One of Fox News’ most recognizable on-air personalities recently offered a rare moment of candor about the corrosive effects of cable television, openly acknowledging that she plays a role in a media environment she believes has grown increasingly toxic.

Jessica Tarlov, a liberal commentator and co-host of Fox’s popular panel show The Five, made the remarks during an episode of the Prof G podcast, which she co-hosts. The conversation turned reflective when Tarlov posed a question to political analyst Larry Sabato, founder and director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

Tarlov asked Sabato what issue in modern politics frustrates him the most.

His answer focused squarely on television news and its relationship with social media.

“I watch more TV news than I ever have before,” Sabato said. “Television now funnels whatever is selling on social media, more than the other way around. That makes me furious.”

Tarlov responded with an unusually blunt admission, accepting that cable news personalities—including herself—help amplify the very dynamics Sabato was criticizing.

“It does,” she said. “As someone who works in cable news, I apologize to the entire world for what we export.”

Sabato laughed at the remark but agreed that the deeper problem extends beyond television itself. In his view, social media has become the dominant force shaping political narratives, public outrage, and media incentives.

“There’s nothing we can do about social media,” Sabato said. “The one thing I was promised when I was young was a time machine. We still don’t have one—because I’d love to go back and make it impossible to invent social media. I don’t know how I’d do it, but I’d try.”

Tarlov’s comments arrive at a moment when she has been drawing increased attention for reasons beyond media criticism. Earlier this year, she was named in a high-profile defamation lawsuit seeking $30 million in damages—an effort that ultimately failed in federal court.

The lawsuit was brought by Tony Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden, who claimed Tarlov had defamed him during an on-air discussion on The Five in January of last year. In the segment, Tarlov stated that a Trump-aligned super PAC had paid Bobulinski’s legal fees.

Bobulinski disputed the claim and, through his attorney, demanded a retraction and apology. His lawyer, Jesse Binall, sent a letter to Fox Corporation the day after the broadcast warning that a defamation lawsuit would be filed unless Tarlov corrected the record on air.

The following day, Tarlov addressed the issue publicly on the radio. She clarified that her initial wording had been imprecise and explained that testimony during a congressional hearing indicated that Bobulinski’s law firm had received payments from a Trump PAC—not that the PAC had directly paid Bobulinski’s personal legal fees. She also stated that she had no evidence connecting those payments to his legal representation and noted that Bobulinski denied such a connection.

Despite the clarification, Bobulinski and his attorneys proceeded with the lawsuit, seeking $30 million in compensatory, special, and punitive damages, along with legal costs.

The case was dismissed in full.

U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken ruled that Bobulinski failed to state a viable defamation claim and granted Tarlov’s motion to dismiss. The judge also ordered Bobulinski to pay Tarlov’s legal fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP statute, which is designed to discourage lawsuits intended to silence speech through intimidation or financial pressure.

“Because the Court concludes that the mandatory fee-shifting provision of New York’s anti-SLAPP law applies in federal court, Tarlov’s motion for attorney’s fees is granted,” Judge Oetken wrote.

Fox News welcomed the ruling, calling it a landmark decision. In a statement, a network spokesperson said the outcome not only dismissed what it described as meritless claims but also marked the first time a federal court awarded attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP law.

The ruling closed the legal chapter for Tarlov, but her recent remarks on the Prof G podcast suggest she remains deeply conflicted about the broader media ecosystem she operates within.

By acknowledging the harm caused by cable news amplification and social-media-driven outrage, Tarlov voiced a critique rarely heard from inside the industry—one that resonates amid growing public distrust of televised political debate.

Whether that awareness leads to meaningful change remains uncertain. For now, her apology stands as a rare moment of self-reflection from within the cable news machine itself.