Movies

Paramount says Trump’s CBS ’60 Minutes’ lawsuit seeks to ‘punish’ network

BBG News

Paramount Global is seeking to dismiss a 20-billion-dollar lawsuit filed by former President Trump against them, claiming that edits made to his “60 Minutes” interview were intended as retaliation for CBS’s editorial choices – an act which infringes upon their protected freedom of speech.

In their attempt to throw out the lawsuit, filed on Thursday, Paramount contends that Donald Trump and co-plaintiff, Representative Ronny Jackson (a Texas Republican), are trying to penalize a media company for making editorial decisions that they disapprove of, which are protected by the Constitution.

In their court submission, they stated that they not only want $20 billion in compensation but also a ruling on how a media company can make editorial decisions in the future. However, they stressed that such demands are firmly rejected by the First Amendment.

Experts on the First Amendment have consistently maintained that Paramount had a robust defense in their “60 Minutes” case, as news creators and editors possess broad discretion over the selection of content for broadcast, as far as the presented information remains truthful.

Hollywood Inc.

In simpler terms, President Trump has increased the amount he wants to be compensated by CBS and its corporate parent, Paramount Global (who are awaiting approval from the Federal Communications Commission for a potential merger).

Despite Shari Redstone, Paramount’s major shareholder, pushing for a settlement in the lawsuit with Trump, this action is intended to facilitate the potential sale of her company to David Ellison’s Skydance Media. The $8-billion deal needs clearance from federal regulators before it can proceed.

The attempt to resolve the issue was confronted with strong objections from CBS News reporters who maintain that they did not make any mistakes in editing the autumn’s “60 Minutes” interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, Paramount has decided to bring in a neutral third-party mediator to assess the situation. Originally, they were required to file a motion to dismiss by Friday, but…

In the crisp autumn air, I was invited by CBS for a sit-down with “60 Minutes,” but surprisingly, the guest of honor, Mr. Trump, decided to decline the offer. Instead, they proceeded with a captivating broadcast, gracing our screens with none other than Vice President Harris.

In my appreciation for transparency, I’d like to share that CBS News has admitted to airing an incomplete response from Vice President Harris regarding the Biden administration’s approach towards the Israel-Hamas conflict, which was part of a question posed by CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker during his October interview.

The debate surrounding the topic escalated following CBS airing distinct parts of Harris’ response on two separate news broadcasts.

Trump claims that CBS News manipulated a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris, intending to sway the election in her favor. Previously, he expanded his initial $10-billion lawsuit, now seeking $20 billion, as an effort to shift the legal debate from First Amendment issues by arguing that “60 Minutes” was a misrepresented and deceptive product sold to Texas residents.

Hollywood Inc.

For Subscribers

‘60 Minutes,’ the Associated Press, an Iowa newspaper: Trump’s attacks on the media reach new heights

A bold president and his supporters are aggressively pushing for the use of governmental powers to pressure a growing divided and contentious media, according to experts.

Trump initiated legal action in Amarillo, Texas, a location that ensures a judge appointed by him will preside over the case. Simultaneously, CBS requested the same judge to transfer the case to a federal court in New York City, where their headquarters are located, if he decided against dismissing the allegations.

CBS producers have long insisted that they quoted Harris accurately.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is independently probing allegations about biased news reporting in the “60 Minutes” television program. Footage from the uncensored interview, which was made public by FCC Chairman Brendon Carr and also separately by CBS last month, seems to back up the network’s version of events.

However, the disclosure revealed that Harris’s response was somewhat muddled, which was edited down to its clearest and most logical part.

Critics, particularly those leaning conservative, have expressed disapproval towards CBS for not showing more of Kamala Harris’ response during the debate. Former President Donald Trump labeled Harris’ response as a “verbal mixture.

Media outlets frequently trim down interviews, cutting out unnecessary words and repetitive expressions. This approach is widely recognized – provided that the edits do not alter the interview’s original context or message.

Paramount defended the edits.

In the motion, Paramount stated that the responses broadcasted on every news program were merely fragments of one response given by Vice President Harris to a single question. When combined, what viewers essentially heard was almost the entirety of her response.

1st Amendment scholars believe that Trump might’ve faced challenges in asserting that the “60 Minutes” interview caused him harm, as the question didn’t directly implicate him. In fact, it focused on how the Biden administration managed the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Hollywood Inc.

Support for political conflicts by Hollywood started diminishing prior to Trump defeating Harris, reflecting a period of instability in the media and entertainment sector.

Trump’s revised lawsuit now lists Paramount Global (CBS’s parent company) among the defendants and includes Dr. Jackson, who used to be Trump’s physician, as a plaintiff. This is because Dr. Jackson resides in Texas, the location where the case has been filed.

As a film critic, I’d rephrase that statement like this: In his revised submission, Donald Trump argues against basing the case on First Amendment rights. Instead, he claims that CBS had commercial interests at heart when they presented Kamala Harris in a favorable light, making the case less about freedom of speech and more about business motivations.

Read More

2025-03-07 01:01

Previous post David von Bahr Gets ‘Energized’ at Gallery Steinsland Berliner
Next post Strictly’s Kristina and Ben Split After 12 Years: Financial Woes or Karma?