Paramount Agrees to pay Trump $16 million in CBS 60 Minutes lawsuit

[1srelluc]

Dupe

Thread 'Paramount Agrees to pay Trump $16 million in CBS 60 Minutes lawsuit'

Jul 1, 2025

Paramount has agreed to pay Trump $16 million to settle the lawsuit Trump filed against them over an edited interview on 60 Minutes during last year's election cycle. The interview in question involved Kamala Harris, and the lawsuit claimed that it was maliciously and deceptively edited to make her appear smarter and more competent in her Oct 7, 2024 interview.

Paramount agrees to pay $16 million to settle Trump's CBS ‘60 Minutes' lawsuit

President Trump had filed a $20-billion lawsuit claiming a ‘60 Minutes' interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris was manipulated to show her in a flattering light. Trump alleged the news interview was 'election-threatening.'

www.latimes.com

• TemplarKormac
• Replies: 488
• Forum: Current Events

• 
• 
• 

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Paramount to pay Trump $16m over 60 Minutes Kamala Harris interview

The media company noted the settlement does not include a statement of apology or regret.

www.bbc.com

So, this is a huge one for freedom of speech and for Trump's aims of becoming a dictator by using his presidential powers for his own gains, rather than for the country.

1) Trump sued Paramount for essentially airing an interview with his opponent.

The consequences of such a thing are totally ridiculous. There's so much stuff said about presidential candidates, lies, mistruths, all kinds of things, and it has been upheld as legal, constitutional etc. You're allowed to show interviews of political candidates.

2) So why did Paramount lose? Did they lose and pay Trump's library (Trump has a presidential library, hilarious seeing how Trump probably doesn't do books, or reading, much) $16 million? Nope, they didn't lose. The case didn't go to court for one reason. Paramount want a merger with Skydance media. And Trump, like China is does, has essentially said he can stop the merger going through if he doesn't like what happens.

Trump, using presidential powers, for his own ego, attacking political opponents and doing everything a dictatorship does.

Using the AutoPen Disinformation Standard, Trump could have deplatformed Paramount

 

[shockedcanadian]

Well, Trump isn't abusing power but you might suggest that they are trying to passively coerce him, no?

He didn't ask them to engage in a big merger during this process, they made that decision. He was angry during the campaign and called out this decision by media at the time as I recall. Now that he is in power he is going to follow through with his very public outrage.

Look, I think the lawsuit would be better handled in other ways as I am a big supporter of free speech and there have been too many cases in which this is being skewed. Though the term "free speech" may be a misnomer in this case as splicing interviews can be argued is NOT an example of free speech, but rather, propaganda.

Taking into account that Americans vote based on transparent information and if a media company is violating your Election Laws and trying to manipulate a persons words to impact an election, well, there should be some consequences for such an egregious, even diabolical approach in my opinion.

Their license revoked for an Election cycle perhaps? I don't know. The $16M seems fairly minuscule considering what the consequences of a presidential election have on your nation, nay, the entire world.

 

[egp320i]

Paramount to pay Trump $16m over 60 Minutes Kamala Harris interview

The media company noted the settlement does not include a statement of apology or regret.

www.bbc.com

So, this is a huge one for freedom of speech and for Trump's aims of becoming a dictator by using his presidential powers for his own gains, rather than for the country.

1) Trump sued Paramount for essentially airing an interview with his opponent.

The consequences of such a thing are totally ridiculous. There's so much stuff said about presidential candidates, lies, mistruths, all kinds of things, and it has been upheld as legal, constitutional etc. You're allowed to show interviews of political candidates.

2) So why did Paramount lose? Did they lose and pay Trump's library (Trump has a presidential library, hilarious seeing how Trump probably doesn't do books, or reading, much) $16 million? Nope, they didn't lose. The case didn't go to court for one reason. Paramount want a merger with Skydance media. And Trump, like China is does, has essentially said he can stop the merger going through if he doesn't like what happens.

Trump, using presidential powers, for his own ego, attacking political opponents and doing everything a dictatorship does.

if they edited it to make her not such a bimbo to try and sway to election that is interference and they should pay up.
this boils down to election fraud paid for by democrats to cover their tracks.........and they still lost huge........hahaha

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, Trump isn't abusing power but you might suggest that they are trying to passively coerce him, no?

He didn't ask them to engage in a big merger during this process, they made that decision. He was angry during the campaign and called out this decision by media at the time as I recall. Now that he is in power he is going to follow through with his very public outrage.

Look, I think the lawsuit would be better handled in other ways as I am a big supporter of free speech and there have been too many cases in which this is being skewed. Though the term "free speech" may be a misnomer in this case as splicing interviews can be argued is NOT an example of free speech, but rather, propaganda.

Taking into account that Americans vote based on transparent information and if a media company is violating your Election Laws and trying to manipulate a persons words to impact an election, well, there should be some consequences for such an egregious, even diabolical approach in my opinion.

Their license revoked for an Election cycle perhaps? I don't know. The $16M seems fairly minuscule considering what the consequences of a presidential election have on your nation, nay, the entire world.

Wow, they feel they have to give into a case which is pretty clear cut that Trump is wrong. Trump sued them basically to get money out of them knowing he's wrong, and still won because he put pressure on them telling them "pay you bribe, or else".

 

[frigidweirdo]

if they edited it to make her not such a bimbo to try and sway to election that is interference and they should pay up.
this boils down to election fraud paid for by democrats to cover their tracks.........and they still lost huge........hahaha

Since when has editing TV been ILLEGAL?

 

[Mac1958]

Trump, using presidential powers, for his own ego, attacking political opponents and doing everything a dictatorship does.

Businesses, the press, politicians, DOJ, all of them. Threaten, intimidate and go after them until they cave, AND until their PEERS know about it, and are suitably intimidated, too. Directly from the Oval Office, with all the power of the presidency behind you.

Textbook.

 

[martybegan]

Since when has editing TV been ILLEGAL?

The editing in this case was nothing less than an in kind campaign contribution. It wasn't editing for time or brevity, it was editing to make her look better TO GET THE TRUMPZ.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Wow, they feel they have to give into a case which is pretty clear cut that Trump is wrong. Trump sued them basically to get money out of them knowing he's wrong, and still won because he put pressure on them telling them "pay you bribe, or else".

Please direct me to such a quote made by President Trump.

I know Trump is a smart cookie and so I wouldn't underestimate his ability to make the association that might impact their willingness to settle.

However, we cannot live in a world of assumptions. He called out their actions DURING his election campaign. I remember that as soon as he was aware of this he called them out, even in rallies if I am remembering correctly.

Their merger pursuit and his lawsuit are not enterwined per se. He didn't tell them to manipulate the interview did he? They made that decision.

If he is being rewarded by them in their efforts to influence his decision that's on them and their business model, even faith in the U.S system of objectivity and good governance. That's not directly Trumps fault.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Businesses, the press, politicians, DOJ, all of them. Threaten, intimidate and go after them until they cave, AND until their PEERS know about it, too. Directly from the Oval Office, with all the power of the presidency behind you.

Textbook.

Textbook, and written in 中文

 

[frigidweirdo]

Please direct me to such a quote made by President Trump.

I know Trump is a smart cookie and so I wouldn't underestimate his ability to make the association that might impact their willingness to settle.

However, we cannot live in a world of assumptions. He called out their actions DURING his election campaign. I remember that as soon as he was aware of this he called them out, even in rallies if I am remembering correctly.

Their merger pursuit and his lawsuit are not enterwined per se. He didn't tell them to manipulate the interview did he? They made that decision.

If he is being rewarded by them in their efforts to influence his decision that's on them and their business model, even faith in the U.S system of objectivity and good governance. That's not directly Trumps fault.

Oh, please. You think Trump's going to act like the dictator by saying "I'm a dictator, you need to pay your bribes"??? Even the Chinese govt doesn't do that. Stop being naive.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The editing in this case was nothing less than an in kind campaign contribution. It wasn't editing for time or brevity, it was editing to make her look better TO GET THE TRUMPZ.

So?

Are you suggesting this didn't happen on Fox "News" and other such media outlets?

Is it illegal to make someone look better by editing?

 

[shockedcanadian]

Oh, please. You think Trump's going to act like the dictator by saying "I'm a dictator, you need to pay your bribes"??? Even the Chinese govt doesn't do that. Stop being naive.

Did Trump call them out BEFORE he won the election? Did he call out this interview during the election?

The answer to both questions is "yes". Here a simple search and it's easily found, from October 2024, before the election was even held. This was before he was president again, so it is you that may be suffering something, that of a poor memory.

‘60 Minutes’ rejects Trump’s claims it edited clip for Harris as former president calls for investigation​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/20/politics/60-minutes-trump-claims-harris-interview

CBS’ “60 Minutes” on Sunday rejected former President Donald Trump’s claims that the show edited its interview with Vice President Kamala Harris at her campaign’s direction.


“Former President Donald Trump is accusing 60 Minutes of deceitful editing of our Oct. 7 interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. That is false,” the show said in a statement that noted that Trump backed out of his own “60 Minutes” interview earlier this month.


“60 Minutes gave an excerpt of our interview to Face the Nation that used a longer section of her answer than that on 60 Minutes,” the statement reads. “Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point. The portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide ranging 21-minute-long segment.”


In an interview on Fox’s “MediaBuzz” that aired earlier Sunday, Trump suggested Harris should be investigated over her “60 Minutes” appearance. He repeated his accusations that CBS News edited the sit-down with correspondent Bill Whitaker. “They took the answer out in it’s entirety and put a completely different answer in that looks – that makes her look like she’s normal,” he told host Howard Kurtz.

 

[martybegan]

So?

Are you suggesting this didn't happen on Fox "News" and other such media outlets?

Is it illegal to make someone look better by editing?

If it's a Presidential Campaign and it's to the level of this editing? Welcome to the world of in kind campaign finance violations.

 

[petro]

Paramount settled the case.
If they really gave a shit about freedom of speech they wouldn't have, but they know they altered footage and had nothing to stand on.

 

[Nostra]

Oh, please. You think Trump's going to act like the dictator by saying "I'm a dictator, you need to pay your bribes"??? Even the Chinese govt doesn't do that. Stop being naive.

So you lied.

 

[martybegan]

Paramount settled the case.
If they really gave a shit about freedom of speech they wouldn't have, but they know they altered footage and had nothing to stand on.

They also know there is probably evidence of them discussing the edits with the Harris campaign and that is what makes it potentially an issue of campaign finance violations.

 

[Billiejeens]

Paramount to pay Trump $16m over 60 Minutes Kamala Harris interview

The media company noted the settlement does not include a statement of apology or regret.

www.bbc.com

So, this is a huge one for freedom of speech and for Trump's aims of becoming a dictator by using his presidential powers for his own gains, rather than for the country.

1) Trump sued Paramount for essentially airing an interview with his opponent.

The consequences of such a thing are totally ridiculous. There's so much stuff said about presidential candidates, lies, mistruths, all kinds of things, and it has been upheld as legal, constitutional etc. You're allowed to show interviews of political candidates.

2) So why did Paramount lose? Did they lose and pay Trump's library (Trump has a presidential library, hilarious seeing how Trump probably doesn't do books, or reading, much) $16 million? Nope, they didn't lose. The case didn't go to court for one reason. Paramount want a merger with Skydance media. And Trump, like China is does, has essentially said he can stop the merger going through if he doesn't like what happens.

Trump, using presidential powers, for his own ego, attacking political opponents and doing everything a dictatorship does.

Such a silly post on all counts.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Fox News edited Trump interview days after he slammed ...​

The Independent
https://www.independent.co.uk › World › Americas
Oct 24, 2024 — Fox News edited Donald Trump's sit-down chat with voters at a Bronx barbershop - days after Trump condemned 60 Minutes for doing the same with with Vice President Kamala Harris’s interview.

On Monday, the network ran a roughly 15-minute edition of its barbershop interview series featuring the former president. Lawrence Jones, co-host of Fox and Friends, has been traveling around the country speaking with voters at barbershops.

Was Trump Super Bowl interview with Fox News edited ...​

NJ.com
https://www.nj.com › news › 2025/02 › was-trump-sup...
Feb 9, 2025 — On Sunday, during Trump's interview with Fox News anchor Bret Baier, there's an apparent edit that comes after Baier asks Trump how he will bring the country together.

 

[Billiejeens]

Wow, they feel they have to give into a case which is pretty clear cut that Trump is wrong. Trump sued them basically to get money out of them knowing he's wrong, and still won because he put pressure on them telling them "pay you bribe, or else".

President Trump simply accused them of what they did.