Fact check: Has Fox News been accused of audio manipulation in the past?

1. Summary of the results

Yes, Fox News has been accused of audio manipulation in multiple recent instances. The evidence shows two distinct types of audio manipulation occurring within the past week:

Selective Audio Editing:

• Jesse Watters on Fox News deliberately edited clips of President Donald Trump to omit key phrases, specifically removing "a day ago" from Trump's comments about a phone call with California Governor Gavin Newsom ^[1]. This editing was done to make Newsom appear to be lying about the timing of their conversation ^[2].

Fake Audio Enhancement:

• Fox News was accused of adding artificial applause sounds to their live coverage of President Trump's military parade, with viewers noting that other networks covering the same event did not have the same applause audio ^{[3] [4]}. This manipulation was allegedly done to enhance the appearance of crowd enthusiasm ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the frequency and systematic nature of these accusations. The analyses reveal that these are not isolated incidents but represent a pattern of editorial manipulation occurring within a very short timeframe - both the Newsom incident and the parade audio manipulation occurred in June 2025.

Who benefits from these practices:

• Fox News executives and shareholders benefit financially from maintaining viewer engagement through sensationalized content that supports their audience's political preferences
• Jesse Watters specifically benefits from increased ratings and viewer loyalty by presenting content that confirms his audience's biases against Democratic politicians like Newsom
• Political figures like Trump benefit when networks enhance the perception of their public support through audio manipulation

Alternative viewpoint: Fox News could argue that selective editing is standard practice in television news to fit time constraints, though the analyses suggest the editing was specifically designed to mislead rather than simply condense content.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains no apparent misinformation or bias - it is a straightforward factual inquiry. However, it could be interpreted as understating the severity by using the passive phrase "been accused of" rather than asking about documented instances of audio manipulation. The analyses provide concrete evidence rather than mere accusations, showing actual examples of deceptive editing practices ^[1] and fake audio enhancement ^{[3] [4]}.