The Media Landscape Beyond Stereotypes
The long-running CBS show, 60 Minutes, has seen its fair share of controversies and embarrassments over its 57-year history, including the infamous Dan Rather scandal. However, it appears the show's reputation sunk to a new low in 2024.
Former President Donald Trump recently declined an invitation to appear on 60 Minutes for the traditional election-year interviews of the two presidential candidates. The reason for this was his previous experience in 2020, when anchor and interviewer Leslie Stahl dismissed Trump's claim that the Hunter Biden laptop (then in the FBI's possession) was genuine and damaging to Joe Biden's presidential campaign.
Stahl incorrectly stated that the laptop's authenticity couldn't be confirmed. She also inaccurately claimed that the story about Hunter Biden's laptop, discovered in a repair shop, originated from Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani. The New York Post was, in fact, the source of the story, which the FBI did not deny.
However, Twitter and Facebook, under pressure from the FBI, suppressed the dissemination of this information. Antony Blinken, Joe Biden's then-advisor and now Secretary of State, along with former interim CIA Director Michael Morrel, enlisted "51 former intelligence authorities" to falsely claim that the laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign designed to influence the election.
Joe Biden used this so-called expert consensus to further propagate the lie during the final Biden-Trump debate that the laptop was a Russian fabrication. Neither CBS, the "intelligence authorities," nor any of the Bidens have since apologized for these false claims.
CBS's Reputation Continues to Falter
More recently, CBS was accused of selectively editing a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, manipulating her response to make it seem less confusing. In a subsequent interview with House Speaker Mike Johnson, the network was again accused of editing his answers to make him appear less convincing.
In a CBS interview with author Ta-Nehisi Coates, network host Tony Dokoupil questioned Coates about his new, one-sided, anti-Israeli book, The Message. Coates was quickly revealed to be uninformed about the Middle East, biased, and uninterested in any perspective other than his own.
However, the fallout from this interview led to further embarrassment for CBS. An internal CBS division, the "CBS News Race and Culture Unit," criticized Dokoupil for not providing "context" for Coates's interview. The implication was that CBS, under pressure from woke activists, disowned Dokoupil and sought to re-educate him. His apparent crime was not applying different—softer—journalistic standards to woke black authors like Coates. In other words, CBS blamed Dokoupil for exposing Coates's ignorance on air.
CBS's reputation suffered another blow due to the unprofessional behavior of recent moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan during the J.D. Vance/Tim Walz vice presidential debate.
After the ABC-hosted debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, where the moderators became partisan fact-checkers of Trump alone, CBS promised to avoid such bias. It pledged not to fact-check the two vice presidential candidates and to provide "fair" moderation of the event.
However, the CBS moderators were even more blatantly biased than their ABC counterparts. They broke their own pre-debate rules by fact-checking, but only Vance. This erroneous fact-checking only highlighted their unprofessional bias.
CBS had promised not to repeat ABC's mistakes and alienate the public with partisan distortions. However, the network proved that it would rather sacrifice its professional reputation to further the progressive cause.
The Decline of Prestige Outlets
Just as CBS is no longer the gold standard of network television, the current generation of partisans has done its best to tarnish the New York Times. The Times recently embarrassed itself in ways similar to the toxic partisanship at CBS.
The Times published an op-ed titled "65 Doctors, Nurses and Paramedics: What We Saw in Gaza." The piece featured testimonials from medical professionals in Gaza, telling harrowing stories of Israel's collateral damage and civilian casualties. However, experts pointed out several inconsistencies with the evidence provided, suggesting that the stories might not be entirely accurate.
The New York Times was also quick to dismiss allegations of plagiarism against Vice President Harris. The Times claimed the copying was minor and did not constitute plagiarism, citing plagiarism "expert," Jonathan Bailey. However, after the public saw some of the passages in question, Bailey was forced to revise his initial opinion, stating that Harris had indeed committed plagiarism, but not "maliciously" so.
The Times and CBS are just two examples of once-prestigious outlets, including ABC and NPR, that have consistently abused the public's trust for the benefit of progressive causes.
In conclusion, the trust and prestige that took previous generations of journalists decades to earn have been squandered in just a few years by incompetents and partisans. They seem to operate under the flawed principle that their supposedly superior moral ends justify any means necessary to achieve them.
Bottom Line
The media landscape has shifted dramatically, with once-prestigious outlets sacrificing their reputation for partisan gain. This raises important questions about the role of media in society and the impact of partisanship on journalistic integrity. What are your thoughts on this issue? Share this article with your friends and start a conversation. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is delivered every day at 6 pm.
The Media Landscape Beyond Stereotypes
The long-running CBS show, 60 Minutes, has seen its fair share of controversies and embarrassments over its 57-year history, including the infamous Dan Rather scandal. However, it appears the show's reputation sunk to a new low in 2024.
Former President Donald Trump recently declined an invitation to appear on 60 Minutes for the traditional election-year interviews of the two presidential candidates. The reason for this was his previous experience in 2020, when anchor and interviewer Leslie Stahl dismissed Trump's claim that the Hunter Biden laptop (then in the FBI's possession) was genuine and damaging to Joe Biden's presidential campaign.
Stahl incorrectly stated that the laptop's authenticity couldn't be confirmed. She also inaccurately claimed that the story about Hunter Biden's laptop, discovered in a repair shop, originated from Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani. The New York Post was, in fact, the source of the story, which the FBI did not deny.
However, Twitter and Facebook, under pressure from the FBI, suppressed the dissemination of this information. Antony Blinken, Joe Biden's then-advisor and now Secretary of State, along with former interim CIA Director Michael Morrel, enlisted "51 former intelligence authorities" to falsely claim that the laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign designed to influence the election.
Joe Biden used this so-called expert consensus to further propagate the lie during the final Biden-Trump debate that the laptop was a Russian fabrication. Neither CBS, the "intelligence authorities," nor any of the Bidens have since apologized for these false claims.
CBS's Reputation Continues to Falter
More recently, CBS was accused of selectively editing a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, manipulating her response to make it seem less confusing. In a subsequent interview with House Speaker Mike Johnson, the network was again accused of editing his answers to make him appear less convincing.
In a CBS interview with author Ta-Nehisi Coates, network host Tony Dokoupil questioned Coates about his new, one-sided, anti-Israeli book, The Message. Coates was quickly revealed to be uninformed about the Middle East, biased, and uninterested in any perspective other than his own.
However, the fallout from this interview led to further embarrassment for CBS. An internal CBS division, the "CBS News Race and Culture Unit," criticized Dokoupil for not providing "context" for Coates's interview. The implication was that CBS, under pressure from woke activists, disowned Dokoupil and sought to re-educate him. His apparent crime was not applying different—softer—journalistic standards to woke black authors like Coates. In other words, CBS blamed Dokoupil for exposing Coates's ignorance on air.
CBS's reputation suffered another blow due to the unprofessional behavior of recent moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan during the J.D. Vance/Tim Walz vice presidential debate.
After the ABC-hosted debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, where the moderators became partisan fact-checkers of Trump alone, CBS promised to avoid such bias. It pledged not to fact-check the two vice presidential candidates and to provide "fair" moderation of the event.
However, the CBS moderators were even more blatantly biased than their ABC counterparts. They broke their own pre-debate rules by fact-checking, but only Vance. This erroneous fact-checking only highlighted their unprofessional bias.
CBS had promised not to repeat ABC's mistakes and alienate the public with partisan distortions. However, the network proved that it would rather sacrifice its professional reputation to further the progressive cause.
The Decline of Prestige Outlets
Just as CBS is no longer the gold standard of network television, the current generation of partisans has done its best to tarnish the New York Times. The Times recently embarrassed itself in ways similar to the toxic partisanship at CBS.
The Times published an op-ed titled "65 Doctors, Nurses and Paramedics: What We Saw in Gaza." The piece featured testimonials from medical professionals in Gaza, telling harrowing stories of Israel's collateral damage and civilian casualties. However, experts pointed out several inconsistencies with the evidence provided, suggesting that the stories might not be entirely accurate.
The New York Times was also quick to dismiss allegations of plagiarism against Vice President Harris. The Times claimed the copying was minor and did not constitute plagiarism, citing plagiarism "expert," Jonathan Bailey. However, after the public saw some of the passages in question, Bailey was forced to revise his initial opinion, stating that Harris had indeed committed plagiarism, but not "maliciously" so.
The Times and CBS are just two examples of once-prestigious outlets, including ABC and NPR, that have consistently abused the public's trust for the benefit of progressive causes.
In conclusion, the trust and prestige that took previous generations of journalists decades to earn have been squandered in just a few years by incompetents and partisans. They seem to operate under the flawed principle that their supposedly superior moral ends justify any means necessary to achieve them.
Bottom Line
The media landscape has shifted dramatically, with once-prestigious outlets sacrificing their reputation for partisan gain. This raises important questions about the role of media in society and the impact of partisanship on journalistic integrity. What are your thoughts on this issue? Share this article with your friends and start a conversation. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is delivered every day at 6 pm.
