CBS News has once again proven that its commitment to journalistic integrity is as shaky as a three-legged table at a family reunion. The media giant’s response to the editing fiasco surrounding its “60 Minutes” interview with Vice President Kamala Harris is an exercise in deflection that has left more than just conservative critics raising their eyebrows. Instead of addressing the editing concerns head-on, CBS opted for a passive-aggressive jab at former President Donald Trump, as if to say, “It’s not us, it’s you!”
The initial controversy stemmed from allegations that CBS deceptively edited Harris’s comments, a charge that Trump was quick to voice. In an oh-so-convenient twist, CBS’s response dismissed Trump’s claims while attempting to distance itself from the issues at hand. They asserted that the editing was totally above board, suggesting that the choice to air a more succinct version of Harris’s answer in the 21-minute segment was made for the sake of clarity and conciseness. However, it raises a glaring question: if the unedited footage is over 45 minutes long, what in the world did they choose to cut out?
I love Catherine Herridge.
Catherine Herridge Holds CBS' Feet to the Fire Over Passive Aggressive Statement on Harris Edit Scandal – RedState https://t.co/iPRmT6oDVY
— BapouSpoon (@BapouSpoon) October 21, 2024
Furthermore, it is clear that CBS is employing a type of misdirection akin to the classic magician’s trick. Rather than addressing the substance of the edits, they turned their attention toward criticizing Trump, a tactic as old as the media itself when it finds itself cornered. This response does nothing to repair the frayed nerves of viewers who expect honesty from their news outlets. Credibility is not something that can be bought back with flimsy statements and finger-pointing at political opponents.
Catherine Herridge, a former investigative reporter for CBS, has boldly called for transparency—an end to the game of smoke and mirrors. Releasing the full transcript of the interview would not only clarify the situation but would also demonstrate that CBS values journalistic standards over political posturing. The lack of action speaks volumes; one has to wonder what they might be hiding. Labels like “news distortion” are not thrown around lightly, particularly when a complaint has been lodged with the FCC.
The irony here is rich. CBS, a network that would likely accuse others of misinformation faster than it could say “fake news,” appears to be trapped in its own web of editorial misjudgment. As Herridge pointed out, historical precedents exist for CBS selectively releasing transcripts when challenged. So, why the hesitation now? If Harris’s interview was edited for clarity, then everything should hold up in the light of day. The radio silence on this demand certainly raises suspicion about whether they prefer to keep the public in the dark for a reason.
The chorus demanding the release of the full, unedited footage is growing louder. High-profile individuals, including public figures and politicians, are joining the call, suggesting that CBS is onto something far juicier than they are comfortable revealing. If news networks are truly the bastions of truth they claim to be, then there’s no reason for hesitation. The American people deserve to see the whole story—not just the bite-sized, sanitized version that CBS has chosen to serve up.