Celebrity investor Kevin O'Leary and Fox News have been sued for defamation by four Utah organizations and individuals after O'Leary accused critics of his proposed data center project of being funded by China or the Chinese Communist Party. The suit follows a May 11 Fox Business segment where O'Leary claimed Chinese agents were orchestrating online opposition to his 'Wonder Valley' data center, a massive 40,000-acre development planned for rural Box Elder County, Utah.
On May 11, Kevin O'Leary appeared on Fox Business with host Maria Bartiromo to promote his proposed data center project, Wonder Valley, which he billed as 'the largest data center in the world.' Sitting on 40,000 acres north of the Great Salt Lake, the project would require a dedicated gas power plant generating 9 gigawatts of electricity, more than double Utah's average consumption. O'Leary said the project was moving quickly thanks to support from Utah's governor and legislative leaders, claiming it 'shows China and the rest of the world we aren't messing around.'
During the segment, O'Leary accused Chinese agents of orchestrating online criticism after the county commissioners unanimously approved the data center. Wearing a black baseball cap printed with 'Utah National Security,' he told Bartiromo that a sudden increase in online critics could only have one explanation: China. 'Who would want us to stop building our electrical grid? Who would want to stop us from having compute capacity to develop AI? Which adversary would want that?' he asked. 'There's only one: It's China.'
O'Leary claimed his team conducted a 'deep dig' into IP addresses and began reading names of people he believed were connected to critics, challenging them to 'come out, come out, wherever you are and let's shine the light of transparency on what you're doing.' He asserted, 'It's the CPP [Chinese Communist Party] at work here. There's no question about it.'
Six weeks later, Bartiromo closed a segment by reading a note from O'Leary stating he had 'no evidence' that Alliance for a Better Utah, Elevate Strategies, Gabrielle Finlayson, Taylor Knuth, or Josh Kanter were funded by China or the Chinese Communist Party. Fox News Media also stated it was 'not aware of any evidence' and apologized 'for the error.'
Alliance for a Better Utah, Elevate Strategies, Gabrielle Finlayson, and Joshua Kanter subsequently sued O'Leary and Fox for defamation. O'Leary and Fox moved to have the suit dismissed in late September.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The case highlights the dangers of public figures making unsubstantiated accusations of foreign influence, which can damage reputations and chill legitimate civic opposition.
- It raises questions about the accountability of media platforms when hosts amplify baseless claims of national security threats.
- The outcome could set a precedent for how defamation law applies to statements made during live or semi-live news segments about foreign interference.
Background
Kevin O'Leary, known as 'Mr. Wonderful' from the reality show Shark Tank, has pursued various investment ventures including technology and energy projects. His proposed Wonder Valley data center in Box Elder County, Utah, is a massive undertaking requiring substantial energy infrastructure. The project received unanimous approval from the three county commissioners, but faced online criticism from local organizations and individuals concerned about its environmental and community impacts. O'Leary's subsequent public relations campaign framed opposition as a national security issue, leading to the defamation lawsuit.
Key Perspectives
Plaintiffs (Alliance for a Better Utah, Elevate Strategies, et al.): They argue O'Leary's false accusations of Chinese Communist Party ties defamed them, causing reputational harm and subjecting them to public suspicion. They seek accountability for what they view as reckless and harmful statements.
Kevin O'Leary and Fox News: O'Leary initially defended his claims as a good-faith national security concern, but later retracted them. Fox News apologized for the error. Both have moved to dismiss the suit, likely arguing that the statements were opinion or protected commentary on a matter of public interest, or that the retraction mitigated harm.
Critics/Skeptics: Some may argue that public figures should face higher scrutiny when invoking foreign threats to silence dissent. Others might worry that the lawsuit could chill robust public debate about major infrastructure projects, especially those involving national security implications.
What to Watch
- The court's ruling on the motion to dismiss, which will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery or is thrown out.
- Any further evidence of foreign interference that O'Leary may attempt to present in his defense.
- The response from Utah state officials, who supported the project, and whether they distance themselves from O'Leary's allegations.