>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
It gets worse. According to the lawsuit, if distributors do include Newsmax in their lineups, Fox allegedly retaliates by forcing those same distributors to give preference to Fox’s weaker channels.
That’s not competition. That’s economic strong-arming.
Newsmax argues these tactics have cost them millions of dollars in lost growth opportunities, saying Fox’s pressure has “delayed, for almost a decade, Newsmax’s growth in pay TV distribution, especially in the critical virtual Multichannel Video Programming Distributor (‘vMVPD’) arena.”
Private Investigators and Guest Blacklists
The lawsuit doesn’t just accuse Fox of financial bullying. It also alleges that Fox discouraged guests from appearing on Newsmax and even hired private investigators to dig into Newsmax executives.
Think about that — one conservative network allegedly using P.I.s to go after another conservative network.
One shocking example comes from streaming platform Fubo. Newsmax says Fubo refused to put them in a top-tier Sports/Entertainment package because of Fox’s leverage.
“On information and belief, Fox used its leverage to (i) secure inclusion of Fox News and Fox Business in that Sports/Entertainment Package, and (ii) impose terms that deter Fubo from adding additional news channels, including Newsmax, without incurring penalties,” the lawsuit states.
Fubo disputed the claim publicly, saying Newsmax is in fact part of that package. But Newsmax insists Fox has created a broader pattern of intimidation that extends to platforms like Sling TV.
Fox Fires Back With Dismissive Response
How did Fox respond? Not by addressing the allegations head-on, but by dismissing Newsmax entirely.
“Newsmax cannot sue their way out of their own competitive failures in the marketplace to chase headlines simply because they can’t attract viewers,” Fox News Media told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Notice what’s missing: a denial. Instead of refuting the charges, Fox shrugged them off and blamed Newsmax’s supposed lack of audience appeal.
Michael J. Guzman, Newsmax’s attorney, hit back: “Fox’s behavior represents a textbook abuse of monopoly power. The law is clear: competition, not coercion, should decide what news channels Americans can watch.”
Why Conservatives Should Care
This fight isn’t just about two networks. It’s about whether conservative media can truly compete on a level playing field.
If Fox has been rigging the system to keep competitors down, it’s not just Newsmax losing — it’s conservative audiences across America.
Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy made the stakes clear: the lawsuit is about “restoring fairness to the market and ensuring that Americans have real choice in the news they watch.”
That should matter to every conservative, whether they prefer Fox, Newsmax, or another outlet.
Because if Fox really did spend a decade using monopoly tactics to suppress competition, they’ve been helping CNN and MSNBC more than they’ve been helping the conservative cause.
The case is moving forward under the Sherman Act, with Newsmax demanding damages and a jury trial.
One thing is certain: this battle isn’t going away anytime soon. Conservative viewers deserve to know the truth about whether Fox has been a fair competitor — or a monopolistic bully behind the curtain.
