.
Furher expanding on the secret goings-on among Fox News' executives :
Newsmax Files Lawsuit Against Fox News, Antitrust Case Alleges Major Violations - BOCA RATON, Fla. – Newsmax Inc. (NYSE:NMAX) announced today that the Company's subsidiary, Newsmax Broadcasting, LLC, has filed a major federal antitrust lawsuit against Fox Corporation and Fox News Network, LLC (collectively, "Fox") in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The suit, led by prominent antitrust litigators at Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C., accuses Fox of engaging in an extensive and unlawful campaign to block competition in the market for right-leaning pay television news, including Newsmax. [See Newsmax Complaint Against Fox]
Newsmax's action seeks damages under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the Florida Antitrust Act, and the Florida Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Under federal law, any damages awarded in this case will be trebled – meaning Fox faces significant financial liability if Newsmax prevails.
The complaint alleges that Fox has abused its dominance in the right-leaning pay TV news market for years by coercing distributors into unfair carriage agreements designed to exclude or marginalize competitors like Newsmax.
Fox News, described in the complaint as a "must-have" channel for distributors, leverages its market power to impose restrictions that harm consumers, stifle competition, and drive up costs across the pay TV ecosystem.
Among the exclusionary tactics detailed in the complaint:
No-Carry Provisions: Fox conditions access to Fox News on agreements by distributors not to carry or to restrict competing right-leaning news channels.
Financial Penalties: If distributors carry Newsmax, Fox forces them to also carry low-demand channels like Fox Business or Fox Sports 2 in their most widely viewed tiers - triggering potentially tens of millions in extra fees.
Confidential Drag-Down Provisions: These clauses penalize distributors for placing Newsmax in basic packages by requiring simultaneous promotion of Fox less popular channels.
Intimidation Campaigns: Fox has allegedly pressured its guests to not appear on Newsmax, as well as has run online smear campaigns and hired private investigators targeting Newsmax executives to damage the Company's credibility.
The result, the complaint asserts, is that Fox has deliberately blocked Newsmax's growth in critical distribution platforms such as Hulu, Sling, Fubo, and other major platforms.
Internal Fox communications cited in the complaint reveal that senior executives and talent saw Newsmax as a competitive threat following the 2020 election.
Texts, emails and memoranda show Fox leaders acknowledging that Newsmax's growing audience could "drastically change the landscape" of cable news, including:
Then-Fox host Tucker Carlson warned that "an alternative like Newsmax could be devastating to us."
Fox News President Jay Wallace told CEO Suzanne Scott that Fox was on "war footing" over Newsmax's rise.
Fox Chairman Rupert Murdoch instructed Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott that Newsmax "should be watched" as a result of press stories about the network.
Other executives tracked Newsmax's bookings and content, openly strategizing about ways to contain the new competitor.
HARM TO COMPETITION AND CONSUMERS
The lawsuit alleges that Fox's exclusionary conduct has had far-reaching consequence:
Higher Prices: By blocking competition, Fox has extracted supracompetitive carriage fees – charging distributors nearly $2.20 per subscriber per month, double CNN's fees and six times MSNBC's. These inflated costs have been or likely will be passed on to consumers.
Reduced Consumer Choice: Millions of right-leaning viewers who want an alternative have been denied access to Newsmax on affordable basic packages, leaving Fox as the only viable option.
Delayed Growth of Newsmax: Fox's practices have prevented Newsmax from reaching critical mass with distributors, advertisers, and audiences, costing the Company hundreds of millions in lost carriage fees and advertising revenue.
"Fox has sought to protect and expand its monopoly power in the right-leaning pay TV news market by engaging in a suite of anticompetitive behaviors," the complaint states, adding Fox's unlawful and exclusionary conduct "has harmed not just Newsmax and other competitors," but also "consumers and competition itself."
Newsmax is represented by Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C., and Sperling Kenny Nachwalter, LLC, two of the nation's premier antitrust litigation firms.
Both firms have extensive experience taking on monopolistic conduct and have successfully litigated complex cases involving dominant players in telecommunication media, pharmaceuticals, and technology.
"Fox's behavior represents a textbook abuse of monopoly power," said Michael J. Guzman, lead counsel for Newsmax at Kellogg Hansen. "The law is clear: competition, not coercion, should decide what news channels Americans can watch. By leveraging its must-have status, Fox has blocked new voices, suppressed consumer choice, and extracted excess profits."
"Fox may have profited from exclusionary contracts and intimidation tactics for years, but those days are over," Christopher Ruddy, Newsmax CEO, said.
"This lawsuit is about restoring fairness to the market and ensuring that Americans have real choice in the news they watch. If we prevail, Fox's damages could be tripled under federal law – an outcome that would send a powerful message to any company that thinks it can monopolize public discourse."
The complaint underscores that Fox's conduct harms not just Newsmax, but the competitive process itself.
By keeping rivals off affordable distribution packages, Fox has denied millions of Americans the diversity of viewpoints that a healthy marketplace of ideas requires.
"American democracy depends on a vibrant and competitive media landscape," Ruddy added.
"Fox has acted as a gatekeeper, silencing emerging voices and overcharging consumers. Our lawsuit seeks not only justice for Newsmax, but also to protect the rights of viewers who deserve choice and fair pricing."
Newsmax is asking the federal court to:
Declare Fox's conduct unlawful under federal and state antitrust laws.
Award monetary damages as permitted by law.
Enjoin Fox from continuing exclusionary contracts and monopolistic practices.
Order equitable relief to restore competition in right-leaning pay TV news.
See Newsmax Complaint Against Fox
See Newsmax Share Information
ABOUT NEWSMAX
Newsmax Inc. is listed on the NYSE (NMAX) and operates, through Newsmax Broadcasting LLC, one of the nation's leading news outlets, the Newsmax channel. The fourth highest-rated network is carried on all major pay TV providers. Newsmax's media properties reach more than 40 million Americans regularly through Newsmax TV, the Newsmax App, its popular website Newsmax.com, and publications such as Newsmax Magazine. Through its social media accounts, Newsmax reaches 20 million combined followers. Reuters Institute says Newsmax is one of the top U.S. news brands and Forbes has called Newsmax "a news powerhouse."
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This communication contains forward-looking statements. From time to time, we or our representatives may make forward-looking statements orally or in writing. We base these forward-looking statements on our expectations and projections about future events, which we derive from the information currently available to us. Forward-looking statements can be identified by those that are not historical in nature. The forward-looking statements discussed in this communication and other statements made from time to time by us or our representatives, may not occur, and actual events and results may differ materially and are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions about us Newsmax does not guarantee future results, performance or achievements. Moreover neither we nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any of these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as predictions of future events. We are under no duty to update any of these forward-looking statements after the date of this communication to conform our prior statements to actual results or revised expectations, and we do not intend to do so. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include various factors, including but not limited to the timeline or outcome relating to litigation against Fox, our ability to change the direction of Newsmax, our ability to keep pace with new technology and changing market needs, the competitive environment of our business changes in domestic and global general economic and macro-economic conditions and/or uncertainties and factors set forth in the sections entitled "Risk Factors" in Newsmax's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024, Newsmax's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2025, and other filings Newsmax makes with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Nothing in this communication should be regarded as a representation by any person that the forward-looking statements set forth herein will be achieved or that any of the contemplated results of such forward-looking statements will be achieved. Undue reliance should not be placed on forward looking statements in this communication, which speak only as of the date they are made and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the cautionary statements herein.
Like many Fox news viewers, I felt deeply betrayed in Nov 2020 when Fox News was the first network to bizarrely and prematurely call the election for Joe Biden.
And then virtually all of Fox's anchors were part of a propaganda campaign to convince its viewers to "just accept that Biden won." Which enraged us, because we saw the clear evidence that the election was rigged, and further evidence of a rigged 2020 election ("Twittergate", the fake "51 intelligence officials letter" orchestrated by Antony Blinkin, millions of faked mail-in ballots, "2000 Mules", RIGGED by Mollie Hemingway) continued to be revealed over the last 4 years since.
And like millions of other Fox viewers up till Nov 2020, it was prior to then unthinkable that I would lose confidence in Fox News and look for another alternative network that I could trust.
And because of their own deception, Fox's ratings over the next year in 2020-2021 dropped by half.
There were clearly many conservatives on Fox who resisted Fox executives' push to undermine Trump, to propagandize that Trump lost the 2020 election. But a few resisted management and refused to push that narraive. Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo among them. In particular I recall Sean Hannity, who in the opening minutes of his show one night seemed angry, like he'd just had a fierce argument with a Fox executive before going on air. Hannity angrily said: "I don't know how much longer we can, but as long as I'm able to, I'll continue to give you the facts on what is occurring."
Clearly, Fox News management has some kind of a grudge against Trump, and tried to fully cut Trump loose and undermine him when it was even the slightest bit plausible after the Nov 2020 election, and forced their anchors and reporters and guests to prop up that narrative as well. But a few to their great credit resisted propping up that narrative.
That Fox betrayal drove me (and millions of others) to increasingly check out Newsmax and One America News.
And just when I was starting to regain trust in Fox, they fired Tucker Carlson with no explanation. And in over two years since, there has STILL never been been an explanation given why they fired Carlson. But it was the moment he exclusively revealed the opening salvo of the 40,000 hours of Jan 6h Capitol security video, ha immediately triggered release of most of the Jaqn 6th prisoners (i.e., revealing THE UNDISPUTABLE FACTS, vs, the previous Democra narrative for over 2 and a half years). And when Tucker Carlson was fired Monday morning, he was on Monday night going o interview the Capitol police chief who resigned after Jan 6th. Someone was deeply aafraid of the truyh, and silenced Carlson, at leas on Fox. (He later interviewed the Capitol police chief a few months later on his podcast.)
The point being, if Fox had not undermined their own credibility with all these bad decisions and deceptions, me and millions of others would have continued to have 100% confidence that Fox is fair and balanced (or at least, more fair and balanced than their competitor networks).
The ONLY reason we went looking elsewhere at Newsmax and other channels is because Fox through their own self-destructive actions like this, put into question their own credibility.
Multiple reports I've seen have speculated that Rupert Murdoch gave a lot of coverage to Trump in 2016, and he wanted some kind of control or payback from Trump as reward for that coverage, and Trump refused to be Murdoch's pawn, and that is why Fox News and other Rupert-owned media are less friendly to Trump now, at Murdoch's order.
But since Fox's core audience is obviously very pro-Trump, Fox pushed the boundaries of negative Trump coverage in 2020-2021 and lost half their audience, and only became more pro-Trump again to some extent because they don't want to lose the market share they managed to get back.
There's also the fact that Rupert Murdoch is now 93, and since leveraging Roger Ailes out in 2016, Rupert Murdoch has been transitioning control of Fox News to Lachlan Murdoch, (both of Murdoch's 2 sons are very liberal-Left) and if Lachlan fully had his way, Fox News would become another CNN.
And now this above revelation of unfair business practices to suppress Newsmax. I've noticed for years that many of my favorite Fox anchors and guests have been making a gradual exodus over to Newsmax, such as Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova, Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz, John Solomon, Matt Taibbi, James Rosen, Ed Henry and many others. Apparently they were considered too conservative or too pro-Trump, and were no longer invited back to Fox. But I've been hearing for 4 years that Fox News has been telling guests if they appear on Newsmax, they wouldn't be able to continue appearing on Fox News. And the above article just confirms what's been known for years.
And visible with Tucker Carlson's abrupt firing, and the attempts by Fox to slander Carlson and make him radioactive in the weeks after his firing, so that no other network would hire him either, Fox has done the same to Bill O'Reilly, Eric Bolling, James Rosen, Ed Henry, Judge Nick Napolittano and others, often leveraging them to quietly quit with sexual allegations too shaameful to discuss as a way o quietly push them out, and then badmouthing them quietly behind the scenes in the industry so no one else would want to hire them either. Which again undermines trust in the character of those in executive positions running Fox News, not the people they slandered.
And this hardball underhanded way Fox has done things all originates to 2016 when Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly were both leveraged out. And then many others after, in a mean underhanded slanderous way pushing out conservatives on the network. And trying to blacklist them in the industry, even after they left or were fired by Fox News.
So while I have an increasing distaste for the way the executive leadership has been running Fox the last 9 years, there are still people on Fox that I like. And I wish Fox would scrap their current executive leadership, and replace them with people their audience would once again actually trust.
