Staff Reports
In a twist that seems ripped straight from the annals of reality television rather than a serious news program, CBS’s famed “60 Minutes” has once again shown that when it comes to the battle of the networks, it remains firmly in the corner of the Democratic ticket. The program has a long-standing tradition of interviewing candidates from both the Republican and Democratic sides, beginning in the era of bell-bottoms and disco. Yet, this election cycle has turned into a lopsided affair with Vice President Kamala Harris being given the only platform to strut her stuff, while Donald Trump’s team threw CBS a curveball by declining to participate. Instead, Trump opted for a casual chat on the Full Send podcast—because where else do you go when you want actual, unfiltered dialogue?
CBS lavished promotional attention on the episode, teasing an enlightening conversation with Harris, particularly her thoughts on Israel. What viewers got, however, was a haircut of sorts—an edited response that left many wondering what had been left on the cutting room floor. In his signature style, Trump claimed that the network pulled a fast one, crafted an entirely edited narrative, and essentially turned the Vice President’s original answer into something more palatable. One has to wonder if production assistants were sitting around humming “Chop Suey” while they snipped away.
"I think the CBS scandal with 60 minutes, I think it's the worst thing I've ever heard in broadcasting history."
Former President Donald Trump talks to Chris Salcedo about 60 Minutes editing Vice President Kamala Harris' interview to make her sound more favorable.
More:… pic.twitter.com/JL6Z4Xd2xO
— NEWSMAX (@NEWSMAX) October 13, 2024
The uproar stemming from this creative editing was palpable. Calls online erupted for CBS to release the full transcript, lest viewers think they’ve been privy to a poorly crafted dramatic reenactment instead of a genuine interview. A recent Harvard Caps Harris Poll revealed that an astounding 85% of Americans—across party lines, no less—agreed that the full transcript should be made public. Yet, as is often the case in matters of media integrity, the respondents were split on motive. A narrow majority inferred that CBS was playing stylist – editing Harris to appear more competent, while an equally passionate contingent insisted this was merely the impartial art of news editing. How quaint!
As they say, a little transparency goes a long way, and in today’s wild world of “fake news” alerts, demands for clarity can get drowned out by the very hubbub they create. No surprise, Trump’s campaign was not satisfied with CBS claiming a newsworthy sit-down was in the works, dismissing it as wishful thinking. The campaign had its concerns over potential “jump cuts” to his responses, a clever tactic that makes it seem like the former President himself had dropped the ball mid-sentence.
Meanwhile, while Harris sauntered through her CBS appearance, others—like Governor Tim Walz from Minnesota—did similarly. However, anytime a Republican, such as Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio, was scheduled for a crossover, the audience was left out in the cold, forced to watch the once-credible media outlets play favorites in the unending narrative war. Looks like America is set for a sequel of “You’ve Been Edited,” with a predictable ending that depends heavily on who is at the helm of CBS’s editorial decisions.
