Politics is messy. Media is messier. But when a Fox News host apologizes to Gavin Newsom, people stop scrolling. It doesn’t happen often. Usually, these two sides are locked in a permanent state of verbal war. California's governor is basically the arch-nemesis of the primetime lineup over at Fox. Yet, in a rare turn of events, Jesse Watters found himself delivering a "mea culpa" that was as awkward as it was legally necessary.
The whole thing started with a phone call. Or rather, a dispute about a phone call.
In June 2025, during a period of heavy anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles, Donald Trump claimed he had spoken to Newsom "a day ago." Newsom immediately hit back on X, saying no such call happened. He even went as far as to say there wasn't "even a voicemail."
Enter Jesse Watters. On his show, Jesse Watters Primetime, he didn't just side with Trump; he went all in. He ran a segment with a massive chyron at the bottom of the screen that screamed: GAVIN LIED ABOUT TRUMP’S CALL. Watters mocked the governor. He questioned his integrity. He basically called him a fraud for the world to see. But there was a massive problem. The call logs actually backed Newsom. The conversation Trump was referencing had actually happened days earlier, not "a day ago."
The $787 Million Deja Vu
Newsom didn't just tweet through the anger this time. He sued. And he didn't pick a random number for damages. He sued Fox News and Jesse Watters for $787 million.
If that number sounds familiar, it should. It’s the exact amount Fox News paid to settle the Dominion Voting Systems defamation case. It was a pointed, symbolic middle finger to the network. Newsom's legal team made it clear: they weren't just looking for a payout. They wanted a public admission that the network had manipulated the timeline to protect Trump from a simple mistake.
The lawsuit alleged that Fox had intentionally edited video clips to remove Trump saying "a day ago" to make Newsom's denial look like a blatant lie.
That "Mealy-Mouthed" Apology
Facing the prospect of discovery—where lawyers get to dig through private emails and texts—Fox News blinked. Or at least, they squinted.
On a Thursday night in July 2025, Watters took to the air. It wasn't exactly a heartfelt "I'm sorry" with a bouquet of roses. It was a classic "I’m sorry you felt that way" style of backtracking.
Watters basically said they "took it to mean" Newsom was saying there was never a call at all. He said, "He didn't deceive anybody on purpose, so I'm sorry, he wasn't lying. He was just confusing and unclear."
It was a backhanded apology if there ever was one. He ended it by telling the governor, "Next time, governor, why don’t you say what you mean."
Why Newsom Isn't Backing Down
If Fox thought a 30-second snarky apology would end the $787 million headache, they were wrong. Honestly, it might have made things worse.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With Gabby Petito: Beyond the Headlines
Newsom’s response was short and lethal. He told the Los Angeles Times, "Discovery will be fun. See you in court, buddy." You see, for Newsom, this is about more than just one segment. He’s leaning into a "truth and transparency" brand. By keeping the lawsuit alive even after the "apology," he keeps the pressure on the network’s editorial standards.
Here is what most people get wrong about this case:
- It’s not just about a phone call. It’s about the actual malice standard.
- To win, Newsom has to prove Fox knew the info was false or acted with reckless disregard.
- The fact that Watters admitted to a "mistake" on air is a huge piece of evidence, even if he tried to frame it as Newsom’s fault.
The legal reality is that public figures have a high bar to clear in defamation cases. But when a network puts "Gavin Lied" in big bold letters while allegedly sitting on evidence that he didn't? That's when the lawyers get excited.
What This Means for Media in 2026
This whole saga tells us a lot about where we are right now. We’re in an era where politicians aren't just complaining about "fake news"—they are weaponizing the legal system to fight it.
The strategy is simple. Force the hosts to admit they were wrong on their own stage. If they don't, take them to a jury. It’s a high-stakes game of chicken.
For the average viewer, it’s a reminder to look at the chyrons with a grain of salt. If a host says someone "lied," check the receipts. Usually, the truth is buried somewhere in the timeline, hidden between what was said today and what actually happened three days ago.
Actionable Insights for the Informed Citizen
- Check the Source Clips: When a news outlet claims a politician "lied" about a specific event, try to find the unedited footage of the original statement.
- Follow the Legal Paperwork: Sites like CourtListener or Law360 often provide the actual complaints. Reading the "Statement of Facts" in a lawsuit usually provides more context than a 2-minute TV segment.
- Watch the Chyrons: Television news uses on-screen graphics to frame the narrative. Notice how "Gavin Lied" is a definitive statement, whereas "Dispute over call" is a report of a conflict. The difference is legally massive.
The battle between Sacramento and Midtown Manhattan isn't ending anytime soon. Whether this case ever reaches a jury or ends in another massive settlement, the "apology" heard 'round the world has already changed the math for primetime commentary. The days of consequence-free name-calling might just be hitting a very expensive wall.