The lone remaining Democratic commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission said Thursday that the decision by CBS to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump over how “60 Minutes” edited an interview with Kamala Harris was “chilling” and represents a “scary moment” in history.
The network agreed to settle the suit which alleged the network sought to deceive voters by airing an edited version of the interview last fall with Harris during last year’s presidential campaign. Experts said the lawsuit had little grounds and what CBS did was routine journalistic practice.
The situation is “something I’m very concerned about,” Anna Gomez said at a panel discussion at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, which is meeting in Chicago this week. “I believe that the public interest requires us to look at how CBS acted in this case.”
Critics have charged that CBS settled the suit to clear the way for governmental approval of a proposed merger of its parent company, Paramount, and Skydance Media.
Gomez, who was appointed to the FCC by former President Joe Biden, criticized CBS for its decision to settle, which she called “a private lawsuit against ’60 Minutes’ for reporting the news the way it should, for its editorial decisions.”
Top officials with the news network left during settlement talks. Gomez charged that “CBS has now tempered how it reports the news. It pushed out the executive producer of ’60 Minutes,’ it pushed out the president of CBS News entirely to appease this president in a desperate attempt to get approval of this $8 billion to $9 billion merger by the FCC.
“That is completely contrary — it is chilling and it is a very scary moment for our freedoms.”
While CBS agreed to pay $16 million toward Trump’s future presidential library and legal fees, the network noted that it did not apologize for its actions. A CBS spokesperson could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday.
At the forum, Gomez also expressed concern over efforts to lift FCC restrictions on local media ownership that she says ensure viewpoint diversity, competition and “localism.”
“My concern is with the owners looking to lift ownership caps on local broadcasters. This is done under the guise of promoting local journalism. I think it’s the opposite of that. I think it’s being done for the benefit of billionaire companies,” she said.
