Fox host says he is forbidden from covering Dominion lawsuit

Fox News host and Media Buzz anchor Howard Kutz revealed Sunday that he is prohibited from covering the defamation lawsuit filed against his employer by Dominion Voting Systems.

"Some of you have been asking why I'm not covering the Dominion voting machines lawsuit against Fox involving the unproven claims of election fraud in 2020, and it's absolutely a fair question," he told viewers during Sunday's episode, per The Washington Post. "I believe I should be covering it. It's a major media story, given my role here at Fox. But the company has decided that as part of the organization being sued, I can't talk about it or write about it, at least for now."

"I strongly disagree with that decision, but as an employee, I have to abide by it," he continued. "And if that changes, I'll let you know."

The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Sign up

Dominion has accused Fox of purposely promoting baseless claims that Dominion's voting machines contributed to widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, despite knowing such allegations were bogus.

A court document made public in mid-February appears to at least somewhat support that hypothesis — the bombshell report contained a number of texts and emails wherein top Fox personalities and executives are privately doubting the fraud claims they were publicly promoting. And though the document "made waves the in the media industry," the Post writes, it has "received sparse coverage on Fox."

Fox had also previously filed a countersuit against Dominion, alleging the firm "can't prove its damages and claiming that it had filed the lawsuit to create headlines and discourage free speech," the Post says.