In a recent development, former president Donald Trump intensified his legal action against CBS. His updated lawsuit alleges a slew of additional infractions related to the network’s handling of a 60 Minutes segment featuring Kamala Harris. Trump’s primary bone of contention is that CBS manipulated the course of the interview deceitfully, thereby reducing the visibility and viewing figures.
Curiously, Trump seems to be driven by the belief that CBS’s editorial decisions were a form of camouflaged competition. He contends that the alleged biased editing inflicted a direct loss of viewership for him. Trump has not stopped at just accusations; he has substantially hiked the quantum of damages under claim. Now, he is pursuing a whopping $20 billion – twice his previous expectation.
Intriguingly, the plaintiff list in this landmark suit has also seen an addition. Rep. Ronny Jackson, a Republican from Texas and the ex-White House doctor, is now co-plaintiff with Trump. This new development appears to be a strategic play attempting to vanquish CBS’s claims that Trump’s insistence on Texas as trial location is a calculated strategy for forum shopping.
This legal imbroglio with CBS originally sparked off in October when the network broadcasted a 60 Minutes political special that featured an exchange with Kamala Harris. One section of the interview is particularly contentious. Evidently, the host Bill Whitaker questioned Harris about the seeming indifference of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, towards the Biden administration.
Harris’s response was, to put it mildly, as evasive as it was absurd. She spouted a litany about an array of ‘movements’ in Israel, claiming them to be the repercussions of the Biden-Harris team’s efforts and advocacy. She further beat around the bush propounding on the administration’s ongoing actions in the region, and their unwavering stand for the culmination of the conflict.
CBS appears to have indulged in some selective editing while airing this interview. A teaser for the show, broadcasted on Face the Nation, portrayed Harris delivering the initial part of her response. However, 60 Minutes telecast the segment displaying Harris verbalizing only the concluding phrase of her reply.
Trump seized the opportunity to highlight these disparities, accusing the network of sugarcoating Harris so as to portray her in a better light. CBS attempted to quench the brewing controversy by disclosing the uncut transcript this week. They defended their actions as necessary truncations compelled by broadcasting time bounds rather than any deceptive intent.
CBS went on the defensive soon after the allegations, citing an attempt by Trump to castigate them for their editorial decisions. Their maneuver to dismiss the case is currently underway. But it’s worthwhile to note that Trump’s campaign against biased media outlets isn’t new and has included a myriad of lawsuits. Most of these have been dismissed, but it doesn’t discourage the former president.
In his original lawsuit, Trump banked on the Deceptive Trade Practices Act of Texas, mostly intended to deter false advertising. With the amended suit, Trump has widened the net, leveraging the Lanham Act. He now alleges false advertising and unjust competition, in addition to the previously claimed infractions.
The lawsuit postulates that the Face the Nation teaser was essentially an advertisement. Trump and his allies argue that CBS has misrepresented facts in commercial advertising, an explicit violation of the Lanham Act. CBS’s attorneys, on the contrary, claim that the plea is essentially moot since it hinges on an already concluded election, which is a seemingly desperate argument to douse the flames.
While it remains to be seen how this legal saga unfolds, it certainly appears that the mainstream media, with CBS being an example, seems to have adopted questionable practices to project the Biden-Harris administration in a positive light. The truth’s subtle alterations can indeed have sweeping repercussions on public perceptions and, in turn, democratic outcomes.
The current administration continues to evade critical questions, deliberately sidetracking or producing nebulous answers. Harris’s response about Israel was a prime example of this worrying trend. Manipulation of facts, dodging accountability, and turning a deaf ear to the misgivings of foreign leaders is becoming an unpleasant hallmark of the Biden-Harris reign.
Trump’s escalating pursuit for justice against media bias is a cautionary tale for news networks. The media’s role in influencing public opinion is being rigorously scrutinized, as is their controversy-courting dalliance with deceptive practices. It also raises concern about the media-next-door becoming a prop masking the shortfalls of those in power.
The steadfastness of Trump and his refusal to back down despite repeated dismissals of his cases is symbolic of a growing discontentment with mainstream media. This case underscores the need for unbiased and transparent reporting. It’s high time that the media embraced its role as the ‘Fourth Estate’, standing as a vigilant watchdog rather than a discreet promoter of certain political ideologies.