Fox News inadvertently undermined President Donald Trump’s claims about gas prices during his primetime address on Thursday, Dec. 18, 2025, when the network became the only broadcaster to air graphics provided by the White House—graphics that contradicted the president’s own statements.
Trump delivered an 18-minute address on Thursday evening, during which he made several claims about economic achievements during his second term. The White House supplied graphics to major television networks, hoping they would display them alongside the president’s speech. However, NBC, CNN, ABC and CBS all declined to air the material, with sources indicating the graphics lacked clear sourcing information.
CNN’s Brian Stelter first reported the networks’ decision to reject the White House graphics. “The White House wanted tonight’s prime time address to double as a PowerPoint presentation,” Stelter noted. Only Fox News chose to display them, airing seven of the provided slides during Trump’s speech. The graphics later appeared again on Hannity’s show later that evening.
During his address, Trump stated that gasoline prices had dropped significantly across the nation. According to The Daily Beast, Trump claimed gas was now under $2.50 per gallon in much of the country and, in some states, had hit $1.99 per gallon. “Gasoline is now under $2.50 a gallon in much of the country. In some states, by the way, it just hit $1.99 a gallon,” the president said. These assertions, however, were contradicted by both independent data and the White House’s own graphics.
According to AAA, the national average gas price on Thursday stood at $2.91 per gallon—well above the figures Trump cited. More problematically for the administration, the Fox News graphic clearly labeled as being provided by the White House showed gas prices hovering around or above $3 per gallon throughout Trump’s second term so far. The network’s decision to air the graphics meant viewers could see in real time that the data contradicted the president’s verbal claims.
The gas price discrepancy was just one of several inaccuracies identified in Trump’s address. The president claimed he had lowered drug prices by 600 percent, a mathematical impossibility since prices cannot decrease by more than 100 percent. He also stated he had brought in $18 trillion in investments, contradicting the White House’s own reported figure of $9.6 trillion.
Trump’s assertion that more Americans are working than ever before also conflicted with employment data. The national unemployment rate reached a four-year high in November, with more than 700,000 more people unemployed that month than before Trump’s inauguration.
The White House graphics aired by Fox News included slides showing what was described as an increase in native-born employment levels and decreasing costs for several everyday food items. However, according to Trump’s own Department of Agriculture, food prices have actually increased by 3.2 percent since August and are rising faster than overall inflation.
The concentration of factual errors prompted immediate fact-checking from other networks. Both CNN’s Harry Enten and Jen Psaki began verifying the president’s claims as soon as he finished speaking, highlighting the discrepancies between his statements and verified data.
The incident highlights the complex relationship between the White House and media organizations during primetime presidential addresses. Networks must balance their duty to broadcast presidential communications with their responsibility to verify information presented to viewers. The decision by most major networks to decline the White House graphics reflects growing caution about airing unvetted material, particularly when sourcing information is unclear or absent.
Fox News’ unique position as the only network to display the graphics meant it bore the brunt of the contradiction. While the network likely intended to provide comprehensive coverage of the president’s address by including the supplementary materials, the decision resulted in visual evidence that undermined Trump’s verbal claims about economic performance.