Network of Lies: The Epic Saga of Fox News, Donald Trump, and the Battle for American Democracy

by Brian Stelter

The  New York Times  bestselling author of  HOAX,  “[a] rare look inside the profoundly influential” ( The New Republic ) Fox News, returns with an even more explosive account of the network’s blatant attempts to manipulate the truth, mislead the public, and influence our elections

In the wake of Joe Biden’s unequivocal victory against Donald Trump in the 2020 election, Fox News anchors started to panic. They swapped out the truth about Biden for lies about Trump, and their stories about voting irregularities and “rigged” systems fueled a fire of misinformation, hate, and even violence. Now, facing unprecedented billion-dollar defamation lawsuits, and with the 2024 election rapidly approaching, Fox is in hot water—and it’s only getting hotter. With the lawsuits dragging the network’s shameful secrets into the light—such as Tucker Carlson’s passionate hatred for Donald Trump and Sean Hannity’s contempt for own colleagues—the future of the network, and the Republican Party, hangs in the balance. Featuring Brian Stelter’s signature “thorough and damning” ( The New York Times ) investigative prowess and filled with outrageous behind-the-scenes details,  Network of Lies  is a page-turning, urgent examination of the insidious ways the media is damaging our democracy—and what we must do to preserve it.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Audiobook, Business, Journalism, True Crime

384 pages, Hardcover

First published November 14, 2023

About the author

Brian Stelter is the chief media correspondent for CNN and anchor of the show Reliable Sources. He was previously a staff writer at the New York Times and was featured as a subject in the New York Times documentary Page One. Before joining the Times in 2007, he was the founder and editor of TVNewser, the pre-eminent blog about the television news industry, which was sold to MediaBistro in 2004.

(source: Amazon)

Reviews

[Scott Rhee · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't watch FOX News. In truth, I don't watch any news anymore. Over ten years ago, I made a decision to reduce stress and lower blood pressure by not watching TV news. Even local news. I feel that my life---and, by extension, my family's---is better for it.

According to Brian Stelter, in his entertaining and thoroughly-researched book "Network of Lies: The Epic Saga of Fox News, Donald Trump, and the Battle for American Democracy", I saved myself a hell of a lot more than just stress by not watching. I apparently saved myself at least a decade of confusion, misinformation, right-leaning propaganda, Trump-pandering, ridiculous conspiracy theories, hosts who were falling down rabbit-holes on-screen, libelous bullshit, and having to look at Tucker Carlson's two facial expressions (constipated or deer-in-headlights).

Stelter's book focuses primarily on the lawsuit against FOX by Dominion, which subsequently resulted in the largest corporate settlement ever---$787 million. It also resulted in the firing of several established FOX personalities, including Lou Dobbs and Tucker Carlson. Others named in the suit are still working, but there are more lawsuits pending.

Stelter gleefully quotes frequently from court records, televised transcripts, and secret e-mails and text messages which were used in the case. Some, if not all, of this stuff is jaw-droppingly hilarious and just plain unbelievable.

Unfortunately, what it portends for the future of our democracy and contemporary news media is frightening.

[Erin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I used to watch Brian Stelter's CNN show Reliable Sources back when I had cable and paid attention to corporate news. I liked the show because it attempted to call out the media on its lies. It was the best you were going to get from corporate media. So when I heard about this book while listening to a podcast I just knew I had to pick it up.

Network Of Lies is a fun gossipy exploration of the symbiotic relationship between Fox News and Donald Trump. It takes a look at how Fox News too lately discovered that it was no longer in charge of Republicans and right wing media. Basically for the last 30 years Fox News has set the agenda for how Republicans think, they have controlled the right wing as a whole. Even after Trump rose to power, Fox News still thought it was in control....then on election night in 2020 it called Arizona for Biden and its audience turned on them.

Fox News viewers live in an alternate universe and Fox News likes it like that...but the Arizona call punctured that fantasy world and turned Trump against them. Fox News' efforts to win him back would result in them sued by Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic another voting machine company. Fox News spread conspiracy theories and lies about voter fraud in the 2020 election. During depositions many wild secrets were uncovered about Fox News and its personalities and possibly lead to its biggest star Tucker Carlson( my dad always calls him Carl Tuckman...why because he thinks that's his name) being fired. Fox News paid out nearly a billion dollars to Dominion but that hasn't stopped the lying.

This book is juicy and gossipy. We hear about who hates who and whose possibly having extramarital affairs. It's a fun read...if you don't think about how Fox News is actively working to destroy democracy.

If you like gossip or just good old fashioned media critique than I think you'll enjoy Network Of Lies.

[Malia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though this was well written and researched, it felt extremely repetitive after a while. The subject matter is frustrating, which I knew it would be, of course, so the book just felt about a third too long. I do think it's interesting, just a bit too much.

[Beauregard Bottomley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I held Stelter’s previous book “Hoax,” in contempt; he didn’t fully grasp that Fox was populated with evil beings and they are destroying the country by enabling the MAGA moron Fascists to destroy democracy. This book is different. Stelter is shouting as loud as I shout and is doing everything in his power to warn us against the rot of evil that is within Fox and their minions who shape it. Thank you Stelter, for seeing the world the way I do!

Stelter gets it that the Maga mob controls Fox more than Fox controls them. Tucker Carlson was a special pernicious scab on America and his racism, hate, and incoherence reflected that of his viewers. Stelter mentioned that only 1/100th of Fox’s audience is made up of Black Americans, and that Tucker thought the Dominion lawsuit jury was made up of low IQ members since 5 of them were Black, and Stelter even refers to Fox as “white wing”. Tucker is a willful racist fascist agitator spouting substance free conspiracy incoherences, those who work at Fox are too; Trump is as dangerous as Hitler, and if he wins there will never be a need to have books like this one. Thank you, Brian Stelter, for seeing reality for the way it is and warning against the scum at Fox and the viewers who shape Fox.

I re-read my review for “Hoax” because I wanted to be reminded what I thought about before the run-up to the previous election. Stelter in those days didn’t get it and that made me mad at his book, he thought the evil that resided within Fox and their viewers were worth trying to convert. They are not: Fox viewers mean the things they say in the comment sections of Breitbart and their white wing sites . They do not share the same reality that I experience and Fox gives them what they want, and they give Fox what they want through ratings that equate to their bottom line of profits. The system sucks, but Stelter is shouting a warning and kudos to him for that. Tolerance is not required to those who want to enslave you, and Fox, Trump, and their fascist viewers are not deserving of tolerance.

Since this book is recent and current to today, Stelter gets to talk about Fox opinion presenters and its viewers previous hate of Homosexuals, Transgender, Woke-nonsense, abortion madness, Critical Race Theory, Dr Seus books, wars on Christmas, and many of their other hate agendas and goofy conspiracy theories. One must have a nightly line-up of fact free news with a special blend of hate opinions spouted by presenters who should just “shut up and dribble” to keep track of the lies: Trump won the election, voting machines are rigged, psychics from the future saw the fraud (Maria Bartiromo comes off as an especially willfully ignorantly psychotic), and so on.

Stelter said Trump’s delusion was embraced as a Bartiromo initiated delusion, I would say that Bartiromo was willfully in on the con and when a person’s paycheck is threatened by telling the truth, the falsehood will be embraced as truth since greed trumps goodness when it comes to a paycheck; Bartiromo willfully created the Dominion voting machine fabrication and then Trump took the delusion and made it his own, and in the process Bartiromo increased her relevance and her paycheck by 10 fold while the MAGA mob embraced the lie since it made them feel good, and as Fox tried to backtrack on the lie the MAGA Fox watchers switched off Fox in mass and switched on Newsmax thus causing Fox to embrace the delusion all the more because their viewers demanded it, a vicious circle motivated by even more money for the one who could tell the biggest lie that the viewers craved.

Fox was right to fire Tucker Carlson. He needed them more than they needed him, and I’m certain none of the suits at Fox regret that decision today. Today Carlson is as relevant as Father Coughlin was when he lost his radio show, and more importantly for Fox they have neutered all dissent within their own ranks without missing a beat. Without that platform Carlson is a non-entity. X (formerly known as twitter) is a place where relevancy goes to disappear into the ether of the outer edges of outer space and Carlson was last seen being interviewed by Bill O’Reilly and supposedly having some kind of platform where he interviewed Trump that nobody watched, but Musk claimed 300,000,000 people did while Tucker’s old time slot is filled by a non-entity drawing in the same kind of ratings.

There wasn’t a lot of new news in this book, and for those such as me, who scour the news as I anxiously watch the demise of the TFG (the former guy) and shout as loudly as possibly to anyone who will listen that Trump, his followers and Fox are a fascist monster the new items in this book were far and few between. Overall Stelter now gets that we need to warn Americans against the fascists at Fox, their viewers and Trump.

[Christopher Febles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Before I write anything, please raise your right hand and repeat after me: “I will NOT post any comments that will devolve this whole thing into a political nuclear meltdown.”

Thanks! Now that we’ve got that out of the way…Yikes! Stetler makes Fox News look like Cringe Central.



I can’t imagine the work that went into gathering all those texts, all that email, all those interviews and reports. There was nothing that wasn’t backed by fact, nothing that wasn’t attached to a real quote or a real event. And…it was all creepy as heck. We’re spared much of the icky harassment a la Roger Ailes, but we’re front and center for all Tucker Carlson’s machinations, whacked out conspiracies, and caustic racism, both blatant and implied.

“Respect the audience” is a phrase used often here to explain why a “news source” (I use that term loosely here) would continue to tell its viewers something false. So, why Fox would keep up the narrative of a rigged election with no proof makes a weird kind of sense: without it, they lose viewers. Which means lost money. Oh, sure, they probably get the viewers back, but no one inside stopped the madness, and hence people like Carlson and Pirro and Bartiromo went out there and shouted bizarre theories and ideas. Even when some of the hosts, including Carlson himself, called it all crazy. Discovering this was a little like learning how babies or sausage are made. Yeesh.

From there we get plenty of detail of the $787 million settlement with Dominion. How it all goes down is equally icky. Again, the thought process, or lack thereof, that goes into preserving viewership is mind-blowing. How do you let that happen?

Of course, with a book this heavily researched, sometimes it seemed like interoffice memos or meeting minutes or TPS reports or whatever. I had a hard time keeping track of who was who, and I’d have appreciated a timeline for all those court proceedings. It’s also a little…vicious at times. Oh well, Stetler’s giving what he got, I suppose.

Thank goodness, however, he provides some suggestions at the end. He makes a strong case that news agencies that deny fair elections and spread disinformation are a threat to democracy. But at least there’s a little hope of a clearer discourse. I was waiting for it, and I got it.

This was a gift from a brilliant friend with some inside information, some tales to tell himself. Anyone seeking truth in the media in this crazy world would love it.

[Simon Gibson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fox News, a cesspool full of bullsh*t and human t*rds. As a non American looking in I'm shocked that your system of thinking, morals, humanity, is so broken, warped and sickeningly damaged. The author has done a great job of scraping through the sewerage to see if there's anything worth saving, I think not. Land of the free? Please read this book, especially if you're non American. (Audiobook)

[Morgan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think I follow the news a bit too closely for this to feel like anything new or surprising, but for those who aren’t being mean to themselves by keeping close eye on political and media news, I do think it might be pretty eye opening and shocking.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting look at the infighting, collusion and flip flopping that makes up the sad cast of faux news.
Just knowing they promoted the Big Lie may be enough for some, but as a non American who's never watched Tucker, Hannity et al I found the in-depth look at the propaganda, the email and text exchanges between key players (which I guess the author got from discovery in the Dominion case?), as well as the tactics they used to justify/push their agenda really telling.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like freelancers during tax season, Brian Stelter brings receipts to NETWORK OF LIES. I've always wanted to read a deep dive into Fox News: how it operates, the push-and-pull between journalists and commentators, why they went all-in on Trump in the mid-2010s and then backed away from him in the 2020s only to embrace him again in the present.

Digging into the history of Fox News dating back to its founding in 1996 is a big subject. The thesis of NETWORK is on how Fox News changed, and how it didn't, because of toxic hosts such as Tucker Carlson. All the background and analysis you need is here. Stelter focuses on a brief overview of the network's founding, the Murdoch family and how they do business, how its political commentators slowly and methodically removed real journalists from the network so that their opinion could define Fox News; and how Fox News opened itself to major lawsuits from Dominion and Smartmatic that, in the grand scheme of things, did no harm to the network or the power it holds over American politics.

Everybody with half a brain knows Fox News is exactly what Stelter and others call it: a network of lies. But the receipts, coupled with prose as entertaining as it is trenchant, made this the book I've been waiting for since I was old enough to scratch my head and wonder how anyone could fall for the claptrap on Faux News.

I love Stelter's voice not only because he breaks down facts, but because he's an engaging storyteller. Too many other political history books I've read come across as sloppy, poorly researched, and hasty, all signs of a book scribbled on cocktail napkins and thrown onto store shelves out of an eagerness to cash in on the scandal and horror surrounding Trump's White House and its collapse. NETWORK OF LIES is not one of those. I hadn't read or seen Stelter's work before now, and I'm definitely a fan.

[Linda · Rating 3 out of 5]

A lot of facts (good!) peppered with editorial comments (disappointing). I am definitely not a fan of neither our former president nor Fox news, but I think Stelter would have held more credence by not including his obvious bias in the text.
Most disturbing was reading that the behind the scenes people at Fox decided that pandering to what their audience wanted (lies of a stolen election) for higher ratings trumped reporting the facts.
I was very glad that I was reading this as an e-book since I often was overwhelmed by the use of only last names (so many) where I had lost track of exactly who so and so was. In an e-book, I was able to search and satisfy my need to know who.

[Gaetano Venezia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Confirmation-freude: The satisfaction found in further verifying justified true beliefs.
Etymology: 'Confirmation-freude' is a portmanteau made from 'confirmation bias' and 'schadenfreude' (literally harm-joy). See also: savoring, overkill drive, therapeutic dialectics, philoponos (love of effort and toil), cognitive soothing, taking a victory lap, logical overdetermination, superego boost, fact check fever.

Confirmation-freude and its associated concepts consist of a positive emotional state arising from re-experiencing or strengthening one's justified beliefs. One might seek out additional evidence, replay memories or footage of an experience, find more in-depth reporting or commentary, review additional primary sources, simplify and strengthen the logic of an argument, or refine criticism of the opposition.

This general category of experience can appear in many domains with different reasons for the impulse, for example:
— A victorious athlete goes back to watch a championship game in order to better see how all the action played out (savoring), then goes on a PR tour to tout their victory (taking a victory lap)
— A true crime addict is fascinated by each and every gory detail of a psychopath's machinations (overkill drive)
— Someone goes through a proof of 2+2=4 just for fun (philoponos)
— A reader seeks out praiseworthy reviews for a book they already know is a classic (superego boost)
— A politico consumes podcasts, legal proceedings, books, journalism, etc. in order to strengthen their well-researched conclusion that the Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election was based on bogus claims of fraud and unconstitutional legal theories

Confirmation-freude applies best to epistemic claims like this last one. Confirmation bias is also related to epistemic claims, but there is a significant difference in the strength of evidence and how that evidence is used to bolster an argument.

Confirmation bias occurs when one begins reasoning from an unjustified, weak conclusion which is firmly held. One then seeks reasons for that assumed conclusion—creating the feeling of strong premises in support of a strong conclusion.

On the other hand, confirmation-freude occurs when one begins reasoning from justified, strong premises which are firmly held. These premises lead to a justified, strong conclusion. Then, one seeks out new premises or additional justification of the initial premises in order to create even stronger support for the conclusion.

Simply put, confirmation-freude uses epistemically sound principles of reasoning. Confirmation bias abdicates these principles.

Thus, it is more difficult to meet the conditions for confirmation-freude. Confirmation bias can obtain at any moment: all that is required is a strong prior conviction applied indiscriminately to evidence. Confirmation-freude takes careful consideration of evidence to obtain. And at any point confirmation-freude can degrade into cognitive bias by failing to adhere to epistemically sound principles.

Confirmation-freude can also be disrupted by controversy, when new evidence starts to cast doubt on an initially strong argument. Indeed, these cases are the hardest to evaluate. Re-evaluation is not by itself evidence of a bias; it depends on how one integrates new findings. Paradigm shifts periodically occur among experts even after the strongest arguments are marshaled. New evidence or a new paradigm can reveal flaws in a worldview or argument, but before such evidence arises, the most accurate, logical argument might have justifiably led to a conclusion that we now view as less useful or false. Future advancements do not automatically turn the best form of reasoning we have at the moment into bias.

Science has well-documented examples of said shifts (see Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions). And these shifts don't discount the use of the scientific method and logical arguments used within former paradigms.

Thus, confirmation-freude is a relative evaluation based on the current state of knowledge. While it can be difficult to evaluate confirmation-freude in controversial or rapidly changing domains, it shares this evaluative problem with truth claims (in both the lay sense of the term and the 'justified true belief' sense debated in academic philosophy).

So while confirmation-freude is generally truth-tracking, it does not guarantee that one can always be satisfied with a simple truth. In some controversial domains, confirmation-freude is not justifiable. In such cases, it's better to acknowledge controversy than to assert certainty, let alone feel emotional satisfied with only one side of the controversy.

Similarly, confirmation-freude—even when justified—does not guard against other forms of abuses and missteps. A variety of factors can turn confirmation-freude into "I told you so" and a holier-than-thou mentality. Once a position is established and becomes part of one's identity, it can be difficult to dislodge.

Since knowledge is constantly shifting, as a practical matter it could be better to aim for intellectual curiosity than confirmation-freude: curiosity is not wedded to a specific argument or conclusion. Furthermore, just because one is justified in happily holding an argument, that doesn't mean opponents are any more likely to follow the reasoning. Persuasion is a different matter.

Which brings us literally to the book at hand. Stelter's latest book is a confirmation-freude magnet for readers like myself. My hope in reading this book is that arranging the facts, moral arguments, and inductive reasoning in just the right pattern will finally persuade someone lost to confirmation bias, authoritarian logic, or the cult of personality. Failing that lofty—even naive—goal, I fall back on confirmation-freude: I'm encouraged and relieved to see that other people are coming to similar conclusions from different starting points and relevant expertise.

This general impulse also brought me to similar works like Cheney's Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning, Karl's Betrayal: The Final Act of the Trump Show, Conspirituality: How New Age Conspiracy Theories Became a Public Health Threat and a slew of podcasts like "The Bulwark," "Pod Save America," and "Prosecuting Trump." These works provide the vicarious joy of constructing a holistic case against bullshit, without having to mire about in the muck oneself.

These niche forms of media are a welcome feature of the 20th and especially the 21st century, but they come with unique challenges, too. I've been wary of my argument-as-a-service media ecosystem; I want to prevent confirmation-freude from turning into confirmation bias. Epistemic standards are the guardrails:

I do my own due diligence by fact-checking primary sources. And while these works clearly corroborate the blatant dishonesty of Trump, Fox News, and the MAGA media sphere, their other claims and policy prescriptions are not as clear cut or simple or uncontroversial. An important principle is recognizing where conclusive arguments end and good-faith differences and debate begin. Following principles of good reasoning, one must assess evidence and arguments relative to their domain and engage with the opposition.

To this point, I've engaged with the opposition: including Trump, Giuliani and the rest of Trump's legal team, Tucker Carlson, Alan Dershowitz, a host of other podcasters, lawyers, and journalists.

I have read some of the high-profile cases around Trump's election fraud charade, including a few of Trump's lawsuits against states claiming fraud, some of the January 6th congressional and legal proceedings (including the Chansley appeal which is emblematic of many bad faith revisionist accounts of January 6th), the Colorado Supreme Court insurrection disqualification decision, and most (apropos, the Dominion defamation suit's summary judgment). I've looked over primary research and meta-analyses and make sure I'm listening to varied sources which are reliable and have the relevant expert knowledge.

In a loose sense, my media sources are biased. But of course bias toward good evidence and relevant experts and other bearers of sound reasoning are exactly the kinds of bias one should have. And so in the course of internal struggle over the reason for this bias and the positive feelings I get from engaging with them, I formulated the concept of confirmation-freude.

If we could foster confirmation-freude rather than confirmation bias, we'd be better off in many domains. Rising epistemic standards are a foundation of societal progress and social cohesion. Increasing incentives to engage in rational argument catalyses this progress and cohesion.

But of course, this is some utopian thinking. We'd have to first upset the confirmation bias process—not to mention all the other cognitive biases distorting rationality. This task is extremely difficult. Cognitive biases create barriers to reasoning, so one can't argue against them. Rather, the effective response to cognitive biases consists of persistent listening, subtle suggestion, and sharing from a place of mutual trust (See my notes on Amanda Ripley's High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out).

So I admit this book is not needed. If you were assessing the evidence, there's nothing in Network of Lies that would be required to sway you. The publicly available evidence is already damning. Either you trust the legal paper trail of Trump's failed election fraud claims, the illegal attempts to decertify the 2020 election, the defectors from Trump's own camp, and the more recent Dominion defamation suit's summary judgment showing obvious lies about election fraud, or you trust Trump enough to dismiss the entire legal system and all the evidence it has produced of blatant lies and contradiction within Trump's media sphere.

If you were looking for an author to hold the hand of MAGA Republicans and gradually lead them to a more reasonable position, Stelter has no patience for that task. And if you can't already tell, I'm not trying to convince anyone in this review.

Instead of persuasion, Stelter provides satisfying overkill. Some of the discovery documents from Fox News for the Dominion defamation case were even more damning than what I had seen. And he didn't merely rehash the defamation suit, he revealed additional details and got additional comments from key players. As I came to learn, there were too many discovery documents to quickly and effectively report on when the documents were unsealed, so Stelter's follow up is valuable for highlighting the most damning pieces of evidence and requesting comment from key players.

With Trump's malignant, 2020 Big Lie apparatus foreshadowing insurrection 2.0 in 2024, I take keen satisfaction in confirming how truly unhinged his lies are. At least history will disabuse him of a redeemable legacy, even if his supporters hang on by tooth and nail presently.

Alongside the Dominion case and the evidence of election lies is the story of Fox News' motivations and internal struggles. Fox News tried to toe the line of telling enough truths to retain some sense of journalistic integrity while at the same time allowing and benefitting from the spread of conspiracy theories—even making them up in the case of Bartiromo's lie about Dominion. Fox News held back the truth from their viewers because there were strong monetary incentives to do so.

Stelter's reporting is extremely frustrating and disheartening. At the same time, with the right perspective and care, such revelations can foster emotional satisfaction—compelling stronger and stronger epistemic standards in the face of growing disinformation, post-rationality politics, and authoritarianism. Confirmation-freude can be the bane of confirmation bias and fake news. Use responsibly.

[Julian Dunn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brian Stelter is an incredibly hardworking reporter, someone I've been following since he was basically a young kid at the New York Times being mentored by the legendary David Carr. And he's certainly done his homework for Network of Lies, poring over thousands of pages of court documents leading up to the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit against Fox News, to present a compelling argument of how Fox is essentially another example of unregulated capitalism run wild (Enron, LTCM, this AI horseshit that's going on right now, etc.) "The Dominion Voting Systems case, with all its costs, did not change Fox one iota, at least in the category of pushing lies," Stelter writes. That's because lies are incredibly profitable, since they create outrage-driven eyeballs, and there's no price to be paid for corrupting democracy. (Not even that $787.5M settlement, because it didn't prevent Fox from continuing to do what it's doing.) Stelter correctly diagnoses Rupert Murdoch, Suzanne Scott, and other Fox executives as primarily being driven by a profit motive:

"The execs are mechanical, not ideological," as one host put it. [Suzanne] Scott and her deputies weren't having lively off-air conversations abut economic populism versus free market conservatism. They were just trying to hit their ratings and profit targets. They weren't leading--they were following.

We can blame both Republicans (Reagan for dismantling the Fairness Doctrine) and Democrats (Clinton for signing the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that immunizes Internet broadcasters from liability under Section 230) for the woeful state of media regulation in America, but perhaps we should also blame ourselves as a country for being all too eager to consume media uncritically. Just like $787.5M was not enough of a punishment to Fox News, electing Trump once was not enough of a deterrent to us to counteract disinformation and authoritarianism. After all, many voters might ask, "what really happened to the country after Trump's first term? Nothing much really changed, did it? Why not elect him again?" Unfortunately, the amount of pain often needs to be increased to serve as a sufficient deterrent, and it might be necessary to elect a dictator to reinforce how important democracy is. (If America should ever recover from such a move.)

While Network of Lies itself is a fine book, I do have to ask whether it covers any new ground after Stelter's previous book Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News, and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth. It seemed like the only reason Stelter felt compelled to write this book is that he had a lot of extra time on his hands after getting fired by CNN (he even obliquely alludes to this in the book, and offers some bizarre empathy for Tucker Carlson getting fired by Fox as a result?!) to the point where he started reading much of the material unearthed during legal discovery between Fox and Dominion and thought, why don't I write another book? There are more than a couple places in the book where I wondered whether Stelter just wanted to use the vehicle of the book to grind a few axes and insert admittedly-funny-but-unneeded one-liners to attack Fox News personalities. (e.g. "Gutfeld!--the first figure on the right who decided he needed his own exclamation point since Jeb!") I do think Stelter is a fine journalist, and it's too bad he's off in the hinterlands of being a Vanity Fair special correspondent right now after hosting a CNN show, so I can hardly fault him for trying to claw his way back into the circles of influence and fame with another book. But it's the same pattern that caused Tucker Carlson to say increasingly hysterical and ludicrous things, so I hope Stelter is self-reflective about this.

[Dave Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like in his previous book Hoax, Stelter does a good job of making what would otherwise be an overwhelming amount of information accessible and engaging. Network of Lies focuses on a shorter period of time than Hoax, which results in the book adopting a more granular focus. I found myself wanting to know more about the Murdoch family and less about Tucker Carlson, but Stelter was likely limited in this regard by the content his sources could actually provide. What he does a stellar job of is using the information made public by the Dominion lawsuit against Fox News to comprise the core of his account. In the process, he also makes clear the dearth of support there actually is for the Big Lie. In the final analysis, I was never bored with Stelter's work and that is a significant credit to the author.

[Diana Sánchez · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is not my usual read (I read it for class), but regardless of that I was completely hooked. Apart from Stelter’s snarky comments sprinkled throughout every page, it was so interesting to see how Fox News manufactured an entire web of lies without even noticing. One so powerful it catapulted into the storming of the Capitol on January 6th. It was a first step to understanding the actions of the very far right, something I can never work my head around. Would definitely recommend to any seeking to learn something new.

[Ari Damoulakis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Scary. Sad. Depressing. And now the second term, probably definitely more of the same, and probably will be even worse. Trump TV.

[Joanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think Stelter accomplished exactly what he intended with this one: in-depth reporting on the “epic saga,” as he puts it, of Fox News’ firing of Tucker Carlson over the Dominion vs Fox defamation lawsuit.

Stelter is a rabid journalistic standard bearer-you may remember his now-cancelled show Reliable Sources when he portrayed himself as a ombudsman of sorts, so I can imagine how much he wanted to get his teeth into this story.

I listened to the audiobook which was narrated by BS himself, who did a decent job.

No love lost here between Brian and Tucker—that’s for sure. This reporting felt a bit personal and well, a bit hot, despite his noble oath to unbiased integrity in media and journalism. You can feel the passion…and some bias too; although, obviously, Fox deserves all it was dealt here.

It was good narrative, built to the explosive conclusion we all know of. Maybe there were more places to build some balance, but he admits he was in a hurry to get this out before the 2024 election season. And it’s a corker.

I may go back and read it in print to make sure I didn’t miss any nuanced yet steaming piles of gossipy you-know-what.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even if you, like me, closely followed the machinations of Fox News in recent years, you will still learn a lot from “Network of Lies.”
Brian Stelter indicts Fox with its own words. Quoting extensively from the texts and emails sent by Fox officials revealed as part of the libel lawsuit filed by Dominion Voting Systems, Stelter shows the lies and hypocrisy that came from not only popular hosts - especially Tucker Carlson and Maria Bartiromo - but from top brass - CEO Rupert Murdoch, his son Lachlan and news president Suzanne Scott.
While many of these internal messages are already well known, Stelter reveals many more. What the book shows is a network that fears its own viewers. After Fox was the first network to call the key state of Arizona for Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election, viewers fled the network. Trying to lure those viewers back, Fox endorsed the election lies, which led to the lawsuit filed by Dominion that was settled for close to $800 million (a lawsuit filed by another voting tech company is still pending).
My jaw dropped when reading how Bartiromo used a bizarre email from a viewer to first air the unverified allegations against Dominion. How she still has a job is beyond me.
I felt sorry for those lonely Fox News staffers who tried to push back against the lies, only to be subjected to nasty notes from Scott and others accusing them of not “respecting the audience.”

[Paul Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mr. Stelter's Network of Lies: The Epic Saga of Fox News, Donald Trump and the Battle for American Democracy is a well-written, responsibly researched work. Will it please everyone? If you're an avid Fox News viewer, probably not. If you actively avoid Fox News, you will most likely enjoy the book. Mr. Stelter has provided some interesting descriptions and details of some of the maj0r characters in this book. Among the people includes the controversial Tucker Carlson, the baffling Maria Bartiromo, and many others. This book chronicles Fox News' positive and supportive coverage of the 2020 election through the January 6th insurrection and the Dominion Voting lawsuit for which Fox News paid more than $780 million in a settlement before going to trial. The founder of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch and his sons are described as well in this book. At times, the senior Murdoch appears to be surprised at what his creation has done. No one can deny Fox news is controversial mainly through its cartel of news commentators like Carlson, Laura Ingraham and Jesse Watters, among others. One thing that outraged me was the fear by some Fox news employees on Election Night 2020 when the results were turning against President Trump, that they would be alienating their own audience. A news organization is supposed to report the news, regardless of whether the audience likes the news or not. This to me indicates Fox News is severely compromised as a news organization. A journalist's obligation is to the truth, first and foremost, and to the audience, second. I recommend this book. Smartly written and well-sourced. This book is available in accessible formats from the Centre for Equitable Library Access in Canada and Bookshare in the United States.

[Melanie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this sensational looking cover does a disservice to the important story within. This is an in depth look at how Fox News runs, makes decisions, and ultimately the lies they are willing to tell for ratings. I am no Fox News fan, but even I was absolutely stunned by the willingness of executives of ostensibly a news organization to completely fabricate and mislead viewers. They tricked a wide swath of the population into not believing legit news sources, when all along they were the ones flat out lying. The one part of this cover that I don't think is hyperbole is that this is truly a battle for our democracy. If all you watch is Fox News, or if you believe that other legit news organizations are lying to you, I urge you to examine those beliefs with a critical eye. And really delve into the documents from the Dominion v Fox lawsuit, which make it clear that no one at Fox believes the lies they are peddling to you.

[Ben Riley · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a well researched and documented book which I really appreciate. Things have become so partisan now-a-days, that it’s difficult to find factually based political opinions.

What has happened at Fox News is remarkable. The lack of journalistic integrity and willful spreading of “alternative facts” is incredibly disappointing. Any channel that has “news” in its title should have at least some passing relationship to truth.

However, I’m giving it only three stars since it was clearly a one-sided piece entirely bent on smearing Fox News (which it rightfully deserves). I could have done without the author’s moral commentary and histrionics. Fox’s record speaks for itself, I didn’t need the additional righteous indignation and over moralization.

What this book highlights most of all, is that the majority of our news outlets are privately owned and care more about ratings than veracity. While I don’t think CNN’s sins are as egregious, it is still biased and spins the news for this sensibilities of its viewers. We need to fund public news outlets like PBS and NPR more liberally and rely more on non biased outlets for our news. The current polarization our news and social media creates is hurting our democracy.

[Christopher Tarr · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting read, the content is really good the book is well put together.

While reading this one must always keep in mind that it would be like reading a book about Stalin written by Churchill.

Although this book cites many facts it's also deeply opinionated and has a strong bias.

That being said I have no love for Fox or Tucker or even the author but this is an interesting insight into the workings of their companies and character.

I give this book four stars based on my own knowledge of its inherent biases, I would give it three for anybody who is unaware. Simply due to the fact that it does not acknowledge how biased it is.

[Nollie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched and compelling documentation of the Fox/News Corp backstory and Fox News’s coverage leading up and during the Trump years, the Jan 6th insurrection, ensuing Dominion Voting lawsuit, as well as the downfall of Tucker Carlson and other network journalists. I found particularly interesting the backstories of Rupert Murdoch and Tucker Carlson and how it all plays into the greed and hypocrisy that has harmed our democracy by just “respecting the audience” and giving them what they “want”, at the expense of truth.

[Pamela · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sadly everything discussed within it won’t be a reveal to those who read it. Those who would be surprised if they picked the book up, regrettably won’t be reading anything that might pop the magic bubble they live in. Even the Fox ratings support that the group will go elsewhere to get their « fix » if they air something truthful (e.g. Trump lost Arizona prior to any other organization acknowledging this)
I hope that future generations will be allowed to read this and other books that clearly encapsulate what happened during these times…. It is disheartening already to see what books are being banned so who can predict.

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

The information in this book was thorough. I was very interested in the beginning of the book, struggled in the middle of the book, and ultimately slugged my way through it. I think the book would have benefited from a more defined structure with overarching “take home points,” as it was easy to get lost in the details and forget the big picture.

While the book could have been condensed, this was an illuminating read that highlighted the importance of ensuring that our news is responsibly sourced and reputably conveyed.

[John Schorg · Rating 2 out of 5]

One imagines the author placing this book before a devout Fox News viewer, going through it page by page, pointing out the numerous idiocies and contradictions and excessive sleazy behavior, then saying, "See? See? This whole network sits on a throne of lies!!" Then imagining the viewer saying, "Yeah, so what?," then turning back to Fox. The rapidly burgeoning industry of bashing Fox means nothing. Those who hate the network will continue to believe, while those who love it for giving comfort to their deepest beliefs will be unswayed. You wish it would mean something, but it doesn't anymore. In that context, this subject has been covered better in other books, including one from this author.

[Edward Amato · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book for reading prior to 2024 election. Gives clarification on the deal between Fox News and Dominion, the role Fox played in misinformation about the 2020 election, and the fall of Tucker Carlson among sane people.

[Grant · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid look into the past few years of Fox News and the power it has over society.

[Kimmi by the Books]

I wish literally a single sentence of this shocked or surprised me, but alas.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE DOMINION LAWSUIT AND ITS AFTERMATH

Author Brian Stelter wrote in the Prologue to this 2023 book, “We are undergoing a stress test of American democracy, the rule of law, and the very notion of a shared political reality. Can we achieve accountability for assaults on democracy? What forms can accountability take? That’s what this book is about… When Trump and his network of lies claimed he won an election he lost in 2020, he failed in court but prevailed in the court of public opinion he cared about most, the opinion of his loyal voters. Then, special counsel Jack Smith alleged, Trump perpetrated three criminal conspiracies, each one ‘built on the widespread mistrust the Defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud.’ The conspiracies sought to overturn the results of a free and fair election in a brazen attempt to retain power. In other words, a coup… The coup attempt could not have happened without the help of Fox News, the cable network controlled by Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan. All of the indictments Trump faced in 2023 related, in one way or another, to the misguided advice, misinformation, and mendacity of the Fox machine.” (Pg. 1-2)

He continues, “Of all the efforts at Big Lie accountability… Dominion’s lawsuit against Fox was the most expensive. Fox’s executive team had dismissed Dominion’s chances… with the same language that Trump’s lawyers used to defend him. But Fox ultimately paid a staggering self-imposed fine for its unchecked attacks on Dominion---and the accountability did not end there. Because Fox was subject to the pretrial discovery process, it was forced to share years of emails, texts, chats, and memos with Dominion… Dominion ensured that thousands of documents were exposed to the public. For the first time in Fox history, outsiders were able to see how it worked on the inside.” (Pg. 4)

He goes on, “Fox was more directly responsible for the chaos than anyone realized at the time… Tucker Carlson … [and] Laura Ingraham … both knew that Trump lost and talked about ways he could have won… Rupert Murdoch, for the record, said in 2023 of people who still believe Trump won in 2020, ‘they are crazy.’ What Rupert and his hosts all had in common was selfishness and greed. By protecting their own personal brands, political futures, and self-interests, they put profits over patriotism and the public interest.” (Pg. 5) He adds, “In April 2023, less than a week after Fox settled with Dominion, Carlson was fired… Marched off the Fox News plank and into the stormy seas of ‘independent’ media. He said he didn’t know why his show was canceled---but by the end of this book, you will know why. You will also see why … Fox is the black widow at the center of the web of lies that pervert American politics.” (Pg. 7)

He notes, “[The] show, ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight,’ was previously based at the Fox D.C. bureau, and he still retained a prized corner office for those precious few occasions when he dropped by for a visit. But Carlson had fled D.C. during Donald Trump’s presidency and used his burgeoning star power to set up a whole new life for himself. While the Capitol dome still sparkled above his right shoulder on air, he spoke from remote TV studios … [in] Florida and … Maine… viewers never guessed that he was hundreds of miles from D.C. … one of the many secrets he kept from the viewing public… He was isolated in almost every sense of the world.” (Pg. 11-12)

After his firing, “[Carlson] was dumped and he wanted everyone else to know it too. He wrote a farewell email to his staff at 11:27 a.m. The news erupted at 11:28… Carlson’s production team was not given a heads-up, so they found out the same way as everyone else, through smartphone news alerts or texts from friends… the staff was supposed to stay at their keyboards and whip up a replacement show that very night… The fact that Fox had no firm plan for the time slot… betrayed how suddenly and sloppily Carlson had been terminated and added to the shock value.” (Pg. 20-21)

He recounts that Carlson’s early show ‘Tucker’ “was canceled in early 2008… CNN certainly wasn’t taking him back. So that left Fox. Lucky for Carlson... Roger Ailes had been building Fox into a conservative alternative to the rest of the American media. After 9/11 it took off… Fox had morphed into a dedicated propaganda organ… Fox was light on reporting, heavy on opinion about what OTHERS were reporting… Ailes ruled through fear and control. He really liked washouts like Carlson because he wielded power over them… Ailes added, ‘if I can make him a success here, we make … CNN and MSNBC… look bad.’” (Pg. 45) He adds, “The MAGA movement’s rage, glee, cruelty, and contradictions [were] perfectly distilled into a TV show that rarely mentioned Trump at all.” (Pg. 48)

He outlines, “during the Trump years, Carlson continued to spin the fable that … the deep state… still had all the power…. He reserved his strongest (and most accurate) criticisms of Trump for external audiences, at one point telling a German newspaper that Trump … ‘hasn’t surrounded himself with people that can get it done, hasn’t done all the things you need to do’… Carlson’s critique of Trump was correct.” (Pg. 59)

He notes, “I cannot overstate Fox’s fixation on ratings… The preeminent question was rarely ‘was it true?’--- it was instead ‘did it rate?’” (Pg. 62-63) He recounts, “On election night… minutes after Fox called Arizona for Biden, Fox’s audience started to shrink and Newsmax’s audience started to grow… the Fox audience was so invested in Trump, and so infuriated by Fox’s Arizona call, that they went off in search of a safer space. They were like sports fans who didn’t want to see the action live if it meant their guy … might lose. They just wanted to see the parts where he was winning. And so they landed on Newsmax, where there was no decision desk.” (Pg. 95-96) Carlson asked, “‘Do the executives understand how much credibility we’ve lost with our audience?’… Fox was being confronted with a new paradigm: They don’t trust us any more because this time we didn’t lie.” (Pg. 117) “Newsmax… was surging [in the ratings]… a spectacular 1,000 percent increase from its pre-election average… On Newsmax, Biden was not president-elect and Trump was not a loser… Every other segment on Newsmax seemed to be a tirade against Fox.” (Pg. 124-125)

He reports, “Carlson was fed up… he texted associates about his conviction that [Trump lawyer Sidney] Powell was lying---and hurting the MAGA movement… Carlson texted her… ‘You’ve convinced them Trump will win… If you don’t have conclusive evidence of fraud at that scale, it’s a cruel and reckless thing to keep saying.’… Tucker Carlson was right. He clearly knew the difference between carefully framed, suggestive BS and sloppy, unmistakable BS. Powell WAS being reckless… She was leading the viewing audience into a blind, dark alley of delusion… ‘Sidney is a complete nut,’ Ingraham replied. ‘No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.’” (Pg. 140-141)

He states, “On the evening of January 5, 2021, Donald Trump was … fleetingly happy. His outbursts and all-caps rants had rattled Washington … for four years, and in the weeks after he lost the election he turned especially foul toward his own staff… his most reliably obsequious Fox wingman, Sean Hannity, was skewering him behind his back. But on the evening of the 5th… ‘he was so excited.’ So excited for one last shot at stealing the presidency.” (Pg. 167)

On January 6th, “at 1 p.m., right after Trump told the crowd ‘if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,’ the Fox control room cut away from Trump… Fox was AHEAD of other major networks in focusing on the unrest.,, anyone watching Fox in the 1 p.m. hour could tell that something was coming this way. This is relevant because the White House was relying on Fox for information.” (Pg. 171-172) He adds, “New videos emerged of the violence day after day, but Fox and other right-wing networks mostly ignored the evidence… [Fox,] always conscious of how well it played to portray conservatives as victims, spent far more time on social media sites ‘censoring’ conservatives than the bloody aftermath of the riot.” (Pg. 185)

He recounts, “[Chris] Wallace gave notice to Fox management on … December 9… there were audible gasps across Fox’s D.C. bureau when Wallace announced [on Dec. 12] ... ‘this is my final “Fox News Sunday.”' The shrinking band of journalists left at Fox hated to see Wallace go… He was not just quitting Fox, he was fleeing to the network [CNN] that punctured Fox’s propaganda at every opportunity.” (Pg. 212-213)

He observes, “Fox viewers steered clear of anything that questioned (or might undermine) their established convictions. Every time the [Jan 6] committee held a daytime hearing… the audience tuned out en masse… The ratings were the … most convincing data… about the radicalization of the right. All those breast-beating avowals by conservatives about cherishing law and order? Being pro-police?... They were blown to bits by this transparent hypocrisy about January 6.” (Pg. 228)

He recounts, “Fox’s stable of talent… got a heads-up about what the discovery process dredged up in the Dominion suit. ‘They’re going to call us hypocrites,’ an exec warned… For Dominion, summary judgment briefs were the #1 way to force reams of evidence into public view… Dominion included scores of Fox documents---the cringier, the better---and snippets from the late 2022 depositions… Headlines about the filings were exactly the distasteful dessert the exec had expected. ‘Fox News Hosts Called 2020 Election Frand “Total BS” in Private’… ‘Tucker Carlson and Fox News Knew Election Fraud Claims Were Bogus.’” (Pg. 264-265)

He says, “As I absorbed thousands of … Dominion deposition transcripts, I found myself thinking that the people in charge of the Fox machine should take their own advice… As Lachlan said in his deposition, ‘You never want to knowingly report a falsehood.’ And as Hannity said in his deposition, ‘If you can’t prove it, you better not say it.’ Most powerfully, when Rupert was asked, ‘Does Fox have a responsibility to tell the truth, even when its viewers don’t want to hear it?’ he said yes. Imagine if Fox actually lived up to that responsibility.” (Pg. 319-320)

He concludes, “Could Americans of all ages and backgrounds and beliefs come together to speak more loudly than the liars? Yes, they could, and so they did, knowing that fictions aided autocracy while facts nourished democracy. The network of reality will, in the end, triumph.” (Pg. 326)

This vastly informative book will be ‘must reading’ for anyone wanting to study the Dominion lawsuit, and its effect on Fox News.

[Bill Salmi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brian Stelter’s ' Network of Lies: The Epic Saga of Fox News, Donald Trump, and the Battle for American Democracy ', lives up to its’ title. ‘Network of Lies’ provides direct evidence that, if its’ audience depended on the Fox News Channel for its’ news, then that audience has been significantly disinformed.
Backed with direct quotes, Stelter shows that many of Fox News hosts deliberately fabricated totally baseless news reports. That Fox News evolved from news journalism to a money generating propaganda machine.

A great read for better understanding the process and dynamics of producing sensational, false news, the mind set of Fox News aficionados, MAGA followers and Trumpism.

*** Evidence of False Reporting ***
Evidence that the Fox News Channel broadcasts false news stories was largely obtained as a consequence of the Dominion Voting Systems defamation lawsuit. The Dominion defamation vs Fox Organization lawsuit’s discovery process both disclosed, and made public, a large trove of Fox Company internal text messages and emails:
“Because Fox was subject to the pretrial discovery process, it was forced to share years of emails, texts, chats, and memos with Dominion. Through court filings Dominion ensured that thousands of documents were exposed to the public. For the first time in Fox history, outsiders were able to see how it worked on the inside.”

Steltzer also gathered information from the ‘Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol’, Fox memos, interviews, social media conversations, and Internet Archives of TV news databases.

Stelter, a former CNN anchor, and former host of Reliable Sources, leverages his journalism background to provide insights into the Fox News organization. Stelter does a stellar job of collecting, filtering, and organizing a vast amount of primary source information. The book presents a cohesive chronology of Fox News creating false news narratives that radicalized its’ viewers. The paper book is 376 pages, which is 11 hrs and 16 minutes for the Audible version. IMHO it is a bit too long, and a tad redundant.

*** The Players ***
‘Network of Lies’ provides direct quotes from texts, emails, Fox memos, court filings, interviews from Fox organization personnel, election pundits, Trump, and election fraud proponents.

Fox organization personnel include the Fox News Channel line-up of commentators: Tucker Carlson, Maria Bartiromo, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Jeanine Pirro, and others. Fox organization management include: Fox News Media CEO, Suzanne Scott; Fox News Media President, Jay Wallace; Fox News owner, Rupert Murdoch, and his sons Lachlan Murdoch, and James Murdoch. The players also include some of the key 2020 election fraud proponents: in particular voting machine fraud charlatan, Sidney Powell, previous Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and provocative disruptor, Steve Banon, and some MAGA supporters.

Stelter devotes a lot time to Tucker Carlson. The reader gets an inside look at Carlson’s isolated home life, toxic work environment, vulgarity, nasty opinions of co-workers and bosses, extreme opinions of the Fox audience, and opinions of Trump - including ‘I hate him passionately.’

Seltzer provides numerous examples of Carlson’s opinions, for example, on Ukraine:
“Tucker Carlson’s strikingly pro-Putin monologues. He downplayed the conflict as a "border dispute," criticized Ukraine ceaselessly, and parroted Kremlin propaganda, so much so that Russian state TV shows ran clips of his rants. Other Fox hosts had drifted toward pro-Putin commentary, but Carlson’s open disdain for Ukraine and defense of Putin commanded the most attention—just the way Carlson liked it’.

Carlson’s own words depict a personal and political unethical, scuzzy person. Similar quotes, of other Fox News hosts, document a lack of honesty and journalistic integrity among the Fox News Channel hosts.
“What Rupert and his hosts all had in common was selfishness and greed. By protecting their own personal brands, political futures, and self-interests, they put profits over patriotism and the public interest.”

*** Fox News Devolution from Journalistic Integrity ***
The Fox News Channel was created by Rupert Murdoch in October 1996. During the Trump years Fox News transitioned from news journalism, to opinion and analysis. More costly news journalism was replaced with money making sensationalism:
“Left unmentioned was the fact that Fox News had just laid off sixty to seventy people, largely from the reporting ranks, including the so-called Brain Room of researchers who tried to keep the network’s coverage somewhat straight. The Brain Room department was ‘always a reliable and unbiased source for us’ ”.

Seltzer states, “For the entirety of the Trump years, the story was the same: Opinion won, news lost”. Fox News commentary devolved into a money making propaganda machine.
Stelter does however, note that not all the Fox organization lacked journalistic integrity. The Fox organization continues to have journalists, referred to internally as ‘the brain room, that include Fox Business News personnel including Vice President Niel Cavuto, and reporter Chris Stirewalt.

*** Market Driven 'News' Stories ***
Journalistic, objective truthfulness, does not appear to be a prime tenet of The Fox News Channel. The Fox News Channel’s business model is based mostly on market performance. Using a viewer ratings scorecard people within the Fox organization assess, near real time, changes in Fox News viewership day by day, show by show:
‘I cannot overstate Fox’s fixation on ratings, on winning, on keeping viewers hooked around the clock. Every day Scott [Fox News CEO] and her lieutenants received an email titled "Fox News Executive Scorecard" with segment-by-segment breakdowns of which stories and which guests rated well. Spreadsheets and line graphs showed the audience’s hunger for Republican red meat and its distaste for anything remotely positive or respectful about Democrats. The preeminent question was rarely “was it true?"—it was instead "did it rate?’

This ‘viewers driven’ news story generation evolved from: stories with outlandish perspectives, to coverage of, for instance, non-existent election machine fraud, then perpetuation of QAnon and other baseless conspiracy theory falsehoods.

*** Fox Viewers – The Audience ***
‘A Network of Lies’ chronicles the development of ‘The Audience’. ‘The Audience’ refers to Fox News acolytes whom often are part of the Trump base. ‘The Audience’ was ’coparented’ by Trump, and Fox hosts.
Fox host, Carlson, avoids ‘insulting the audience’. The term ‘Insulting the audience’ as used by Fox News hosts meaning the cases of Fox doing fact checking. The term contrasts with the meaning of ‘respecting the audience’, i.e. leaving it to audience to decide veracity. The meanings of these terms are an interesting take on the Fox News Channel’s old slogan, ‘We Report. You Decide’.

A case in point, of Fox News viewers driving the the Fox News Channels news content, was the viewers response to the Fox News decision desk having accurately projecting that the Arizona state presidential election would be won by Joe Biden. ‘The audience’ was angry, and the Fox News hosts disparaged the brain desk, Trump lambasted Fox News, and espoused his audience changed the channel. ‘The Audience’ did change the channel, as shown by election night Nielsen Ratings:

"Trump publicly pressured Fox to be as irrational as OAN with tweets like this:
'FoxNews daytime is not watchable. In a class with CNN & MSDNC. Check out @OANN, @newsmax and others that are picking up the slack. Even a boring football game, kneeling and all, is better!...'

In response to Trump’s social media texts:
“Carlson was furious at Fox’s mis-management team. He asked VP of morning programming Gavin Hadden, "Do the executives understand how much credibility and trust we’ve lost with our audience? We’re playing with fire, for real."
"I hope so," Hadden replied. "I’m worried."
Fox was being confronted with a new paradigm: They don’t trust us anymore because this time we didn’t lie.
The Carlson – Hadden conversation continued:
Carlson: "Some of this will pass but once you lose people’s trust it’s tough."
Hadden: "We certainly have gone against ‘the customer is always right.’ But hopefully our product is strong enough to withstand.”
Carlson: "I sure hope so. I sincerely believe it’s important to have a strong Fox News."
Hadden: "There is no question."
Hadden: “And Newsmax with all our castoffs is not the answer."
Carlson: "With Trump behind it, an alternative like Newsmax could be devastating to us."
Carlson also wrote, "We worked really hard to build what we have,", "Those f***rs [Fox’s brain desk] are destroying our credibility. It enrages me.”

Stelter notes that this twisted logic drove out some of Fox ‘actual’ News hosts.

*** The 2020 Election ***
In the the weeks after the 2020 election Stelter notes Rupert Murdoch attempted to encourage actual journalism by the Fox hosts:
"He [Rupert Murdoch] wrote to Scott [the Fox News CEO] that 'everything seems to be moving to Biden, and if Trump becomes a sore loser we should watch [to make sure] Sean especially and others don’t sound the same. Not there yet, but a danger.' Rupert wanted to warn against Trump dragging Hannity—and the rest of Fox-—down into the sewer of fabricated evidence with him."

Stelter does not claim a conspiracy between Trump, and Fox News, indicating it is more of a codependency:
“For four years. Fox and Trump were deeply codependent. Trump needed Fox for access to his rabid followers; Fox needed Trump for popularity and enormous profits. … Fox could hurt Trump by puncturing his force field of audacious lying. Trump could hurt Fox by directing his legions of acolytes elsewhere”.

*** January 6 2021 Attack on the US Capitol ***
After the election Fox host’s and Trump’s network began asserting ‘The Big Lie’ - the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.
Stelter chronicles Fox News hosts and their guests introducing baseless claims of election fraud.
These are verbatim quotes of text conversations between Fox and the Trump organization people during the events leading up to and after the January 6th Capitol attack.

In addition, Stelter introduces raw testimony and interviews drawn from ‘January 6th Investigation Committee’.

Overall, Stelter provides an evidence based narrative supporting the assertion that:
“The coup attempt could not have happened without the help of Fox News, the cable network controlled by Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan.”

After the January 6 attack on the US capitol, Stelter notes that Fox News’s method for addressing ‘bad’ news became either attack it or ignore it: “Fox had two settings for an unwelcome story like the January 6 investigation: Attack and ignore.”

*** The Dominion Systems Voting Systems Evidence of Defamation ***
A central election fraud claim was that rigged voting machines, owned by various nefarious players, manipulated election votes.

Sydney Powell’s allegation against Dominion Voting Systems were first presented on the Fox News Bartiromo show:
“Bartiromo came back on camera and said ‘Sidney, we talked about the Dominion software. I know that there were voting irregularities. Tell me about that.’ Powell alleged fraud: ‘They were flipping votes in the computer system or adding votes that did not exist.’
“Powell alleged, in her very first answer, ‘a massive and coordinated effort to steal this election from We the People of the United States of America, to delegitimize and destroy votes for Donald Trump, to manufacture votes for Joe Biden.”

In my review of ‘Network of Lies’ I leave it to potential readers to find out what ‘report’ Bartiromo based Powell’s Dominion Systems Voting machine fraud claims on. For one, it was the first alleged instance of Dominion Voting Systems defamation, in addition it was “a gift to Dominion’s lawyers.”

Stelter notes that initially many people in the Fox organization expected, and hoped, that the January attack would finally take Trump off the public stage:
“Even Tucker Carlson couldn’t hold back his excitement at the prospect of Trump being off the public stage. He wrote to a colleague on January 4, ‘We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights. I truly can’t wait.’ ”

Next ‘Network of Lies’, focuses on Fox News rescripting the January 6th events. In particular, Tucker Carlson, progresses from claiming the January 6th events were: caused by ANTIFA, not caused by Trump supporters, were peaceful, were not the fault of Trump supporters, “eventually reframing January 6 as an unholy attack __on__ Trump supporters.”

Stelter observes:
“Thus, in the span of just one week, January 6 started to be reframed. It was no longer a coup attempt, but a conspiracy against conservatives. Carlson promised that ‘it was not your fault.’ Now Trump fans were the ‘victims’."

Specifically, Stelter notes that Carlson’s disinformation escalated into his production of the documentary ‘Patriot Purge’. Stelter describes Patriot Purge as:
“Carlson took the story to its incendiary extreme with ‘Patriot Purge’, a three-part documentary-style series that cast January 6 as a "false flag” operation meant to entrap Trump fans.”

Similarly, Stelter’s quotes, even Geraldo Rivera, who left Fox News Channel in 2023, insight as:
“Rivera decided to speak publicly about Carlson’s "January 6 was an inside job" agitprop. It was “unforgivable,” he said, but Carlson did it because "that’s what the audience wants. In other words, it wasn’t the malevolent media leading the audience. It was the audience leading the malevolent media." The more clearly this dynamic is understood, the more thoroughly it can be defeated.”

*** Fox Settles the Dominion Systems Defamation Suit ***
Initially Fox executives, bolstered by their lawyer’s advice, and the success of legal defenses used in previous Fox organization defamation law suits, expected that the Dominion Voting Systems defamation suit would be easily dismissed. “Fox’s executive team had dismissed Dominion’s chances (‘it’s a slam-dunk First Amendment case,’)”

However, the deposition of hosts and the suit discovery process gathered extensive defamation evidence. Fox hosts had not been vetting guests, nor attempting to verify outlandish claims:
“… the discovery process and the depositions did show the limits of exec oversight. On the day Biden became president-elect, Clark emailed Bartiromo and said, "Maria, I am asking that we reconsider the Rudy Giuliani booking tomorrow.” Clark attached an article titled “Giuliani releases bizarre video claiming Fox News won election for Biden." The election was over; why book a conspiracy theorist to say otherwise? Because, Bartiromo said, "it was our show." Carlson wasn’t the only host who believed he was bigger than the Fox brand.”

Throughout ‘Network of Lies’ Seltzer highlights incriminating revelations that led to the Fox settlement of the Dominion defamation case:
“.. on Tuesday [April 18, 2023] Fox paid big to avert the trial. Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, under intensifying threat of what the testimony might do to Fox’s already battered reputation, authorized a mind-blowing $787.5 million payment to Dominion. Carlson would not have to go through the wringer of testifying—and neither would Rupert or Lachlan.”

Note the wider Murdoch media organization made $14.9bn in revenue during its’ 2023 fiscal year.

*** Tucker Carlson is Fired from Fox News ***
Less than a week after the settlement Tucker Carlson was abruptly fired from Fox. Stelter presents numerous, inconclusive rationales for the firing. It is also uncertain whether the firing was driven by Rupert, Lachlan, or Suzanne Scott.

*** The Fox News Organizations Post Settlement ***
Stelter next points out that after the Dominion lawsuit settlement Fox organizations problems due to advocating ‘The Big Lie’ were not over:
“The Big Lie reckoning, however, was far from over for Fox. Another voting technology company, Smartmatic, was suing for even more money, and its case looked even stronger than Dominion’s.”
Stelter provides an explanation for the claim that Smartmatic’s, “case looked even stronger than Dominion’s.” My review excludes a spoiler here, leaving it to interested readers to find the very simple explanation.

Stelter does not believe that Fox loosing Dominion Systems lawsuit positively impacted journalistic integrity at Fox Media.
“The Dominion Voting Systems case, with all its costs, did not change Fox one iota, at least in the category of pushing lies. In mid-May 2023 Rupert’s New York Post splashed a story titled "VETS KICKED OUT FOR MIGRANTS" across its front page.”
Stelter then continues and explains why the New York Post story had not been sufficiently vetted. It was a baseless false story... the vets in the story were paid to pose as displaced vets.

After the Dominion vs Fox settlement there remain significant differences, held by Rupert’s sons James, and Lachlan, regarding the direction the Fox News organization should pursue:
“After the deal dust settled, James [Murdoch] thought of the new Fox as just "an American political project." Lachlan ostracized James as a deluded liberal. The two brothers stopped speaking. It became increasingly clear that James could not abide the reactionary, radical direction Fox News was heading in. He was disgusted by Fox’s prime-time hosts. "They’re spewing poison," he told confidants.”

‘Network of Lies’ was published in November 2023, and remains germane regarding developments in the Fox News organization. Currently, August 2024, Rupert, at 92 is trying to guide the future direction of his Fox Media outlet upon his death. There is strong disagreement among his adult children, heirs, as Rupert tries to alter the irrevocable family trust to give son Lachlan full control of the media empire.

*** External Resources and the Kindle Version Tools ***
As per my typical ‘book reading’, I listened to the Audible version. After discovering the extensive, documented evidence of Fox organization misdeeds, I also got the Kindle version.

The Kindle version is very useful for perusing the book’s content. This is because the Kindle PC browser version provides useful functionality including:
-- a Search function that returns a hyperlink that includes the search, and text surrounding search word;
-- a Table of Contents with a pop-up pane to navigate between chapters;
-- an Annotations (see uploaded photo) pop-up pane to filter by: highlighter color, Notes, or Bookmarks;
-- an Index with hyperlinks to referenced pages;
-- a Notes section (see uploaded photo) with hyperlinks from the books text to external footnotes;