Why was Tucker Carlson fired from Fox News in April 2023?

1. The immediate public record: a terse corporate statement and timing that mattered

Fox News issued a short announcement that it and Carlson had “agreed to part ways,” and publicly confirmed his last show was April 21, 2023, without providing a specific cause; that announcement came less than a week after Fox Corp. agreed to a $787.5 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems tied to election‑fraud coverage ^{[2] [1]}. Reporters immediately noted the timing and potential link to the defamation litigation but also emphasized the absence of a single, definitive corporate explanation ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Dominion settlement: a plausible catalyst — but not a stated confession

Many outlets and analysts connected Carlson’s exit to the Dominion settlement because the judge‑filed litigation and internal documents had focused attention on Fox’s on‑air hosts, and Dominion’s case named hosts whose shows had amplified false election claims ^[1]. Carlson’s critics and some reporting argued the settlement made Fox’s legal exposure and corporate risk intolerable; however, Fox’s public statement did not say Carlson was fired specifically because of Dominion, and later reporting and memoirs suggest multiple factors were in play ^{[1] [3]}.

3. Internal lawsuits, personnel complaints, and alleged misconduct cited by reporters

Contemporaneous reporting flagged at least one other legal pressure point: a separate discrimination and misconduct lawsuit brought by a former Carlson show producer, Abby Grossberg, which named Carlson and Fox employees and raised concerns about internal culture and legal exposure; Fox publicly disputed those claims ^{[5] [2]}. Reuters and NPR noted Fox had also retained outside counsel to review material tied to Carlson amid liability concerns in the run‑up to his departure ^{[1] [2]}.

4. Reporting on texts, emails and workplace tensions — “too big for his boots”

Later investigative accounts and a book by Brian Stelter argue that Carlson’s internal communications — incendiary texts and emails — and his alienation of colleagues were significant factors leading to his dismissal; those accounts say Fox executives feared those messages would be probed in litigation and create additional legal and reputational risk ^[3]. The Guardian‑cited reporting portrays Carlson as having alienated “large swaths” of the company and suggests the decisionws inside Fox were driven by a combination of behavior, internal strife and liability exposure rather than one discrete transgression ^[3].

5. Competing narrative from Carlson and allies: a condition of the Dominion settlement

Tucker Carlson and some of his supporters have maintained — including in accounts summarized by The Guardian and his own book excerpts — that his firing was effectively a condition of the Dominion settlement and an effort by Fox to remove a troublesome star ^[4]. That claim is reflected in Carlson’s own public framing, but the network did not publicly confirm the settlement as the stated reason; independent reporting did not find a single smoking‑gun statement by Fox tying the settlement to the firing ^{[4] [1]}.

6. How contemporaneous journalists covered it: multiple plausible explanations

News organizations covering the story in April 2023 presented several plausible, overlapping explanations: the Dominion settlement increased legal risk around hosts’ statements; internal discrimination and personnel lawsuits raised separate liability and cultural issues at Fox; and internal emails/texts and workplace conflicts made Carlson a liability or untenable colleague — with the network’s leadership, including Murdoch family members and executives, reportedly involved in the decision ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}. Different outlets emphasized different pieces of that mosaic.

7. What sources do not establish or directly contradict

Available sources do not present a single, Fox‑issued reason that explicitly names one cause for Carlson’s termination; Fox “did not provide a reason for Carlson’s termination” in its initial public messaging, and major contemporaneous reports stress multiple contributing pressures rather than one decisive fact ^{[6] [1] [2]}. If you seek a definitive, legally documented cause (for example, a filed termination letter or an unequivocal corporate admission), that is not found in the cited reporting ^{[6] [1]}.

8. Bottom line and implications

The factual record from April 2023, as reflected in the cited journalism and subsequent reporting, shows Carlson’s departure was abrupt, publicly unexplained by Fox, and occurred amid overlapping legal settlements and personnel controversies; follow‑up investigations and books attribute the firing to a mix of legal risk, internal conflict and allegedly damaging communications, while Carlson disputes those accounts and says the Dominion settlement played a decisive role ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. Different stakeholders advance competing narratives — readers should weigh contemporaneous corporate silence, independent reporting on legal exposure, and Carlson’s own assertions when drawing conclusions ^{[1] [3] [4]}.