The Federal Communications Fee demanded that CBS present the unedited transcript of a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris that’s the topic of a criticism to the FCC and a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump.
CBS Information on Wednesday obtained a letter of inquiry by which the FCC requested “the total, unedited transcript and digicam feeds” of the Harris interview, The New York Occasions reported at present. “We’re working to adjust to that inquiry as we’re legally compelled to do,” a CBS Information spokesperson instructed media retailers.
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr repeatedly echoed Trump’s complaints about alleged media bias earlier than the election and has taken steps to punish information broadcasters since Trump promoted him to the chairmanship. Complaints towards CBS, ABC, and NBC stations have been dismissed beneath former Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, however Carr reversed these dismissals in his first week as chair. Carr additionally ordered investigations into NPR and CBS.
FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, a Democrat, criticized what she known as Carr’s “newest motion to weaponize our broadcast licensing authority.”
“It is a retaliatory transfer by the federal government towards broadcasters whose content material or protection is perceived to be unfavorable,” Gomez mentioned at present. “It’s designed to instill concern in broadcast stations and affect a community’s editorial selections. The Communications Act clearly prohibits the Fee from censoring broadcasters and the First Modification protects journalistic selections towards authorities intimidation. We should respect the rule of regulation, uphold the Structure, and safeguard public belief in our oversight of broadcasters.”
CBS considers settling Trump lawsuit
Trump sued CBS over the Harris interview, and executives at CBS-owner Paramount International have held settlement talks with Trump representatives. “A settlement could be a rare concession by a serious U.S. media firm to a sitting president, particularly in a case by which there is no such thing as a proof that the community bought details fallacious or broken the plaintiff’s popularity,” The New York Occasions wrote.
