Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did Tucker Carlson leave voluntarily or was he terminated by contract or settlement in April 2023?
Executive summary
Fox News announced on April 24, 2023 that “Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways,” and the network said Carlson’s last show had been April 21 [1] [2]. Reporting at the time described the departure as abrupt and noted both that Fox had just settled the Dominion defamation suit for $787.5–$787m and that unnamed network sources and later coverage suggested he was dismissed rather than a voluntary, pre-planned exit [3] [4] [2].
1. The official line: “agreed to part ways” — the phrasing matters
Fox News’ public statement framed the exit as mutual: “agreed to part ways,” and the company confirmed his last program was April 21 [1]. Media outlets quoted that same Fox wording and on-air Fox anchors reiterated the network’s “mutual” language when addressing viewers [5] [1]. That phrasing is commonly used in high-profile departures to avoid assigning blame and to meet legal/privacy considerations [1].
2. Abruptness and lack of advance notice point toward termination
Multiple outlets and contemporaneous reporting stressed how sudden the move was: Carlson signed off on Friday saying he would “be back on Monday,” yet he did not appear and the network announced the split the next Monday — a timing several outlets characterized as abrupt and inconsistent with a planned, amicable resignation [6] [1] [2]. The BBC and other reporting noted that it “does not appear” Carlson received advance notice, a fact that supports the interpretation that he was dismissed rather than voluntarily leaving [6] [3].
3. Context: the Dominion settlement and legal risk
Fox’s $787m settlement with Dominion Voting Systems was disclosed days earlier, and many outlets connected the network’s broader risk-management calculus to personnel decisions, including Carlson’s show, which had been cited in litigation over election-related coverage [3] [4]. However, some experts quoted in coverage said it was hard to prove a direct causal link between the settlement and Carlson’s exit; others suggested Murdoch leadership had concluded the network needed to rein in risk and influence [7] [2].
4. Reporting on internal decisions and unnamed sources
Reuters and other press accounts cited “sources familiar with the matter” saying Fox executives Lachlan Murdoch and Suzanne Scott had reached a decision to part ways with Carlson and that the senior producer was also let go, language consistent with a managerial decision to remove talent rather than a negotiated retirement [2]. The Wall Street Journal, as noted by the BBC, reported unnamed sources saying the dismissal was driven in part by messages Carlson sent about colleagues and management — a detail presented as a rationale for an employer-initiated termination [3].
5. The “mutual” formulation and possible contractual/settlement elements
Available sources show Fox used neutral, “mutual” language and did not disclose settlement terms; Wikipedia and other retrospective summaries state Carlson’s contract was terminated [6]. Deadline and other contemporaneous reports said the departure was immediate and surprised many, and noted that large talent separations often involve buyouts or settlements — but those reports did not publish explicit, verifiable contract-termination or settlement figures for Carlson that are present in the public record provided here [1]. Available sources do not mention specific contract buyout numbers or a signed settlement between Fox and Carlson in April 2023.
6. Competing interpretations in the record
Some commentators and pieces framed Carlson’s exit as an ousting by Rupert/Murdoch leadership to reduce legal and reputational exposure [2] [7]. Fox’s official, mutual-parting language and immediate post-exit statements allowed for a countervailing narrative that it was a negotiated departure [1]. News organizations repeatedly cited unnamed insiders who leaned toward dismissal; others cautioned against conflating the Dominion settlement and Carlson’s exit without hard documentary proof [3] [7].
7. What the supplied sources do not say (limitations)
The assembled reporting does not provide a public copy of Carlson’s Fox contract, a disclosed financial settlement, or an explicit on-the-record statement from Fox saying “we fired him,” nor a signed resignation from Carlson acknowledging a voluntary departure [6] [1] [2]. Therefore, while the preponderance of contemporaneous coverage describes the move as abrupt and reports that network executives decided to part ways with him, available sources do not provide a definitive public document proving whether the separation was formalized as a termination under contract law or a negotiated settlement with specific terms [3] [1].
Bottom line: Public reporting at the time emphasized abruptness and cited unnamed Fox insiders indicating management decided to remove him, while Fox’s official statement used “agreed to part ways” vocabulary; the sources provided do not include a public contract or settlement document to categorically prove one legal mechanism over the other [1] [2] [3].