PDF Summary:Hoax, by Brian Stelter

In Hoax, author Brian Stelter examines the evolution of Fox News from an impartial news outlet to a powerful conservative influence. Stelter chronicles the network's shift toward right-wing narratives, fueled by its pursuit of ratings and the mutually beneficial relationship with Donald Trump's presidency.

Stelter argues that, to maintain viewership, Fox News embraced Trump's misinformation campaigns, amplifying falsehoods and conspiracy theories while undermining democratic norms and journalistic standards. This behind-the-scenes look dives into how the network's programming and personnel became intertwined with Trump's agenda, sowing division and eroding faith in American institutions.

(continued)...

• The portrayal of Fox News commentators as enablers of misinformation could be challenged by the argument that they were providing a platform for diverse viewpoints.
• Hannity's role as an informal advisor could be interpreted as an example of a media personality leveraging their access to influence policy, a common practice in political journalism.
• The movement of individuals from Fox News to the Trump administration could be seen as tapping into a pool of like-minded professionals rather than an inappropriate merging of media and government.
• The influence of Fox News personalities on policy and personnel decisions could be viewed as an extension of the network's role as a voice for its audience, which the administration sought to address.

The growing interdependence between Fox News and Trump has significantly eroded the trust in democratic institutions and the dissemination of accurate information.

Stelter suggests that the intertwined relationship between Fox News and Trump severely eroded the bedrock of American democratic values and the trustworthiness of journalistic practices, resulting in weakened institutional faith and a more frequent spread of misinformation. The commander-in-chief, in conjunction with his compatriots at Fox News, persistently undermined the credibility of established journalism by labeling it as "fake news," thereby crafting an altered perception of reality where truth appeared malleable and trust was exclusively reserved for individuals who parroted the narrative set forth by the president. Stelter contends that this widespread skepticism left the nation susceptible to influence and eroded the common basis of knowledge essential for a functioning democracy.

Trump's co-opting of the phrase "fake news" and its subsequent impact on the trustworthiness of established news organizations.

Stelter meticulously outlines how Trump redefined the phrase "fake news," which was originally associated with entirely fabricated stories on social media platforms, into a sweeping critique of any journalistic work that did not align with his own viewpoint. The method, which gained momentum and wider dissemination through Fox News, diminished the public's confidence in authentic news outlets, as pointed out by Stelter. The president, along with his allies, cultivated an atmosphere of skepticism towards credible journalism by likening authentic news reporting to the dissemination of Russian disinformation and falsehoods.

Fox News presents itself as the solitary trustworthy news outlet.

Stelter suggests that a considerable segment of the population began to view Fox News as the sole reliable news outlet, a circumstance that was cultivated through the network's cooperative endeavors with Trump. Personalities at Fox News established themselves as the sole dispensers of truth, persistently denouncing the "liberal media" for bias and deceit, and simultaneously discrediting any reporting that contradicted their perspective or cast the president unfavorably. Viewers were caught in a loop where they were insulated from alternative perspectives and persuaded to consider only the information validated by individuals within Trump's inner circle as trustworthy.

The spread of baseless claims and conjecture about the 2020 election was intensified by both Trump and the network Fox News.

Stelter delivers an in-depth examination of the many baseless assertions and deceptive statements about the 2020 election spread by Trump and Fox News, aimed at undermining confidence in the validity of Biden's win and questioning the integrity of democratic procedures. The network frequently aired baseless claims of widespread voting irregularities and unsupported allegations of international interference, undermining the information consumed by numerous viewers and fostering doubt and mistrust regarding the integrity of the election process.

Sean Hannity was a central figure in spreading allegations of electoral fraud, along with his colleagues at Fox News.

Stelter highlights the considerable impact wielded by Sean Hannity and his peers at Fox News in spreading stories related to voter fraud linked to Trump. The presenters, rather than critically examining or confirming the truthfulness of the statements made by the national leader, repeated and supported these assertions, thus lending an air of legitimate reporting to announcements that lacked confirmation. Stelter posits that the intentional spread of false information significantly shaped public opinion, eroding confidence in the mechanisms overseeing voting and electoral processes.

The unyielding attack on those deemed as foes, including journalists and Democratic lawmakers, has undermined the essential tenets and frameworks that support democratic rule.

Stelter argues that Trump and his allies at Fox News have significantly eroded faith in America's democratic institutions by consistently labeling journalists and Democrats as adversaries of the populace. This rhetoric, evocative of authoritarian regimes, was designed to suppress dissent and cultivate a sense of doubt among individuals skeptical of the president's narratives. Stelter argues that the relentless barrage of vilification and discrediting has further degraded the communal discourse, cultivating an atmosphere steeped in apprehension.

A significant segment of the population found themselves trapped in a cycle where their only sources of news were limited to Fox News and the communications from Trump.

Stelter suggests that the combined efforts of Trump and Fox News created a discourse loop that essentially isolated a significant portion of the American public from reliable sources of news. This resonating space, bolstered by the constant reverberation of right-leaning opinions and the dismissal of established news sources, cultivated an ideology where facts and reality were seen as malleable, with trust reserved solely for media that aligned with the views of the President. This led to a perilous and unparalleled intensification of political division, characterized by the emergence of divergent viewpoints that challenged the conclusions of specialists and impartial onlookers. Stelter suggests that the insular nature of this media organization significantly contributed to the public's misunderstanding of the pandemic and the spread of incorrect information regarding the election.

Other Perspectives

• The concept of "fake news" predates Trump, and concerns about media bias and accuracy are not unique to his administration.
• Some argue that Fox News provides a necessary counterbalance to what they perceive as a predominantly liberal mainstream media landscape.
• Claims about the 2020 election's integrity were not solely propagated by Trump and Fox News; other individuals and outlets also raised questions.
• Hannity and other Fox News personalities argue that their discussions of electoral fraud were based on addressing concerns of their viewers and ensuring election integrity.
• Criticism of journalists and lawmakers is a standard part of political discourse, and not all such criticism undermines democratic institutions.
• Viewers choose their news sources, and the popularity of Fox News could be seen as a reflection of public demand rather than the network isolating its audience.
• Trust in democratic institutions has been declining for various reasons, and attributing this erosion solely to the relationship between Trump and Fox News may oversimplify a complex issue.

The erosion of ethical and moral values at Fox News and its subsequent impact on societal norms.

Stelter suggested that Fox News' unwavering support for Trump indicated a deterioration in the channel's ethical and moral principles, which had profound implications for the structure of American society. The network's focus on financial gain at the expense of ethical standards, along with its readiness to indulge the detrimental tendencies of the president and spread his falsehoods, eroded the quality of public conversation. Stelter argues that such an atmosphere heightened tensions and deepened divisions within society, exacerbating political and societal rifts among various groups.

The network's downplaying of the severity and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on public health.

Brian Stelter documents how Fox News downplayed the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting Trump's casual approach and prioritizing political rhetoric over rigorous reporting. The commentators and presenters not only dismissed concerns about the virus but also alleged that Democrats were leveraging the situation to their political advantage. Stelter argues that this misinformation led a significant number of people to downplay the severity of the health crisis, contributing to its wider spread.

Television hosts associated with Fox News promoted hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment, which was subsequently supported by President Trump, despite the lack of definitive evidence confirming its efficacy.

Stelter highlights the persistent promotion of hydroxychloroquine as a miraculous COVID-19 remedy by certain Fox News personalities, despite the lack of scientific evidence to support such claims. Stelter contends that such unquestioning reportage further fueled Trump's fixation on the unsubstantiated remedy, prompting him to advocate for it during media updates and even confess to using it personally. The network's emphasis on political gain, to the detriment of public well-being, is highlighted by its reckless advocacy driven by the desire to meet presidential demands and attract a larger audience.

The broad endorsement of dialogues that advance the politics linked to the concept of white identity.

Stelter argues that Fox News played a role in intensifying societal discord, alienation, and anger in the United States by often airing material that made extreme right-wing views seem commonplace. The network leveraged the anxieties of its largely white audience, frequently highlighting racial implications, spreading baseless stories about demographic changes, and stoking fears about immigration. The contentious journalism of the author in question cultivated a climate in which extreme ideologies and racial hostility were considered acceptable.

Laura Ingraham, alongside Tucker Carlson, has played a major role in spreading stories about cultural displacement.

Stelter highlights the significant role Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham play in promoting narratives centered on white identity politics and the notion of cultural displacement. Stelter suggests that such presenters frequently use divisive rhetoric, implying that the multicultural fabric of American society poses a threat to white residents, which in turn incites a sense of disquiet and resentment in their audience. The commentary often mirrors viewpoints that align with beliefs favoring white nationalism and hostility towards immigrants, thus broadening what is deemed acceptable in conservative dialogue and normalizing what were once considered extreme perspectives.

The proliferation of apprehension and skepticism towards others, especially across various racial and political divides.

Stelter connects the conversation from a leading media organization to the widespread doubt and unease experienced by numerous individuals, particularly concerning divisions based on race and politics. The broadcaster significantly fueled a climate of distrust and animosity by focusing on divisive stories, accentuating alleged dangers facing white Christian Americans, and portraying those with liberal political views in a negative light. This, Stelter contends, has deeply scarred the nation, causing rifts among neighbors and splintering families along ideological lines.

Fox News played a significant role in heightening feelings of discontent and estrangement among its viewers.

Stelter argues that Fox News has been instrumental in fostering a climate where viewers harbor feelings of bitterness and alienation, which has resulted in a deep distrust of authoritative bodies and a sense of abandonment in a changing country. Stelter suggests the network's persistent focus on complaints, tales of being wronged, and disapproval of alternative viewpoints cultivates an atmosphere of being under attack and overlooked. Stelter observes that this feeling of alienation made viewers more vulnerable to the demagogic tactics of Trump and more likely to believe unfounded conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.

Other Perspectives

• Fox News often argues that its support for Trump reflects its audience's views and that it is providing a counter-narrative to what it perceives as a predominantly liberal mainstream media.
• The network has claimed that its coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved with the changing understanding of the virus and that it has provided a range of perspectives, including those of medical professionals and experts.
• Some argue that the early promotion of hydroxychloroquine was based on preliminary studies and anecdotal reports, which at the time were considered worth exploring, and that the media's role is to report on all potential treatments being considered.
• Fox News contends that its discussions on race and immigration are part of a broader conversation about national identity and policy, and that it is important to represent viewpoints that feel marginalized by other media outlets.
• Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham may argue that their discussions on cultural displacement are legitimate concerns about rapid social changes and their impact on communities, rather than an endorsement of white identity politics.
• The network might assert that it is highlighting legitimate concerns of its viewers regarding political and social issues, and that fostering skepticism is a part of healthy democratic discourse.
• Fox News could argue that it is giving voice to Americans who feel discontented and estranged by other media, and that it is not responsible for viewers' distrust but rather is responding to it.

The disintegration of the alliance after the results of the 2020 election were announced.

Stelter documents the deterioration of the relationship between Fox News and Trump following the 2020 election, highlighted by the channel's premature announcement that Arizona had gone to Biden, signaling that the president was nearing a loss. The prediction of election outcomes prompted a notable change in loyalty among Trump's backers, who began favoring channels like Newsmax and One America News for their unwavering right-wing viewpoints. The channel faced challenges with declining audience numbers and internal conflicts, as it tried to balance the demands of a progressively more radical audience against the realities of President Biden's administration.

The declaration from the organization responsible for overseeing election results, confirming Biden's victory in Arizona, was met with resistance from Trump and his supporters.

Stelter details the moment when Fox News' decision desk projected Biden's victory in Arizona on Election Night, a projection considered premature by the Trump campaign and deemed a betrayal by many Fox viewers. Trump and his supporters applied significant pressure to Fox, demanding the retraction of the projection, which led to a heated dispute that included Mishkin, the head of the decision desk, and representatives of the president. This event emphasized the limitations imposed on the network by Trump's sway and underscored the apprehension within about alienating its loyal audience.

Viewers shifted their attention to alternative networks like Newsmax and OAN, which echoed the untruths disseminated by Trump.

As Fox News acknowledged Biden's victory and Trump's defeat, Stelter observed that a considerable portion of the audience transferred their loyalty to more right-leaning media outlets, including Newsmax and OAN. Stelter suggests that these networks fostered a space where viewers could find comfort amid disconcerting truths by dismissing the authenticity of election results. The exit presented a significant financial challenge for Fox News, prompting the network to move even more to the conservative side to recapture the loyalty of Trump's supporters.

Fox journalists and commentators who offered perspectives diverging from those of Trump found their voices diminished and their presence sidelined.

Stelter chronicled the sidelining and silencing of Fox's journalists and commentators who challenged Trump's denial of the election outcomes. Journalists and presenters who scrutinized the assertions made by the president without echoing his falsehoods, or who acknowledged the legitimacy of Biden's victory, belonged to this faction. Stelter argues that the leadership at Fox deliberately suppressed dissenting views to match the preferences of Trump's base and prevent further audience erosion.

Chris Stirewalt and Bill Sammon lost their positions for maintaining their stance and resisting the pressure from Trump to withdraw the Arizona call.

Stelter recounts how the ousting of Chris Stirewalt and Bill Sammon, who played significant roles in the Arizona call, reflects Fox News's inclination to capitulate to a more radical audience base. Their dismissals exemplified prioritizing the contentment of their staunchest followers over adherence to truthfulness and neutrality, thereby disregarding the tenets of ethical journalism. Stirewalt later shared that his role in predicting Biden's victory in Arizona led to him being the target of intense ire from viewers. This disturbing disclosure highlights the perilous climate for truthfulness within a network increasingly permeated by material that favors Trump.

The programming featured in the evening hours on the network has been amplified to more closely resonate with the tastes of the MAGA viewership.

Brian Stelter chronicled the transformation of Fox News' nightly shows toward a right-leaning bias, a shift prompted by a decline in viewership and ratings. The broadcaster sharpened its emphasis on commentary programs, bolstered its backing for disputing electoral outcomes, and promoted personalities who resonated with the widespread discontent and turmoil within Trump's staunchest following. The author argues that the broadcaster's reputation suffered additional damage, and in its efforts to recapture a dwindling viewership, it dangerously spread misinformation.

The spread of baseless conspiracy theories intensified the focus of significant tech firms to divert scrutiny from the outcomes of the 2020 election and the disturbances at the Capitol on January 6.

Stelter documents the intensification of Fox News' efforts to disseminate conspiracy theories related to elections and to cast aspersions on "Big Tech," with the goal of deflecting blame for the January 6 Capitol riot and reinforcing its bond with the ardent followers of the Make America Great Again movement. The channel aimed to reinforce its status as a stronghold of conservative principles by portraying these matters as conflicts in defense of free expression and opposition to suppression, simultaneously disseminating false information and fostering a climate that intensified radical viewpoints.

Other Perspectives

• Fox News' decision to call Arizona for Biden could be defended as a journalistic commitment to accuracy based on available data, rather than a premature or politically motivated decision.
• The decline in audience numbers at Fox News could be attributed to a variety of factors, including a natural fluctuation after a highly engaging election cycle rather than solely a shift in loyalty.
• Resistance to the declaration of Biden's victory in Arizona by Trump and his supporters could be seen as an exercise of their right to question and seek clarity on election processes, which is a fundamental aspect of democratic societies.
• The shift of viewers to Newsmax and OAN could be interpreted as a market response to consumer demand for diverse political perspectives in media.
• The sidelining of Fox journalists who diverged from Trump's views could be argued as a network's strategic alignment with its audience's preferences, which is a common practice in media to maintain viewership.
• The dismissal of Chris Stirewalt and Bill Sammon could be seen as part of routine post-election staffing changes rather than a direct consequence of their actions regarding the Arizona call.
• The shift in Fox News' evening programming could be considered a response to audience demand for content that aligns with their political beliefs, which is a legitimate business strategy.
• The spread of conspiracy theories by any media outlet could be countered by the argument that they are providing a platform for alternative viewpoints, which some may consider an aspect of free speech, even if those viewpoints are widely disputed.