Fox hurricane helene

Media Matters / Molly Butler

Research/Study Research/Study

Fox News set its narrative on Hurricane Helene early, then used it to protect the Trump administration from accountability

Hurricane Helene, which made landfall on September 26, 2024, was the second deadliest U.S. mainland hurricane in half a century, killing at least 250 people and causing $80 billion in damage. In the year that followed, Fox News aired nearly 500 segments about Helene, keeping the story in circulation through a mix of empathy and outrage, especially via false claims that Federal Emergency Management Agency funds had been diverted to migrants or that the Biden administration did not care what happened to the victims of Helene. 

The network’s distorted version of accountability avoided any discussion of climate change, tried to turn FEMA into the emblem of failure, and portrayed the Biden administration as negligent, while leaving unexamined the Trump administration policies that later deepened the recovery crisis.

The same migrant-centered misinformation that drove much of Fox's Helene coverage has resurfaced recently, as right-wing media recycle similar falsehoods about Democrats shutting down the government to secure “health care for illegals.”

  • Topline findings

  • A Media Matters review of Fox News' coverage of Hurricane Helene from September 26, 2024, through September 26, 2025, found:

    • Fox News aired 491 segments about Hurricane Helene.
      • 117 segments (24%) criticized or misinformed about FEMA's actions regarding its response to Helene.
      • 93 segments (19%) criticized or misinformed about the Biden administration's response to Helene.
      • No segments mentioned the role climate change played in driving the storm.
  • How Fox News covered Hurricane Helene

  • Fox turned a disaster story into a political one

    Fox treated Hurricane Helene as a recurring national story, airing 491 segments across the year in a steady drumbeat of coverage that kept the storm and its victims visible. More than two-thirds of that coverage aired during the immediate aftermath of Helene's landfall: 336 segments, or 68%, aired between September 26, 2024, and October 10, 2024, a surge that set the narrative frame for the year ahead.

    Early segments in late September and early October 2024 focused on the scale of destruction and the human cost: families displaced, rescues under way, and volunteers stepping in where official aid lagged. But the tone of coverage hardened almost immediately. During those first two weeks, 71 segments criticized or misinformed about FEMA’s response, and another 71 segments targeted the Biden administration’s handling of the disaster.

    Scenes of loss and relief were reframed through blame, as Fox falsely asserted that the federal government failed to mobilize resources, federal assistance was limited to $750 per victim, and FEMA lacked the necessary funds to respond to Helene due to spending on immigrant assistance.

    By the time Helene coverage slowed, the story’s political meaning had already calcified. Throughout the course of the next year, Fox no longer needed to constantly repeat its early attacks for the frame to hold: Every mention of FEMA delays or local frustration reinforced the idea of Democratic failure.

    Fox omitted climate change from the story

    To reframe Hurricane Helene, Fox first omitted the role global warming played in driving the storm's historic destructivity. Across 491 segments, not a single one connected the storm to climate change, even as climate scientists highlighted how it contributed to Helene’s record-setting rainfall and historic flooding. By isolating the disaster from its climate context, Fox turned what should have been a story about systemic risk into one about political failure.

    Fox misinformed about FEMA under Biden while ignoring Trump’s mismanagement

    In Fox's coverage, the absence of a climate explanation left institutional failure as the dominant storyline, and FEMA became a focal point.  

    In 2024, Fox cast FEMA as a politically corrupt agency that was misdirecting aid and shortchanging victims, and then folded those supposed failures into a story of Biden administration incompetence. 

    In October 2024, Fox hosts Jesse Watters and Sean Hannity repeatedly claimed the administration had depleted hurricane relief funds by giving aid to undocumented immigrants, with Watters repeating the charge across 5 consecutive broadcasts, and Hannity repeating it across 6.

    In reality, politicians of both parties representing impacted areas praised the federal response and urged media outlets, politicians, and influencers to stop spreading false claims that were disrupting rescue efforts and endangering FEMA workers

    After Trump's inauguration on January 20, Fox aired 49 additional Helene segments. Of those, 19 criticized or misinformed about FEMA, which continued the earlier pattern under a new administration. The network recycled false claims such as FEMA’s funds had been diverted to migrants, but it folded these narratives into a broader portrayal of government paralysis, depicting FEMA as a sluggish, unresponsive bureaucracy, while avoiding scrutiny of Trump’s management of it. 

    Fox’s broader 2025 disaster coverage followed the same pattern. As reporting from other news outlets detailed staff cuts, leadership turmoil, and policies that delayed FEMA’s response to multiple disasters, Fox minimizedelided, or outright defended the Trump administration’s issues managing FEMA and its handling of disaster response, generally. 

    Fox demanded accountability from Biden, but not from Trump

    From nearly the beginning of Helene coverage, Fox hosts and guests portrayed Biden and Harris as detached from storm victims and preoccupied with “illegal immigration,” "D.E.I., and equity." The network used FEMA's challenges as a conduit for political blame, translating early logistical setbacks into proof of executive failure. Holding a president accountable for disaster response is legitimate. However, Fox applied that standard selectively, distorting facts to vilify Biden while later exempting Trump from the same scrutiny. 

    Those early attacks combined frustration with recovery efforts that were complicated by the scale of the destruction and the remote and mountainous location of the impacted area fused with presidential blame, establishing a false narrative of Democratic mismanagement that would persist long after the storm. 

    By 2025, the frame had stabilized. Even after Trump took office, Fox continued to use it — airing 49 additional Helene segments, including 7 that still criticized or misinformed about the Biden administration's response to the storm, evidence that the mismanagement narrative outlasted his presidency. 

    The storyline remained the same, but its focus changed: Complaints about slow recovery and bureaucratic delays persisted, while responsibility shifted away from the new administration. In North Carolina, local officials and residents described an aid system with projects and  reimbursements delayed, and rebuilding out of reach — problems Fox reported on without acknowledging that new Trump-era rules had helped cause them.

    For example, a new “Defend the Spend” review, launched by the Department of Government Efficiency, and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s $100,000 approval rule stalled already-approved reimbursements for months, leaving counties without money to repair vital infrastructure

    By mid-September 2025, North Carolina had received only 9% of its requested aid, and FEMA had disbursed just $1.3 billion of $60 billion in total losses. Gov. Josh Stein and Attorney General Jeff Jackson publicly pressed for relief, citing Trump-era bottlenecks that were paralyzing recovery.

    Fox’s coverage, however, rarely addressed these policy failures, in stark contrast to how other outlets treated the same facts. For instance, the May 28 episode of MSNBC’s All In juxtaposed Trump’s campaign promise to “slash every bureaucratic barrier” with FEMA’s letter denying North Carolina’s request for additional federal funding — a contradiction Fox left unaddressed.
     

  • Fox kept Hurricane Helene in the news, but left out true accountability

  • When Trump returned to power, Fox's framing remained largely intact. What had been a criticism of Democratic leadership became a broader narrative about government dysfunction, one that left Trump's role largely unexamined. Fox’s programs provided friendly platforms for his officials to propagandize about their actions, and Helene coverage continued to partially operate as an echo chamber for the broader right’s grievance narratives. 

    The result was reporting that appeared adversarial but functioned as insulation. Fox’s goal was not to examine the true causes and effects of climate-driven extreme weather, but to sustain the idea that accountability begins and ends with Trump’s opponents. What looked like scrutiny was performance — a yearlong cycle of outrage that shielded power instead of confronting it.

    That same pattern has reemerged this fall, as right-wing media recycle similar falsehoods, this time claiming Democrats want to shut down the government to provide health care for undocumented immigrants. The migrant-centered misinformation that defined Fox’s Helene coverage remains a template for how the network converts outrage into partisan blame.

  • Methodology

  • Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream and Kinetiq video databases for all original programming on Fox News Channel for any of the terms “Helene” (including misspellings), “thunderstorm,” or “hurricane” or any variations of any of the terms “tropic,” “Category 3,” “Cyclone 9,” or “storm” within close proximity of any of the terms “Florida,” “Big Bend,” “Gulf Coast,” Caribbean," “Gulf of Mexico,” “Mexico,” “Cuba,” “Central America,” “Jamaica,” “Dry Tortugas,” or “Keys” from September 26, 2024, through September 26, 2025, the one-year anniversary of Hurricane Helene making landfall.

    We included segments, which we defined as instances when Helene was the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of the storm. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed the hurricane with one another.

    We did not include passing mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker in a segment on another topic mentioned the storm without another speaker engaging with the comment, or teasers, which we defined as instances when the host or anchor promoted a segment about the hurricane scheduled to air later in the broadcast.

    We then reviewed the identified segments for any mentions of climate change denial; attacks on the Biden administration's handling of the disaster; or any of the following misinformation about the Federal Emergency Management Agency: that the federal government failed to mobilize resources, that federal assistance was limited to $750 per individual, that the agency lacked funds due to spending on immigrant assistance, or that climate change did not play a role in the storm.