By John Q. Hosedrinker 
CBS omitted a section of Donald Trump’s “60 Minutes” interview where he boasted about receiving a multi-million dollar payout from Paramount, the network’s parent company, potentially to avoid embarrassment. This omission followed a settlement where CBS paid Trump $16 million to settle a suit alleging deceptive editing of a previous interview. The merger of Paramount-Skydance, now led by the son of a Trump ally, was approved shortly after the settlement, sparking criticism of CBS’s actions. The network has since undergone restructuring, including the appointment of conservative figures and an ombudsman, raising concerns about potential bias and a shift in editorial direction.
Read the original article here
MAGA-Curious CBS Busted Using Trump’s Edits for ‘60 Minutes’ is the core of a story that seems to have unfolded with a distinct lack of fanfare, yet carries considerable weight when considering the current media landscape. It’s a tale of perceived bias, potential corporate maneuvering, and the ever-present specter of political influence.
CBS, specifically “60 Minutes,” found itself in the crosshairs, accused of selectively editing an interview with Donald Trump in a way that, ironically, was intended to portray him in a more favorable light. The irony, as it often does, cut deep: even with these edits, Trump still reportedly came across poorly. This fueled the ire of his supporters, who saw it as another example of media bias, while others likely saw the edits as a futile attempt to gloss over the reality.
This situation isn’t just about a single interview. It’s part of a larger narrative of media ownership and its potential impact on journalistic integrity. The thread suggests a possible sequence of events: a CBS interview with a Trump rival, a subsequent deal involving the parent company Paramount, and then the involvement of a Trump supporter, David Ellison, who acquired Skydance and its purchase of Paramount. This raises questions about whether this ownership structure might influence editorial decisions.
The narrative also highlights the broader concerns of media consolidation and the potential for the suppression of dissenting voices. The idea that media outlets are increasingly becoming controlled by a select few, motivated by financial gain rather than journalistic principles, is a recurring theme. There’s a strong sentiment that this kind of environment leads to a homogenization of viewpoints and a lack of critical examination of power.
The reactions within the online discussion range from cynicism to outright anger. Some see CBS’s actions as a clear sign of capitulation to political pressure, while others view it as a calculated business move, the kind of corporate strategy that prioritizes profit over principle. There’s a palpable sense of disappointment and a loss of faith in mainstream media to deliver unbiased reporting.
The discussion also mentions a related episode involving Kamala Harris, where an interview with her was reportedly edited, creating the perception that the media was trying to prop her up. This alleged practice seems to mirror what happened in the Trump interview, suggesting a pattern of editorial manipulation that goes beyond mere news judgment.
The overall sentiment is one of distrust and skepticism. There’s a belief that the media has become a tool for influencing public opinion, rather than a neutral observer. The call for transparency – the demand for unedited recordings and transcripts – is a direct response to this lack of trust.
The discussion even touches on the idea of potential lawsuits. The question is posed: can Democrats, in this case, take similar legal action against CBS, mirroring Trump’s actions? The general consensus is that such a lawsuit would likely be unsuccessful, but the idea highlights the current political environment where these tactics are considered.
The situation described is a complex one, involving legal maneuvering, corporate dealings, and questions of journalistic ethics. It’s a case study in how media ownership, political pressure, and the pursuit of profits can potentially undermine the public’s trust in the news. The mention of Bari Weiss, a journalist known for her criticisms of the left, being installed as an editor at CBS News, adds another layer of intrigue, suggesting a shift in editorial direction.