What studies have compared the accuracy of Fox News to other major news networks?
Executive summary
Academic papers and independent rating groups have repeatedly compared Fox News’ accuracy, bias and effects to other U.S. news outlets. Peer‑reviewed econometric studies find measurable political effects from Fox News distribution (e.g., a 0.05 rating rise linked to a ~0.5 percentage‑point increase in Republican vote share) [1], and media‑rating organizations classify Fox News as right‑skewing with varying reliability scores [2]. Public surveys show strong partisan differences in perceived bias and accuracy: Democrats overwhelmingly call Fox News biased while many Republicans trust it more than other sources [3] [4].
1. What kind of studies have been done — and what they measure
Researchers use three broad approaches to compare Fox News with other outlets: field‑style causal inference exploiting market rollouts or channel placement (electoral and knowledge effects), content‑analysis and rating‑methodology comparisons, and public‑opinion surveys about trust and bias. The ScienceDirect paper uses exogenous variation in channel placement to estimate vote‑share shifts associated with small increases in Fox viewership (0.05 rating points → ~0.5 percentage points for Republicans) [1]. Content/rating projects such as Ad Fontes apply systematic scoring to measure bias and reliability, placing Fox News in a “Skews Right” bias category and rating its reliability as generally reliable with some issues [2]. Large surveys (Knight/Gallup and Pew) collect public perceptions of bias and trust across many outlets and show wide partisan splits in judgments of Fox [3] [4].
2. What the large causal studies find about accuracy and political effects
Field‑design studies do not label “accuracy” directly but measure downstream effects consistent with consistent editorial slant. The paper summarized on ScienceDirect reports that increased Fox availability shifted ideology and partisan identity rightward and linked a modest rise in ratings to a measurable boost in Republican vote shares [1]. Other academic work on “knowledge effects” has used National Annenberg Election Studies and similar large datasets to test whether Fox availability affects factual political knowledge; these pieces focus on information outcomes rather than simple accuracy tallies [5].
3. How content‑rating and fact‑checking projects compare networks
Independent rating projects and fact‑check archives play the role of comparative accuracy and reliability assessments. Ad Fontes’ methodology rates the Fox News website as “Skews Right” and “Generally Reliable/Analysis OR Other Issues,” giving readers a standardized point of comparison with other outlets on the same chart [2]. Media Bias/Fact Check’s profile describes straight reporting as often factual but concludes editorial opinion lowers the outlet’s overall factual rating and rates Fox as right‑biased with questionable elements [6]. PolitiFact maintains a database of checks involving Fox personalities and programming for granular claim‑level comparisons [7].
4. What public‑opinion surveys reveal about perceived accuracy
Surveys capture perception more than instrumental accuracy. The Knight Foundation/Gallup analysis shows stark partisan divergence: Democrats saw Fox News as highly biased (89% biased, 2% unbiased in one cited breakdown), placing it among the least trusted by that group [3]. Pew surveys report that Fox remains a top news source for Republicans and that partisanship predicts trust — for example, a majority of Republicans say they trust Fox more than other outlets [4]. These perception gaps complicate cross‑network “accuracy” comparisons because audiences interpret the same content through partisan priors.
5. Limitations, contested interpretations and missing items
Available sources document political effects, ratings and perceived bias but do not present a single, agreed‑upon metric of “accuracy” across networks. The ScienceDirect work measures political impact rather than discrete factual error rates [1]. Ad Fontes and Media Bias/Fact Check offer methodological comparisons but use different scoring systems and editorial judgments [2] [6]. PolitiFact stores claim‑level verdicts but does not itself produce aggregate accuracy rankings in the provided snippets [7]. Not found in current reporting: a single comprehensive, peer‑reviewed study that takes identical fact‑checks across Fox, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC and reports a unified accuracy ranking in the sources provided.
6. What journalists and readers should take away
Multiple empirical approaches converge on consistent themes: Fox News exerts measurable political influence in academic studies [1]; independent rating projects place it on the right of the bias spectrum with mixed reliability ratings [2] [6]; and public surveys show deep partisan splits in how accuracy and bias are perceived [3] [4]. Readers seeking an apples‑to‑apples accuracy comparison should consult claim‑level fact‑check databases (PolitiFact) and be aware that methodological choices — selection of claims, time period, and definition of “accuracy” — change any cross‑network verdict [7] [2].