Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) is emerging as the right-wing media favorite among the clown car of House Republicans currently vying to become House speaker. Donalds, a second-term member who voted against certifying the electoral votes following the January 6, 2021, insurrection, has little legislative experience but maintains a constant presence on right-wing outlets such as Fox News.
The House has been mired in chaos for weeks since a handful of attention-seeking Republican members ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). First House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) and then Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) were selected speaker-designate by the GOP caucus, but each stepped down after it became clear he could not amass enough votes on the floor. Nine declared candidates for the post will make their case to their peers on Monday night.
Former President Donald Trump reportedly opposes the candidacy of House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN), who was quickly denounced by pro-Trump media figures including Steve Bannon. Notably, Emmer, who was No. 3 in the caucus leadership before McCarthy’s speakership collapsed, is one of only two would-be speakers who voted to certify the 2020 electoral votes.
Meanwhile, Donalds, who still denies that President Joe Biden’s election was legitimate, is picking up Jordan's mantle as the speaker candidate favored by the right-wing press. Donalds, like the Ohio Republican and other members of what I call the Fox News Caucus, uses his regular interviews on right-wing outlets to bootstrap himself to national relevance.
Donalds has appeared on weekday Fox News programs 193 times since August 2017. He’s been interviewed nearly four times as frequently as Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA), the speaker candidate with the second-most Fox appearances, and nearly nine times as frequently as Emmer, who has the third-most.
The disparities are all the more startling given Donalds’ recent entry to national politics — both Emmer and Johnson are members of the House Republican Caucus leadership and entered Congress in 2015 and 2017, respectively.
Donalds has the fifth-most weekday Fox appearances of all elected officials since January 2021, when he began his first term in office. Only Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Jordan, Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL), and Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) received more interviews on the network during this time.
Donalds is a particular favorite of Fox’s prime-time hosts, who serve as influential kingmakers within the GOP. He has appeared in Fox weekday prime time at least 67 times, including 38 interviews on The Ingraham Angle and 25 interviews on Hannity. The only other speaker candidates who have appeared in prime time are Johnson (14 times) and Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK) (once).
Donalds has promoted those Fox appearances to solicit funds from donors, telling supporters that “the next time I go on Hannity, I want to show Sean a list of all the grassroots patriots who stood with me in my hour of need.”
Sean Hannity, the Fox prime-time host and GOP operative who functioned as Jordan’s biggest booster, has floated Donalds for speaker.
“Byron Donalds' name is probably the name I hear the most,” he told his radio audience on Friday.
Donalds’ profile in right-wing media is not limited to Fox; he’s made dozens of appearances on the far-right One America News Network and drawn fulsome praise from right-wing influencers including Charlie Kirk and Roger Stone. He was lauded by conspiracy theorists like Dom Lucre and Benny Johnson over the weekend for going on Fox and saying that as speaker, he would release all security footage from the January 6 insurrection.
Right-wing media demagogues have spent years encouraging their audience to demand leaders who embrace the same brand of radicalism. Donalds is just the latest in a long line of Republican politicians to grasp that Fox and other propagandists constitute their real path to power.
Fox News has almost completely neglected to cover breaking news developments in a series of shootings that targeted the homes of multiple Democratic officials in New Mexico, neglecting a story that would potentially call further attention to the network’s own promotion of conspiracy theories about voter fraud.
On Monday, an Albuquerque SWAT team arrested Solomon Pena, naming him as the suspected “mastermind” behind a series of drive-by shootings at the homes of four local Democratic elected officials, including two county commissioners as well as the incoming speaker of the state House. Nobody was injured in the shootings, but in one instance bullets went through the bedroom of a 10-year-old girl while she was asleep.
A crucial aspect of this story is the suspect’s alleged motive, reported by the Albuquerque Journal: Pena ran as the Republican nominee for a state legislative seat last November, losing with just 26 percent of the vote, and since then has made conspiratorial claims that the election was stolen. “Once the rigging is stopped, I will be sworn in as the State Rep for district 14,” Pena wrote in one Twitter post. He also was in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, when then-President Donald Trump gathered his supporters in an attempted insurrection to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, and has since repeatedly voiced his support for Trump’s false claims about elections being stolen by Democrats.
CNN has covered the story for a total of one hour and 35 minutes over the past two days, MSNBC has covered it for a total of two hours and 20 minutes, including interviews on both networks with one of the officials whose home was shot, and who described Pena’s earlier visit to her home to complain that the election had been fraudulent. In an astonishing contrast, Fox News has covered it for a grand total of less than one minute.
The first mention of this story on Fox News was not even intentional: The network was carrying a live feed of White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s briefing with reporters, when a journalist asked a question.
Fox first purposefully included the story during a headline update on Special Report, lasting less than 30 seconds. The story received another 20 seconds of coverage on Fox News @ Night, as part of a collection of stories headlined under Fox’s misleading category “America’s Crime Crisis.” Fox mentioned in both instances that Pena had lost his campaign for the state legislature, but the network did not mention his false claims that the election was stolen, the fact that he had previously visited a county commissioner’s home to complain about the results, or his presence in Washington on the day of the January 6 insurrection.
Fox News could never admit a connection between those conspiracy theories and a rash of terrorist acts, as doing so would call into question the network’s own recent coverage. Last November, for example, prime-time host Tucker Carlson questioned the election results in Arizona, where a number of statewide Republican candidates lost their races, and declared ominously that “Americans lose their faith in their democratic system and when they lose that faith, they tend to become radical and over time, they can become dangerous.” In addition, the network’s coverage last August of the FBI search for stolen documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate was clearly aimed at whipping up its viewers into further rage.
Methodology
Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original programming on CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC for any of the terms “shot,” “gun violence,” “death,” or “attack” or any variation of any of the terms “shoot,” “wound,” “kill,” “injure,” “gunfire,” or “terror” within close proximity of any of the terms “Solomon,” “Pena,” “Peña,” “New Mexico,” or “Albuquerque” from January 16, 2023, when authorities arrested Pena, through 12 p.m. ET on January 18, 2023.
We included segments, which we defined as instances when the shootings allegedly directed by Solomon Pena were the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of the shootings. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed the shootings with one another.
We also included passing mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker in a segment on another topic mentioned the shootings without another speaker engaging with the comment, and teasers, which we defined as instances when the anchor or host promoted a segment about the shootings scheduled to air later in the broadcast.
Fox News significantly decreased its volume of violent crime coverage in the week of the midterms, down 63 percent from the week prior.
The network averaged 141 weekday violent crime segments per week from Labor Day through the Friday before the election; in the week of the midterms, Fox aired 71 weekday violent crime segments — a decrease of 50 percent compared to the prior average.
Fox was open in its strategy of using violent crime as a political cudgel against Democrats throughout the midterms. Driven in part by Fox host Tucker Carlson's calls for Republicans to run on the issue, the network engaged in a months-long campaign to tie Democrats and the Biden administration to violent crime, often by highlighting specific incidents in “Democratic cities” and blaming progressive criminal justice reform for individual violent crimes.
In the lead-up to the midterms, Fox averaged 141 weekday violent crime segments per week from Labor Day through the Friday before the election. The two weeks prior to Election Day, those starting October 24 and October 31, featured the highest number of weekday violent crime segments of the period studied: 187 and 193 segments, respectively. That coverage dropped dramatically during the week of the election, which had just 71 weekday violent crime segments.
In the week after the election, Fox’s crime coverage has ticked back up a bit as stories about the tragic shooting at the University of Virginia and multiple killings at the University of Idaho entered the news cycle — but the coverage was notably less focused on painting Democratic cities as crime-infested. Thus far this week, Fox has aired 74 violent crime segments in three days, which is still notably fewer than in the weeks prior to the midterms.
Fox’s breathless political coverage of violent crime during the midterm period often ignored key context, such as the reality that crimestatistics from red states were higher than those of blue states and that Democrats across the country at multiple levels of government made efforts to fund law enforcement and curtail violent crime. Instead, these segments often focused on attacking progressive district attorneys and candidates across the country.
This initial drop-off in violent crime coverage immediately following the midterm elections bears resemblance to another long-forgotten Fox News midterm narrative: “migrant caravans.” The network went all in fearmongering about “migrant caravans” in the weeks leading up to the 2018 midterms — only to completely drop the subject right after.
Media Matters searched our internal database of all original, weekday programming on Fox News Channel (shows airing from 6 a.m. through midnight) for segments that analysts determined to be about violent crime in general or specific violent crimes from September 5, 2022, through November 16, 2022.
We counted segments, which we defined as instances when violent crime in general or a specific violent crime was the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of violent crime in general or of a specific violent crime. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed violent crime in general or a specific violent crime with one another.
In segments discussing the Supreme Court draft opinion revealing the court has decided to repeal Roe v. Wade, Fox News hosted an overwhelming number of men and white people, largely excluding voices most heavily affected by the decision to strike down abortion rights in the United States. In contrast, CNN and MSNBC hosted a majority of women to discuss the news.
Key Findings
In cable news segments that discussed Roe or the draft opinion between May 2, when Politico published the leaked decision, through 5 p.m. EDT on May 5:
Men made up nearly two-thirds of all guest appearances on Fox News (64 percent).
The majority of guest appearances on CNN (63 percent) and MSNBC (69 percent) were by women.
White people made up 87 percent of guest appearances on Fox.
CNN and MSNBC featured white people in 70 percent and 62 percent of such guest appearances, respectively.
Across the three cable news networks, 21 percent of guest appearances were by women of color — 24 percent of appearances on CNN, 30 percent on MSNBC, and just seven percent on Fox News.
On the evening of May 2, Politico reported a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, revealing the court is poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The possible repeal would roll back the clock nearly half a century and return abortion law to each state. It would trigger legislation banning abortion in 13 states and would lay the groundwork for an additional 19 states to enforce pre-Roe abortion bans that are still on the books or to institute regressive laws banning abortion extremely early, in the weeks before fetal viability.
The potential ruling would impact people of color the most, and it has already been criticized not only for standing on flimsy and unprecedented legal ground, but also for defying broad and categorical public opinion. In the communities that would be most affected, 63 percent of women, 68 percent of Black adults, and 60 percent of Hispanic adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
Even though this decision impacts women and people of color the most, Fox News predominately hosted men and white guests in segments that discussed the end of Roe: 87 percent of guest appearances in such segments were of white people, 64 percent were by men, and 58 percent were by white men. Only 36 percent were by women.
CNN and MSNBC fared slightly better when it came to featuring a diversity of voices. Both networks featured more guest appearances of women than men in segments on Roe, with CNN featuring women in 63 percent and MSNBC featuring them in 69 percent of such segments.
Across the three cable news networks, 21 percent of guest appearances were by women of color — 24 percent of appearances on CNN, 30 percent on MSNBC, and just seven percent on Fox News.
Black guests also comprised much larger proportions of guest appearances on CNN and MSNBC than on Fox. Approximately 22 percent of guest appearances in segments discussing the decision on CNN and 27 percent on MSNBC were of Black guests. By contrast, only five percent of such appearances on Fox were of Black guests.
All other races and ethnicities – Asian-American/Pacific Islander, Latino/Hispanic, Middle Eastern, and mutiracial guests – were featured in 6% or less of guest appearances on any of the three networks.
It should be noted, however, that MSNBC chose to platform anti-abortion activists in its programming, featuring segments with Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life and Marjorie Dannenfelser of Susan B. Anthony List. In her appearance, Hawkins was allowed to spread anti-abortion misinformation unchecked.
Fox’s decision to host mostly men and white people in segments discussing the opinion might explain why the network’s coverage was largely focused on the leak rather than the damaging impact from the repeal of Roe. Rather than airing segments featuring guests who could describe the genuine impacts of such a decision, Fox News shows like Hannity featured panels of white men to feign outrage over the leak.
When cable media outlets – particularly Fox News – fail to feature guests who can speak to the personal impacts of the story, they fail to adequately inform their viewers about the horrifying ramifications of overturning Roe.
Additional research contributions from Erin Kee
Methodology
Media Matters searched our internal database of all original, weekday programming on CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC (shows airing from 6 a.m. through midnight) from May 2, 2022, when the report of the draft opinion came out, through 5 p.m. EDT May 5, 2022, for guest segments that touched on the leaked Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.
Media Matters searched our internal database of all original, weekday programming on CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC (shows airing from 6 a.m. through midnight) from May 2, 2022, when the report of the draft opinion came out, through 5 p.m. EDT May 5, 2022, for guest segments that touched on the leaked Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.
We reviewed all guest participants in the identified segments for their sex or gender and their race or ethnicity. We classified an individual as “male” or “female” based on their self-identification or publicly available biographical information; no participants in this study publicly identified as nonbinary. We based an individual’s race or ethnicity on their self-identification or publicly available biographical information. If a guest participant’s race or ethnicity could not be determined through such means, we coded them as “unknown.” For guests who identified with multiple races or ethnicities, we coded them as “multiracial.” We used categories as defined by the U.S. Census with the addition of “Middle Eastern” as defined by the U.S. State Department.
We coded guest participants as “white” if they self-identify as white or are of European descent; as “Black” if they self-identify as African American or Black or are of African descent; as “Latinx/Hispanic” if they self-identify as Latino/Latina or Hispanic or are of Spanish/Latin American descent; as “Asian American/Pacific Islander” if they self-identify as Asian American or Pacific Islander or are of Asian descent or Pacific Island descent; or as “Middle Eastern” if they self-identify as Middle Eastern or are of Middle Eastern descent.
In the days after special counsel John Durham, tasked with investigating the FBI probe into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, filed a pretrial motion on February 11, Fox News provided an astounding amount of coverage at a breakneck pace, falsely claiming it proved 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton spied on the Trump campaign. However, coverage of the story slowed dramatically after Clinton accused the network of “getting awfully close to actual malice” in its reporting.
A Media Matters review of Fox News transcripts found that from February 11 through February 24, 2022, Fox's total coverage of the Durham filing was more than 11 hours over 149 segments. Eighty-five percent of that was before Clinton alleged Fox of “malice”; just 15 percent was after.
Contrary to framing from right-wing media, which generally ranhog wild with the story, Durham’s filing alleges that a lawyer linked to the Clinton campaign shared internet traffic data from networks near the White House and Trump Tower with the CIA. The filing does not allege that the data were obtained illegally or that the Clinton campaign directed the effort, nor does it provide evidence that the data were collected after former President Donald Trump was sworn into office.
From February 13, when Fox first mentioned the story, through the 3 p.m. EST hour on February 17, when Clinton commented about the network's coverage approaching “malice,” Fox covered the story for 9 hours and 23 minutes total. From then onward through February 20, Fox spent 1 hour and 40 minutes on the story: The network covered it for 5 minutes on February 18, 17 minutes on February 19, and 56 minutes on February 20.
A significant portion of Fox’s coverage after Clinton’s “malice” comment was on the February 20 edition of Life, Liberty & Levin, where host Mark Levin spent 35 minutes on the Durham investigation and false allegations from Trump that the Obama administration or the Clinton campaign spied on his own. Levin has been making these unsubstantiated accusations for years. Since then, Fox appears to have dropped the subject entirely; there was only a single mention of the story which Trump made during an interview on February 23’s The Ingraham Angle.
In between accusing mainstream media of ignoring the story, Fox and other right-wing media’s coverage falsely framed the Durham filing as a “bombshell” proving Clinton is a “certified political criminal,” and “the real insurrectionist” who “tried to steal the election by spreading misinformation.” Meanwhile, Durham attempted todistance himself from right-wing coverage of his filing.
Such pontificating was not relegated to the network’s opinion programming; Fox’s straight-“news” shows were just as culpable in pushing the false narratives of the Durham filing. Nearly 4 hours of coverage was on so-called “news” shows like The Story with Martha MacCallum (44 minutes), America Reports with John Roberts and Sandra Smith (37), Special Report with Bret Baier (33), and America’s Newsroom with Bill Hemmer and Dana Perino (32).
But Fox’s opinion shows provided the most coverage with more than 7 hours in total. Leading the pack was the network’s premiere weekday morning talk show Fox & Friends with 1 hour and 3 minutes. Following closely behind was Hannity (58 minutes), Fox & Friends First (50), and Fox & Friends Weekend (43).
Clinton’s accusation of “actual malice” holds real legal meaning: The 1964 decision in The New York Times v. Sullivan established “actual malice” as the legal threshold to prove defamation of a public figure; 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Timeshinges on the same legal standard. This wouldn’t be the first time Fox found itself in legal hot water for its reporting: Dominion Voting Systems Corp. and Smartmatic aresuing the network for knowingly pushing false information about election fraud.
Methodology
Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original programming on Fox News Channel for any of the terms “Durham” (including misspellings), “Special Counsel,” or “Clinton” not within close proximity to “Bill” each within close proximity to any of the terms “Trump,” “Russia,” “Sussmann,” “White House,” or “server” from February 11, 2022, through February 24, 2022.
We included segments, which we defined as instances when Durham’s investigation was the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of the investigation. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed the investigation with one another. We also included mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker discussed the investigation without another speaker engaging with the comment, and teasers, which we defined as instances when the anchor or host promoted a segment about the investigation scheduled to air later in the broadcast. We rounded all times to the nearest minute.
We split Fox programs into “news” and “opinion” sides. We defined “news” programs as those with anchors, such as Bret Baier or Shannon Bream, while we defined “opinion” programs as those with hosts, such as Tucker Carlson or Laura Ingraham, at the helm. We used the designations from each anchor’s or host’s FoxNews.com author page. We also considered the format of the program; we defined those using a panel format, such as Outnumbered and The Five, as “opinion.
When Americans are at odds with the government, Fox News has a lot to say -- but which side Fox figures take in such cases seemingly depends on the politics and race of those involved.
As peaceful protests against police brutality and racism in the U.S. continue to unfold nationwide, Fox News has been laser-focused on demonizing the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest (CHOP), a recently formed six-block radius zone in Seattle, Washington, that is free of police. Fox has framed CHOP protesters as engaging in "anarchy," "outright insurrection," and an "occupation."
This framing is in stark contrast to the network's heavy coverage of a 2014 conflict between federal agents with the Bureau of Land Management and Cliven Bundy, a Nevada rancher who refused to pay federal cattle ranching fees for over two decades. (Even Fox's Laura Ingraham has noticed the double standard in coverage, but she claimed it applies to other media outlets.)
Bundy became a Fox News hero after he and other armed protesters threatened violence toward the bureau for attempting to seize Bundy's cattle, eventually leading to his supporters pointing guns at federal agents, among other intimidating tactics. Fox figures, in particular Sean Hannity, relentlessly lauded Bundy for his supposed patriotism, stopping only when he went on a wildly racist public tirade roughly two weeks after the standoff came to a head. Hannity even hosted Bundy on both his Fox prime-time show and his radio program. Fox treated Bundy and armed supporters of his cause as hardworking Americans standing up to the government, while downplaying their threats of violence, intimidating behavior, and lawless actions.
Meanwhile, the network has used terms like "militants" and "anarchists" carrying out an "insurrection" to describe the activists in Seattle, where police vacated their East Precinct headquarters on June 8 after eight days of violent confrontations with protesters. Seattle residents and protesters responded by turning the six-block radius into a peaceful, police-free zone. The area now houses community gardens, co-ops, and regular peaceful protests. Occupants of CHOP invited Seattle's houseless residents to join the area. Organizers in CHOP also released a list of collective demands to the Seattle government, which includes abolition of the Seattle Police Department.
Between June 10 and June 16, Fox spent a total of 8 hours and 48 minutes covering CHOP. Evening shows alone accounted for nearly three and a half hours of this coverage, spread out in at least 71 segments, mentions, and teasers. Prime-time host Tucker Carlson devoted 10 segments and nearly an hour of total time to the story, and Hannity and anchor Shannon Bream each spent just over a half-hour covering CHOP within the seven-day time frame.
(CHOP was formerly named the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone before organizers renamed the area. Fox has reported using the two acronyms, CHAZ and CHOP, but both describe the same Seattle zone. This data reflects coverage of the zone under either name.)
Fox's coverage has typically portrayed the creation of CHOP as an anarchic, violent city takeover and often obscured the fact that the police were the ones who initially chose to abandon their precinct. Fox personalities have fearmongered to viewers that the supposed chaos will spread elsewhere. When reality doesn't match Fox's narrative, the network has turned to fabrication, including unethically edited or misleading photojournalism, and has pushed debunked claims about the protest.
Here are some of the ways that Fox has been covering CHOP:
False or misleading reporting
Fox News uncritically repeated a Seattle Police Department claim that protesters in the Seattle autonomous zone were extorting local businesses. Christina Arrington, the business development manager of the neighborhood chamber of commerce, stated that no businesses have reported extortion.
Fox's website published altered and misleading photos of the autonomous zone and Fox had to issue a rare apology for its egregious violations of photojournalism ethics. In one instance, Fox spliced images taken on different days, and in another, it inserted an image of an armed man from a June 10 protest into other images of CHOP. In yet another case, Fox used an image of burning property from previous protests in Minneapolis to represent CHOP.
Fear-mongering that the "anarchy" from CHOP will spread to other parts of the country
On Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Dan Bongino said that "this fight's coming to your front door, to every single person watching."
Carlson said that the last time there was an independent nation in the U.S., it led to a "civil war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and lasted three years."
Carlson hosted the Seattle Police Officers Guild's Michael Solan Michael Solan, who fearmongered that the activists may overtake other police precincts and disrupt the 911 call center in Seattle.
Fear-mongering about the conditions of CHOP
Fox News contributor Mike Huckabee called CHAZ an "outright insurrection" and a "hostage situation" and questioned why those in charge aren't taking extreme measures like turning off water and electricity and jamming communication to quell the protest.
Fox News contributor Brian Brenberg called CHOP an "occupation," "secession," and "takeover."
In his June 12 opening monologue, Hannity declared that in Seattle, "anarchy now reigns supreme," fearmongering about "armed vigilantes, vandalism, and extortion" while claiming CHOP is like a "failed third-world" country.
On the June 12 edition of his show, Carlson described the area as having "no police, no laws, no industrial base" and then aired a mock travel ad for the "nation of CHAZ," an "anarchist utopia."
In her June 11 opening monologue, Ingraham described CHOP as a "post-apocalyptic hellscape," fearmongered about "anarchists" and "militants," and pushed the lie that local businesses were being extorted.
Seattle city council candidate Ari Hoffman described CHAZ as a "glorified homeless encampment" where "you're concerned you might get hepatitis from or, perhaps, coronavirus."
Fox Coverage Of The Bundy Standoff
Fox News -- and Hannity in particular -- regularly cheered on Bundy as a patriotic American throughout the escalation of his standoff with the federal government.
After weeks of being championed by conservative media in 2014, Bundy and his armed supporters set up checkpoints to demand to see locals' proof of residency and engaged in other intimidating tactics. Bundy's tension with the Bureau of Land Management rose to a boiling point on April 12, 2014, when the federal agency moved to confiscate Bundy's cattle. One reporter described the resulting chaos by saying Bundy supporters had been "whipped into a frenzy" by Hannity and others in conservative media. Bundy threatened violence against Bureau of Land Management agents who confiscated his cattle, saying that he would "do whatever it takes" and that he "abide[s] by almost zero federal laws."
Numerous media outlets reported on supporters pointing guns at federal agents, and one Bundy supporter gained media attention after he presented a strategy of using women as human shields. Another Bundy supporter, who was observed carrying a firearm, was later sentenced to 68 years in prison for his actions threatening law enforcement. Several supporters revealed a common affinity for extremism, including an urge to engage in a "range war."
Yet here is how Fox News covered Bundy at the time:
On Fox & Friends, co-host Ainsley Earhardt said that Bundy's supporters are "good, hardworking Americans" who merely "disagree" with the government.
Former Fox & Friends co-host Clayton Morris said the ranchers were "protesting peacefully" and "arguing against government intervention here."
Fox senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano, who was a contributor at the time, said that the ranch protesters "shows you the resistance of patriotic Americans."
Former Fox News contributor Todd Starnes said that the protesters were "law-abiding citizens" and "patriots."
Starnes also characterized the federal government seizing Bundy's cattle as "stealing" and said that authorities "used to string folks up for stealing cattle."
On his prime-time Fox show, Hannity sympathized with Bundy's claims against the government and argued that allowing Bundy's cattle to graze on public lands "keeps the price of meat down for every American consumer."
Fox & Friends complained about the grazing regulations implemented to protect threatened desert tortoises that sparked the initial dispute between Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management. Co-host Brian Kilmeade said, "We're not anti-turtle, but we are pro-logic and tradition."
Hannity floated a conspiracy theory on his show that the federal government would kill Bundy and bragged about his role in escalating the standoff.
Methodology
Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video archive for all original programming on Fox News Channel for any of the terms "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone," "CHAZ," "CHOP," "Capital Hill Occupied Protest," "Free Capitol Hill," "Seattle Police Department," or "East Precinct" from June 8 through June 16, 2020, for coverage of the Capitol Hill occupied protest. We timed teasers for upcoming segments about the Capitol Hill occupied protest, passing mentions about the Capitol Hill occupied protest in segments on other topics, and segments about the Capitol Hill occupied protest. We included as segments when the Capitol Hill occupied protest was the stated topic of discussion or where we found "significant discussion" of the Capitol Hill occupied protest in segments about other topics. We defined "significant discussion" as instances when two or more persons discussed the Capitol Hill occupied protest with one another. We timed only the speech relevant to the Capitol Hill occupied protest in those instances.
While state governors have attempted to slow the coronavirus outbreak through a number of stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders, right-wing activists have organized a series of protests across the country calling for the reopening of businesses and the end of social distancing orders. Fox News has given extensive coverage to these protests -- promoting the events, praising and encouraging the protesters, as well as hosting rally organizers -- despite warnings from medical experts that opening up the country too soon could backfire, setting everyone back in the fight against coronavirus.
In one week, from April 13 through 19, Fox News devoted 69 segments to the story, spending 4 hours and 23 minutes covering the protests.
Fox & Friend First aired 9 segments about the protests, followed by America's Newsroom with 8 segments. Rounding out the shows with the most segments were Your World with Neil Cavuto and America's News Headquarters with 6 segments, and Fox News @ Night and Fox & Friends with 5 segments each.
Fox provided the most single-day coverage on April 15, the day of the Operation Gridlock protest in Michigan, with an hour and six minutes. That same day, the network hosted Michigan protest organizers four times.
Fox personalities went out of their way to gush over the protests and praise those participating, even overlooking obvious issues like social distancing being ignored:
How Fox News is embracing protests against coronavirus safety measureswww.youtube.com
Fox's promotion of the protests went past just excessive coverage; the network also --
Hosted protest organizers seven times: At least four protest organizers were hosted by the network for a total of seven appearances. Meshawn Maddock, an organizer with the Michigan Conservative Coalition -- who is also on the National Advisory Board of Women for Trump and co-founder of Michigan Trump Republicans -- has made four appearances on the network. Fox also hosted Michigan Conservative Coalition organizers Matt Seely and Rosanne Ponkowski, as well as Michele Even, who organized a protest in Minnesota with Liberate Minnesota.
Hosted sheriffs who are refusing to enforce Michigan's stay-at-home orders four times: On four occasions Fox hosted Michigan sheriffs who have said they won't strictly enforce Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's stay-at-home order. Sheriffs Dar Leaf, Kim Cole, and Ted Schendel all appeared on the network to explain their opposition to some of Michigan's guidelines.
Aired graphics promoting the time and place of upcoming protests: Fox News has repeatedly aired maps and graphics promoting upcoming protests. On Friday's Outnumbered, there was an on-screen graphic noting that the Minnesota protests would be starting at 1 p.m.
Repeatedly thanked and praised protesters and organizers for their efforts, and encouraged them to continue organizing: Neil Cavuto wished protesters in California "good luck", while showing protesters holding signs calling COVID-19 "a lie." On Hannity, Fox host Jeanine Pirro heaped praise upon the protests, saying, "The American spirit is too strong." Pirro also mentioned the Michigan protesters and said, "God bless them," noting that protests will continue to happen across the country. Anchor Harris Faulkner also used encouraging language for the protests, noting, "This country was kind of founded on people who were willing to risk themselves for freedom."
Aired false claims about the details of Michigan's stay-at-home orders: On twooccasions, Meshawn Maddock used her Fox interviews as a platform to spread misinformation saying that Michigan has barred the sale of the American flag.
Repeatedly showed images of Infowars personalities at the Texas protest: During the network's protest coverage on Monday, Fox repeatedly aired b-roll footage of Infowars personalities Alex Jones and Owen Shroyer during protest segments.
Methodology
Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database service for any variation of the terms "protest" or "demand" or the term "anti-quarantine" within close proximity of any of the terms "social distance," "social distancing," "stay-at-home," "shelter-in-place," "closure," "coronavirus," "COVID-19," or any variation of the term "reopen" for Fox News Channel from April 13 through 19, 2020.We timed segments, teasers for upcoming segments, and passing mentions about the protests, which we defined as segments where the protests were the stated topic of discussion or segments that included "significant discussion" of the protests. We defined "significant discussion" as two or more speakers discussing the protests with one another.
Fox News’ August 21 coverage of the tragic death of Mollie Tibbetts spiked after law enforcement identified their suspect as an undocumented immigrant. In the eight hours between reports that the 20-year-old University of Iowa student’s body had been found and the announcement of the suspect’s alleged legal status, the network discussed the story for 21 minutes; after law enforcement announced that the suspect was undocumented, that coverage spiked to over three times as much throughout the next seven hours.
The news of Tibbett’s body being found broke around 9 a.m. that day, and Fox spent 21 minutes on the story during the next eight hours. But once local authorities identified the suspect as an undocumented immigrant during their 5 p.m. press conference, Fox’s coverage jumped to 69 minutes for the remainder of the evening. The spike in coverage occurred despite Fox airing President Donald Trump’s rally for over an hour and news breaking that former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort had been found guilty on eight counts and former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen had pleaded guilty to two felony campaign finance charges in which he directly implicated the president.
Sarah Wasko / Media Matters
The story of Tibbetts’ death was featured on Fox’s entire evening schedule from 5 p.m. to midnight. Every single mention, tease, news correspondence, interview, and panel — save one, a less than 30-second comment on Tucker Carlson Tonight — noted the suspect’s alleged immigration status.
Shortly after the press conference began, commentators on Fox were already weighing in on how Trump could use the revelation about the suspect’s legal status politically, while downplaying the developments in the Manafort and Cohen cases.
The Five co-host Dana Perino suggested that Americans don’t necessarily care as much about Manafort and Cohen’s convictions — what they really care about is the immigration status of the suspect in Tibbetts’ case:
One thing I think that the president might do is — maybe he won’t comment on either of these two things [Manafort and Cohen] at all given that we just heard from the police in Iowa with the Mollie Tibbetts case that they are holding — the federal government is holding a man, illegal immigrant, as a suspect in that case, in that murder. And to me — thinking about the fact that the Mueller thing is a little bit complicated; the Cohen thing is interesting, and it is explosive, no doubt. But if you are out there in America and you’re watching this and you’re thinking, “What do we really care about right now?” I think the president will probably be talking a lot about that.
Co-host Greg Gutfeld agreed, stating, “I just have to piggyback on what Dana said. I think that right now Trump’s main argument [on immigration] has now just been backed up by a very ugly reality. And I can’t see how that isn’t — when you stack that up against these other tax evasions and guilty pleas, for an average American, [the Tibbetts case] resonates.” Later in the show, Gutfeld said, “In terms of what is important, I think no one at the Trump rally tonight will give a damn about Manafort or Cohen, but this will probably be fresh in their minds.”
Introducing the topic of Trump’s West Virginia rally that evening, host Bret Baier stated during Special Report: “We’re likely going to hear a lot about Mollie Tibbetts and this illegal immigrant who’s in custody in Iowa.” Matthew Continetti of the conservative Washington Free Beacon replied, “That’s, of course, safe political terrain for Trump where he has a real point about the problems that illegal immigration are causing in the United States of America, and here we have the most visceral and tragic example of it with Mollie Tibbetts.”
Right before Trump’s rally, The Story host Martha MacCallum asked her guest David Wohl, “What do you expect the president might say about this case tonight?” Wohl replied, “He is going to go over this extensively tonight. … This is the number one story, Martha. Michael Cohen’s being indicted for campaign issues that Trump had nothing to do with is secondary completely to this story, Martha. This is what parents care about.”
After the rally concluded, the remaining lineup on Fox all discussed Trump’s comments about the Tibbetts case and the suspect’s alleged immigration status. Tucker Carlson Tonight, Hannity, The Ingraham Angle, and Fox News at Night all included a clip of Trump’s speech at the start of segments about Tibbetts.
The spike in Fox News’ coverage after local authorities linked Tibbetts’ murder to an allegedly undocumented immigrant made two things clear: The network was looking for a story to take some heat off the Cohen and Manafort news, and its streak ofexploitingstories to hype “immigrant crime” remains unbroken.
Methodology
Media Matters searched the Snapstream video database’s transcript and closed-captioning archive on August 21 for variations (including misspellings) of the terms “Tibbetts,” “Mollie” within close proximity to “Tibbetts”, or “Tibbetts” within close proximity of “immigrant,” “killed,” “murder,” or “missing” on Fox News Channel from 5 a.m. to midnight. We timed all mentions, teases, news correspondence, interviews, and panels only for relevant speech about the Tibbetts case.
During 48 press briefings as White House press secretary, Sean Spicer has elevated reporters from conservative outlets and drastically decreased both the number of follow-up questions granted and the amount of time devoted to answering journalists’ questions compared to Josh Earnest, his Obama administration predecessor. The three major cable news outlets have also exponentially increased the amount of time spent airing Spicer’s press conferences live compared to those at the end of the Obama administration, broadcasting nearly all of Spicer’s briefings in their entirety.
In this study:
The three main cable news networks have obsessively covered the Spicer briefings. CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC each aired at least 93 percent of Spicer’s briefing time, compared to only 2 percent of Earnest’s.
Spicer’s briefings were significantly shorter than Earnest’s — 42% shorter. Spicer’s briefings averaged 45 minutes compared to Earnest’s, which averaged 1 hour and 18 minutes.
Spicer’s top five, most-called-on reporters were all from conservative-leaning outlets. Five of Spicer’s 10 most-called-on news organizations were conservative-leaning.
Politicoreported in mid-May that in light of the “crises that are engulfing his administration,” President Donald Trump is considering upending his communications department, including potentially replacing Spicer at briefings with deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and/or largely scaling back on the number of live, on-camera briefings. (News broke May 30 that Communications Director Mike Dubke has resigned.) Trump has also suggested canceling the briefings entirely.
Given reports about what might happen to Spicer’s role in the administration, Media Matters, which has tracked all of Spicer’s formal press briefings since inauguration, is looking back at Spicer’s first four months as press secretary.
Which reporters and outlets were called on most often?
Spicer set the tone for how the administration planned to deal with the press during his first briefing to reporters on January 21, where he claimed — contrary to all available evidence — that President Donald Trump’s inauguration had “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.” (It did not.)
Since then, the press secretary has had multiple clashes with reporters in the briefing room, notably with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, NBC’s Kristen Welker, and American Urban Radio Network’s April Ryan. After Spicer told Ryan to “stop shaking [her] head” on March 28, he has called on her only two other times, and he hasn’t given her a question since March 30. (Homeland Security adviser Tom Bossert and deputy press secretary Sarah Sanders did call on Ryan during the May 11 briefing. And Ryan attempted to ask a question at the May 8 briefing, but Spicer ignored her.)
While Spicer has repeatedly skirmished with critical journalists from mainstream outlets, he has also shifted the briefings to include many more conservative-leaning reporters. His top five go-to questioners were all from right-leaning outlets: Fox News’ John Roberts, Fox News Radio’s Jon Decker, Newsmax’s John Gizzi, Fox Business’ Blake Burman, and One America News Network’s Trey Yingst.
In addition to the 48 Spicer briefings analyzed, Media Matters also collected data on a corresponding number of briefings by Obama White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, beginning with his last time in the press briefing room on January 17 of this year backward to August 22, 2016. (We assessed press briefings at the end of the Obama era as opposed to the beginning because it allowed for a comparison of more similar media environments.) Earnest’s most frequented reporters were more ideologically diverse and mainstream: Fox News’ Kevin Corke, CNN’s Michelle Kosinski, NBC’s Ron Allen, CBS Radio’s Mark Knoller, and Agence France-Presse’s Andrew Beatty.
How did Spicer handle follow-up questions compared to his predecessor?
Earnest allowed journalists to continue questioning through follow-ups until their line of inquiry was exhausted while Spicer often appeared ready to move on the moment he finished his answer. Earnest’s top five reporters averaged approximately 192 follow-up questions over the 48 briefings studied while Spicer’s top five averaged approximately 53 follow-up questions over the same number of briefings. In total, Earnest allowed 2,574 follow-up questions while Spicer only allowed 1,919 over the same number of briefings.
Sarah Wasko / Media Matters
Spicer used his position to elevate conservative outlets
Spicer has also elevated conservative outlets that had a limited or nonexistent presence in the briefing room during the last portion of Earnest’s tenure. The biggest beneficiaries were One America News Network, Fox Business, Newsmax, The Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, and Fox News Radio. Between the Earnest and Spicer briefings analyzed, One America News Network and Fox Business jumped from zero questions each under Earnest to 32 questions each under Spicer. Newsmax went from 10 questions to 34, The Daily Caller from zero to 24, Washington Examiner from one to 24, and Fox News Radio from 12 to 34.
In addition to One America News Network, Fox Business, and The Daily Caller, other conservative-leaning outlets have asked questions in the press briefing during Spicer’s tenure that were either not present or did not ask a question during Earnest’s last 48 briefings. These include LifeZette, Christian Broadcasting Network, and Townhall, all of which Spicer has occasionally called upon for questions. Other conservative outlets have appeared, if only for a few questions, including CNS News, Independent Journal Review, Intermountain Christian Newspaper, Jobe Publishing, The Lars Larson Show, Salem Radio Network, and UNF News.
Conservative-leaning outlets also make up half of the top 10 news organizations called upon most often in the briefing room. Fox News Channel, Fox News Radio, Newsmax, Fox Business, and One America News Network all made the top 10 organized by number of times Spicer called upon their reporters. (NBC News has multiple reporters from both NBC and MSNBC in the briefing room at any given time.)
By contrast, Earnest’s top 10 most called-on news organizations in his last 48 press briefings were more mainstream and more diverse, including broadcast news, cable news, wire services, radio news, and members the foreign press. While Earnest’s top 10 included several of the major wire services, Spicer’s top 10 included none.
From Earnest to Spicer, The Associated Press dropped down to 11th in the rankings, CNN fell to 14th, Reuters fell to 12th, CBS Radio fell to 24th, and Agence France-Presse went all the way down to 47th.
How frequently did Spicer hold briefings, and how much time did he devote to answering questions?
Spicer’s days in the briefing room have dropped dramatically since early April — and briefings, which were a largely regular occurrence during the beginning of the administration, have become sporadic at best.
Since April 11 — when Spicer caused a firestorm by claiming that Adolf Hitler “didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons” — Spicer has helmed only 12 briefings, which averaged approximately 36 minutes in length. By contrast, Spicer’s first 36 briefings, on and before April 11, averaged approximately 49 minutes in length. (Altogether, Spicer’s 48 briefings averaged approximately 45 minutes in length.) Earnest, on the other hand, averaged a briefing length of approximately 1 hour and 18 minutes for all 48 briefings analyzed. Overall, Earnest’s 48 briefings totaled 63 hours and 24 minutes while Spicer’s totaled just 36 hours and 36 minutes.
Sarah Wasko / Media MattersSarah Wasko / Media Matters
After not airing Earnest press conferences, cable news networks aired almost all of Spicer’s press briefings in their entirety
The three major cable news networks have been unable to resist airing Spicer’s briefings live and — aside from a few exceptions — largely in their entirety. While some disparity in airtime should have been expected due to the fact that Spicer’s original press briefings likely featured more news than ones at the close of the Obama administration, the gap in airtime is still striking.
All three cable networks aired some portion of all of Spicer’s 48 briefings live. CNN has aired 97 percent of Spicer’s briefing time thus far; Fox News, 96 percent; and MSNBC, 93 percent. (All three networks, MSNBC in particular, broke from briefings to cover the House Intelligence Committee hearing on Russia with then-FBI director James Comey on March 20, then-Supreme Court Justice nominee Neil Gorsuch’s Senate confirmation hearing on March 21, the Westminster, London, terror attack on March 22, Gorsuch’s confirmation vote on April 3, and the San Bernardino, CA, school shooting on April 10).
By contrast, over the same number of Earnest briefings, each network aired only about 2 percent of their total time. This even includes instances where a network played a clip from “moments ago” as the briefing was still underway.
Over Earnest’s more than 63 hours of press briefings, CNN spent 1 hour and 26 minutes, Fox News spent 1 hour and 4 minutes, and MSNBC spent just 1 hour and 16 minutes televising the briefings. But for Spicer’s more than 36 hours of press briefings, CNN televised 35 hours and 33 minutes, Fox News televised 34 hours and 59 minutes, and MSNBC televised 34 hours and 9 minutes.
Sarah Wasko / Media Matters
Methodology
Media Matters reviewed all 48 daily press briefing conducted by White House press secretary Sean Spicer between January 23 and May 15, 2017, and an equal number of daily press briefings conducted by former White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest beginning on January 17, 2017 and going backward to August 22, 2016. Press gaggles were excluded from the analysis. If the deputy press secretary conducted the briefing, those were excluded. Ninety-six total briefings were included in the data.
We tracked how often the press secretary called on journalists to ask questions, and we also kept track of the number of follow-up questions a journalist was able to ask. If a journalist interjected without a clear indication of being called on by the press secretary, that was counted as being called on if the press secretary heard and answered the question. If the question was ignored, it was not counted. When journalists asked multipart questions or multiple questions without interruption from the press secretary, those questions were counted individually. If a subsequent question rephrased or clarified the prior question for the press secretary, it was not counted as a separate question.
We counted only those questions fielded by the press secretary. Questions posed to other members of the administration, other cabinet members, or guest speakers at the beginning of briefings were excluded from the analysis.
For the length of each briefing, we went to the official White House YouTube pages and used the video lengths for press briefing videos uploaded by the White House. We then used video archive services iQ media and SnapStream to scan through CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC to time how much of a briefing was broadcast. Any portion of a briefing broadcast during the time that the briefing was actually taking place was included in the totals. The time lengths include when other members of the administration, other cabinet members, or guest speakers took questions from the press as well.
Journalists were identified by watching the video in real time. In approximately 4 percent of all times a journalist was called on, we were unable to identify the journalist asking the question. These typically included members of the foreign press pool or members of news outlets who do not have a regular pass to the press room. These unidentified journalists were excluded from the analysis.
The broadcast networks’ flagship evening news programs failed to inform their viewers about the inherent conflicts of interest a potential Donald Trump presidency would bring in the months leading up to Election Day, and have not given the subject the urgency it deserves in the wake of his election, according to a Media Matters review.
Between September 14 and Election Day, the networks only aired approximately seven minutes of stories about or at least mentioning a conflict of interest. In the week after the election, they aired approximately 14 minutes — but only half of that explicitly called the issues “conflicts.”
Trump has said throughout his campaign and following his election that he intends for his children to run his business empire while he is president. But on September 14, Newsweek reported that if Trump and his family don’t cut ties to the family’s business conglomerate, Trump would “be the most conflicted president in American history, one whose business interests will constantly jeopardize the security of the United States” due to the Trump Organization’s relationships and financial entanglements with foreign interests.” Responding to that story, Richard Painter, the former chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, toldMedia Matters that the only way to avoid serious conflicts of interest would be for Trump and his family to sell all of their holdings in the Trump Organization. Painter also stressed that the issue was a “serious problem” that warrants increased media attention.
Painter sounded some of the earliest alarms about Trump’s conflicts. Speaking with Mother Jones in June, he explained that the idea of a sitting president holding any debt owed to an entity that the government regulates should disturb the public: “[H]aving a president who owes a lot of money to banks, particularly when it’s on negotiable terms — it puts them at the mercy of the banks and the banks are at the mercy of regulators.”
The flood of potential and actual conflicts of interest have been made manifest following Trump’s election. A Washington Post investigation recently revealed a sprawling, globe-trotting Trump empire, showing that the president-elect’s real estate, management, and branding companies have business interests in at least 18 countries or territories. The Post also reported over the weekend that foreign diplomats had flocked to an event at the Trump International Hotel, located just a few blocks from the White House, seeking “to curry favor or access with the next president.”
The New York Timesreported that developers of Trump Towers Pune, located in Pune, India, flew to New York last week to meet with the Trumps during the president-elect’s initial stages of his transition to the White House. Pranav R. Bhakta, a consultant who helped Trump establish a foothold in the Indian market five years ago, told the Times, “To say, ‘I have a Trump flat or residence’ — it’s president-elect branded. It’s that recall value. If they didn’t know Trump before, they definitely know him now.”
These recent events should have come as no surprise, yet the network news hardly mentioned the conflicts of interest inherent in Trump’s global business ties before or after the election.
Media Matters looked at ABC’s World News Tonight with David Muir, CBS’ Evening News with Scott Pelley, and NBC’s Nightly News with Lester Holt for reports on Trump’s conflicts of interest — including the Trump Organization’s ties to foreign governments or businesses, Trump promoting his own businesses through the presidency, plans for Trump’s children taking over the Trump Organization through a “blind” trust or attempting to access security clearances, and Trump’s children using their access to the president-elect to promote their own businesses — starting from Newsweek’s September 14 article.
From then until Election Day, the networks spent approximately seven minutes on stories about or at least mentioning a conflict of interest. NBC aired a three-minute segment, and ABC aired a three-and-a-half-minute segment. Both were about Trump using his campaign to promote his own businesses; however, neither explicitly pointed to potential upcoming conflicts of interest should Trump win the election. NBC briefly mentioned theNewsweek report in a segment about corruption in the Trump Foundation, and the night before the election, the network again briefly mentioned the conflict of interest of Trump’s business ties for about eight seconds.
In the week after the election, the networks have devoted more coverage to these conflicts of interest, but it hasn’t been enough. From November 9 to 16, the networks spent approximately 14 minutes on stories about or at least mentioning a conflict of interest, but only half of those explicitly called them conflicts. They spent a total of about seven minutes on Trump’s foreign business ties, six minutes on Trump’s children helping with the president-elect’s transition or vying for security clearances, and two minutes on Ivanka Trump using a photo of herself in Trump’s recent 60 Minutes interview to sell a bracelet that retails for over $10,000.
Methodology
Media Matters searched news transcripts from the Nexis database for mentions of any variations of “conflict,” “corrupt,” “organization,” “trust,” “business,” “interest,” “cabinet,” “transition,” or “divest” within the same paragraph as “Trump” for ABC’s World News Tonight with David Muir, CBS’ Evening News with Scott Pelley, and NBC’s Nightly News with Lester Holt from September 14 through November 16. We reviewed video to determine length of coverage.
IMAGE: Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his wife Melania Trump attend a campaign event in Washington, DC, U.S., October 26 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri
