Lesley Stahl, a veteran correspondent for CBS, expressed her frustration with the network’s decision to potentially settle Donald Trump’s $20 billion lawsuit. Stahl argued that the edits made to Kamala Harris’ interview were made for efficiency purposes rather than to mislead the audience.
During an interview on The New Yorker Radio Hour, the 83-year-old journalist addressed the backlash surrounding a 60 Minutes segment from October 2024 featuring Kamala Harris. Trump claimed that the editing was intended to portray the former Vice President in a more coherent and electable light.
Trump, 78, sued CBS – the parent company of ’60 minutes’ – just days before the 2024 presidential election for $20 billion.
He and his lawyers claim that the show edited an interview with Harris in a way that hurt his 2024 campaign.
However, according to Stahl, the editing choices stemmed not from political bias but from routine time constraints.
‘There was a lengthy response,’ Stahl clarified. ‘”60 Minutes” aired a portion of the answer in Bill Whitaker’s segment, while “Face the Nation” selected a different part of the same response for their broadcast. Due to time constraints, these decisions were made to streamline the content.
‘We edit to keep our pieces down to a certain length. And this is what Mr. Trump sued over,’ the former Face the Nation anchor continued.
Stahl’s comments directly dispute Trump’s accusation that CBS engaged in deceptive editing to aid Harris’s public image during a critical election period.
Donald Trump sued CBS just days before the 2024 presidential election alleging a ’60 Minutes’ segment was edited to make Kamala Harris (pictured on ’60 Minutes’) appear more coherent and electable
Lesley Stahl, 83, (pictured) has pushed back against Trump’s claims that the CBS network deliberately manipulated an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris
‘What he said was that you made clear what had actually been a word salad,’ New Yorker journalist, David Remnick, who conducted Stahl’s interview recounted, summarizing Trump’s claim.
‘In other words, what he was accusing “60 Minutes” of doing was trying to make Kamala Harris look better,’ Remnick added.
But, the seasoned journalist emphasized that both programs – 60 Minutes and Face the Nation – merely used different portions of the same answer to accommodate their differing formats.
‘That what we did. We just ran two different halves of the same answer,’ she affirmed.
At the heart of the legal dispute is Trump’s assertion that CBS’s editorial decisions were politically motivated. However, Stahl views the lawsuit as little more than a pressure tactic.
‘What is really behind it, in a nutshell, is [an effort] to chill us,’ she said. ‘There aren’t any damages. He accused us of editing Kamala Harris in a way to help her win the election. But he won the election.’
Despite the lawsuit’s seemingly flimsy legal foundation – Stahl flatly called it ‘a frivolous lawsuit’ – CBS is reportedly engaged in settlement negotiations.
Shari Redstone, chair of Paramount Global and a key decision-maker in the network’s corporate hierarchy, is said to be open to compromise, according to the New Yorker.
Instead of fighting the lawsuit, Redstone wants to settle to stay on good terms with the President while waiting for FCC approval of a major deal.
Trump, 78, and his lawyers claim that the show edited an interview with Harris in a way that hurt his 2024 campaign
On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Paramount offered Trump $15 million to settle, but his team rejected it, demanding at least $25 million and a formal apology.
But, Redstone’s openness to settling has since raised eyebrows within the newsroom, even as Stahl downplays internal discord.
‘They’re in negotiations to settle this lawsuit. Shari Redstone seems willing to compromise. I have to think that the newsroom at “60 Minutes” must be in incredible turmoil,’ Remnick probed.
‘Turmoil is too strong a word,’ Stahl replied sternly. ‘That suggests we almost couldn’t function, but that’s not true.’
Still, the situation has stirred unease among some staffers, particularly with Bill Owens, the former executive producer of 60 Minutes, who has since left the outlet.
Stahl explained that her former ‘hero’ ditched the outlet after 37 years because ‘he was being asked to either not run pieces or to change parts of the stories.’
A CBS spokesperson told the New Yorker that no stories have been blocked by Paramount or CBS management.
Stahl has since expressed ‘anger’ at her corporate overlords.
However, according to the longtime CBS correspondent, the editing choices stemmed not from political bias but from routine time constraints. Pictured: Former Democratic Presidential candidate Kamala Harris on ’60 Minutes’
‘To have a news organization come under corporate pressure – to have a news organization told by a corporation, “Do this, do that” with your story, “change this, change that,” “don’t run that piece” – I mean, it steps on the First Amendment, it steps on the freedom of the press.
‘It steps on what we stand for. It makes me question whether any corporation should own a news operation. It is very disconcerting. As I said, we have had pressure before, in earlier owners. And yet…’
However, the CBS correspondent stood firm in her journalistic duty to the people, telling the New Yorker she hopes her higher-ups ‘hold the freedom of the press up as a beacon.’
‘I’m just, frankly, and this is being a little Pollyannaish, hoping that [Larry’s son] David Ellison and the people he brings in to run his organization hold the freedom of the press up as a beacon, that they understand the importance of allowing us to be independent and do our jobs.’
‘That would be the best outcome,’ she added.
