Well, folks, it looks like the truth has a way of sneaking out, even when big media tries to lock the door. Paramount Global, under the watchful eye of former controlling shareholder Shari Redstone, coughed up a hefty $16 million to settle a lawsuit with President Donald Trump over some questionable editing in a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, as the Daily Caller reports. Turns out, sometimes settling is less about guilt and more about dodging an embarrassing discovery.
Paramount’s decision to pay up in July came after Trump filed a massive lawsuit against CBS News, initially for $10 billion in October 2024, later bumped to $20 billion in February, claiming deceptive editing in Harris’ interview.
Let’s rewind to the start of this mess. Back in October 2023, CBS aired a 60 Minutes interview with then-President Joe Biden, conducted by correspondent Scott Pelley, where Biden reportedly looked “tired” on air. Redstone herself was told by CBS staff that Biden seemed exhausted and even needed nudging to respond, raising internal alarms about potential editing to cover up his struggles.
Redstone’s worries over Biden footage surface
Redstone and her son fretted that CBS could be accused of manipulating footage to hide Biden’s apparent difficulties. But hold on — two sources, one who saw the interview live and another who reviewed the raw footage, told the New York Times those concerns were overblown, insisting Biden didn’t need any prodding. So, was this a case of overreaction or a genuine fear of exposure?
Fast forward to October 2024, when Trump launched his legal battle over a different 60 Minutes segment featuring Harris. His lawsuit accused CBS News of “deliberate deception” by editing out parts of Harris’ response to a question on U.S. influence over Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump’s team argued this wasn’t just an editorial choice — it was a calculated move to bolster Harris’ image.
In the aired version, Harris stated, “We are not gonna stop pursuing what is necessary.” But a separate clip from CBS’s “Face The Nation” the day before showed her saying something more detailed about U.S. advocacy, prompting Israel’s actions in the region. Trump’s lawsuit claimed that cutting this part out was outright manipulation, not journalism.
Edited Harris interview sparks legal firestorm
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) stepped in, with Commissioner Brendan Carr opening an investigation in October 2024. By February, the FCC released the full, unedited footage of Harris’ interview, which revealed a noticeably different answer than what CBS broadcast. It’s hard not to wonder if CBS thought a quick edit could rewrite the narrative.
Redstone, speaking to the New York Times, didn’t shy away from the complexity, saying, “This case was never as black-and-white.” Nice try, Shari, but when unedited footage tells a different story, it’s tough to paint this as just a gray area. The public deserves the raw truth, not a polished version.
Paramount’s $16 million settlement with Trump in July didn’t come with an apology, but it did include a promise to publish written transcripts of future 60 Minutes interviews with presidential candidates. The payout, minus legal fees, will go to Trump’s future presidential library. If transparency is the new policy, better late than never, right?
Settlement raises eyebrows amid merger talks
Some critics have pointed out that Paramount’s rush to settle might tie into their pursuit of an $8 billion merger with Skydance Media. Could the fear of bad press or legal distractions have pushed them to cut a check? It’s a fair question when millions are on the line, and optics matter more than ever.
Trump, no stranger to legal tangles with media giants, also settled a $15 million defamation lawsuit with ABC News in December over false claims by host George Stephanopoulos. Separately, he filed a lawsuit in July against Rupert Murdoch and others over a Wall Street Journal piece alleging inappropriate correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein. The man doesn’t back down from a fight, that’s for sure.
Redstone’s admission to the New York Times suggests Paramount settled with Trump partly to avoid what his legal team might dig up during discovery. When you’re worried about skeletons in the closet, sometimes a payout is the safest bet. But it begs the question: what else might be hiding in those unedited tapes?
What’s next for media accountability?
This whole saga shines a light on the power of editing in shaping public perception. When networks like CBS can trim answers to fit a narrative, trust in journalism takes a hit — and that’s a loss for everyone, regardless of political leanings. Maybe this settlement is a wake-up call for more accountability.
The Paramount-Trump settlement isn’t just about money — it’s about the principle of truth in media. If networks fear discovery enough to pay millions, perhaps it’s time for viewers to demand raw, unfiltered access to what’s said on air.
Ultimately, this case serves as a reminder that the court of public opinion often demands more than just a settlement. Media giants like Paramount may write checks to close chapters, but the lingering doubt about their practices isn’t so easily erased. Actions, after all, have consequences, even for the biggest players in the game.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Mae Slater
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.conservativejournalreview.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
