million to settle Dominion lawsuit over network’s 2020 election lies

Newsmax agrees to pay Dominion 67 million to resolve defamation claims tied to coverage of the 2020 election

Newsmax pays 67 million to settle Dominion election lies

Newsmax has agreed to pay Dominion Voting Systems a total of 67 million to settle defamation claims tied to its coverage of the 2020 election. The payout breaks down as 27 million this month and 40 million over the next two years, avoiding a high-stakes trial that could expose more details about the network’s reporting and guests.

A Delaware judge had previously ruled that Newsmax aired defamatory statements by accusing Dominion of rigging the election, with damages to be determined by a jury if the case had gone to trial. The deal mirrors a broader pattern in which other outlets settled high-profile voting misinformation cases, including Fox News and Smartmatic, signaling a shift in how defamation cases may be resolved outside court. Newsmax’s ratings are roughly a tenth of Fox’s, a factor in settlement considerations and public interest.

Key Takeaways

✔️
Settlement signals high financial risk for outlets that broadcast false election claims
✔️
Legal outcomes can deter misinformation even without public apologies
✔️
Outlets may choose settlements over jury trials to limit exposure
✔️
Similar cases at Fox News and Smartmatic show a growing pattern
✔️
Newsmax ratings context matters in settlement sizing
✔️
Public trust depends on demonstrable corrections and accountability
✔️
Defamation actions are expanding beyond traditional newsrooms
✔️
The case keeps pressure on media accountability in politics

"We are pleased to have settled this matter."

Dominion spokesperson response

The settlement marks a clear penalty for spreading false claims about a national process. It highlights that media outlets face real financial consequences when misinformation crosses into defamation, even without a formal on-air apology.

Yet settlements also raise questions about public accountability. Without an explicit correction or apology, audiences may view the outcome as a financial transaction rather than a renewed commitment to accuracy. The case suggests publishers must weigh legal exposure against the freeflow of political commentary and guest appearances.

Highlights

  • Money settles the score when truth is on trial
  • Accountability is the price of careless claims
  • Settlements reshape the risk for outlets that bend facts
  • Public trust rides on the cost of misinformation

Defamation settlement raises political and financial risk

The case ties defamation to political content about the 2020 election. Public backlash and investor scrutiny could follow as outlets reassess risk in coverage.

The cost of misinformation is rising and the impact will be felt in newsroom practices

Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!

Related News