If A 60 Minutes Reporter Shoots Somebody Dead In The Middle Of Fifth Avenue, Will All The Media Just Go On As If Nothing Happened?
I remember, growing up, my parents watching 60 Minutes every Sunday night, trusting it as a source. And that's kind of an understatement.
Well, it seems they've hit rock bottom since then. Robby Soave writes at Reason:
Earlier this week, 60 Minutes dropped a bombshell: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, had granted Publix a vaccination contract as a kickback for a $100,000 campaign donation, according to a report by journalist Sharyn Alfonsi.Then the story swiftly fell apart. Publix was neither the first nor the only vaccine distributor in Florida; the idea to use a grocery chain with more than 800 locations across the state was a good one, and did not originate with the governor; moreover, DeSantis explained all of this to Alfonsi, but his quotes were edited in a misleading way for the version that appeared in the 60 Minutes segment.
Bafflingly, CBS News is standing by this atrocious hit job. "For over 50 years, the facts reported by 60 Minutes have often stirred debate and prompted strong reactions," said the network in a statement released Tuesday. "Our story Sunday night speaks for itself."
This story should be a source of deep embarrassment for the network: Alfonsi made incendiary claims that she utterly failed to prove, and the report actively concealed from viewers the more plausible explanation offered by countless government leaders involved in the decision, including DeSantis himself. (Florida's director of emergency management, as well as the mayor of Palm Beach County--both of them Democrats--have subsequently released statements blasting CBS's distortions.)
It should have also drawn a thorough debunking, as well as outright condemnation, from other corners of the mainstream media. An accusation of corruption leveled by a major television network against a likely 2024 contender is a big story. It's perhaps an even bigger story when it turns out the network got it completely wrong. Media critics at The New York Times, The Washington Post, and elsewhere should be all over this.
The Times has published 10 articles that reference DeSantis in the last week, but not a single one of them concerns the 60 Minutes story. The Post linked to the story in its Monday email but has had nothing to say about its collapse.
...One praiseworthy exception is CNN. Journalist Oliver Darcy highlighted the controversy regarding the article in his own reporting, and correctly noted that CBS "never offered any substantive evidence to support the significant assertion and link the donation with the partnership."
But Darcy aside, it has largely fallen to conservative media--Fox News, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, The Daily Wire, Townhall, and others--to cover this debacle. The mainstream media's silence makes it seem like the matter is some contentious, undecided political issue, with liberal journalists claiming one thing and a leading Republican politician saying another. But that's just not the case. CBS made an extraordinary, unsubstantiated claim, offered no proof, and ignored adequate answers from government officials in both parties.
And some in the media still wonder why Republicans and independents are so distrustful of them.
It is suppressed vigorously, but "60 Minutes" was declared to be a "news magazine" and not liable for failing to uphold journalistic standards of integrity after being sued by the operators of the Quad Cities nuclear facility some 30+ years ago. 60M accused them of lying to the NRC, etc., about maintenance costs and scheduling; fortunately, the operator had its own cameras.
As usual, a retraction forced by a court occurred in moments after hours of breathless lying.
Ever since "news" became its own revenue center, media has had no incentive whatsoever to report either factually or on actual issues in depth. Lately, one may note that media assertion that "the deadly Capitol insurrection" was achieved by professional forces is belied by cell-phone video of police showing the public where to enter. Of course, crickets accompany commentary about "mostly peaceful" destruction by BLM/Antifa/whothehellcareslockemupalready.
This will continue so long as the public chooses ignorance, fear and mindless trust in professional liars for its path forward.
Radwaste at April 8, 2021 3:56 AM
They don't call it the See BS Network for nothing.
dee nile at April 8, 2021 4:13 AM
As Rad points out this is nothing new from 60 minutes. They have always edited tape like this.
As for CBS, Dan Rather with his 'false but true' bullshit that cost him his career used to work there. Publishing blatant lies is nothing new for the organization.
As for the New York Times, why would you expect them to condemn this? They do the same stuff all the time. They just usually aren't as clumsy as 60M and leave themselves more of an out for court purposes. 'We didn't lie 100%! It was only 99%.'
As for CNN having journalistic integrity, I'm sure that is a momentary spat of madness. They will swiftly return to their usual politically flavored entertainment.
It isn't just conservatives who don't trust main stream news sources. It is anyone interested in actually being informed.
Ben at April 8, 2021 5:56 AM
Didn't 60 Minutes lose its claim to credibility in the Illinois Power and Light case? If not, didn't the George W. Bush memo put the final nail in their credibility coffin?
And while we're bashing CBS's 60 Minutes, let's not forget the famous exploding truck on NBC's Dateline.
Before cable, networks made enough money from entertainment that news divisions could run at a loss and the network was still profitable. News was a prestige segment, not a revenue center.
With the proliferation of alternative delivery systems (e.g., streaming), alternative entertainment sources (e.g., YouTube), and non-traditional content providers (e.g., Instagram influencers), on-air television is feeling the squeeze.
With all three networks being owned by non-broadcasting parent corporations, the pressure is on to increase profitability across all segments of the business, including the news divisions.
The 24-hour news cycle has crushed the network news at 6:00. No longer does the family gather 'round the dinner table to listen to Walter Cronkite, John Chancellor, or Huntley and Brinkley tell them what's going on in the world.
And it's not just the broadcast networks being affected. The plethora of choices in streaming entertainment has seen the disruptors (cable) being disrupted.
The entertainment divisions of all three broadcast networks are struggling because the cost of making television is increasing exponentially and the rewards dwindling.
Purchasing a show from a production company means foregoing the often-lucrative revenue stream from syndication. Creating content in-house means a host of managerial challenges.
Even the best broadcast shows capture a fragment of the audiences broadcast networks used to command by default.
Other media are being disrupted, too.
Worldwide distribution has left movie companies with little choice but to load their productions with car crashes, fights, and action sequences -- things that do not require translation or in-depth cultural knowledge -- in the place of dialogue or character development in order to appeal to foreign audiences.
Conan the Grammarian at April 8, 2021 5:56 AM
"For over 50 years, the facts reported by 60 Minutes have often stirred debate and prompted strong reactions,"
Meaning they have been doing hatchet jobs for 50 years why complain now.
50 years ago you had to trust them, there was no real alternative. Although the big 3 were technically in competition, they didn't disagree in opinion. Now we do have real alternatives, because everyone is walking with a movie grade camera in their pocket and anyone can post somewhere. Though they are trying desperately to suppress that.
Joe J at April 8, 2021 7:13 AM
It should have also drawn a thorough debunking, as well as outright condemnation, from other corners of the mainstream media. An accusation of corruption leveled by a major television network against a likely 2024 contender is a big story. It's perhaps an even bigger story when it turns out the network got it completely wrong. Media critics at The New York Times, The Washington Post, and elsewhere should be all over this.
The Washington Post is how I heard about it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/07/60-minutes-hit-job-ron-desantis-is-everything-that-is-wrong-with-journalism-today/
It's actually a gift to DeSantis, and he's playing it smartly on two levels: he's fundraising and getting to play the martyr (synonymous in the modern GOP), and no one is talking about the main thrust of the story, which was vaccine line-cutting for the powerful and connected. Since I don't watch "60 Minutes" and am not curious enough to read up on it,I don't know whether the second charge is true.
Kevin at April 8, 2021 10:21 AM
which was vaccine line-cutting for the powerful and connected. Since I don't watch "60 Minutes" and am not curious enough to read up on it,I don't know whether the second charge is true.
Kevin at April 8, 2021 10:21 AM
Well it was certainly true in New York for the Cuomo clan.
Isab at April 8, 2021 10:33 AM
Fake but accurate - just like the Rathergate documents about Bush's Texas Air National Guard service. So fake that even amateurs spotted them as forgeries.
For this latest, as with most media lies, many folks have grown too tired to even bother with the news media.
charles at April 8, 2021 11:18 AM
I recollect a college dorm-mate whose father had once been interviewed by Mike Wallace for 60 Minutes. Can't recall what for, exactly. Wallace apparently showed up drunk.
After that, I never trusted anything 60 Minutes produced and aired.
ruralcounsel at April 8, 2021 1:16 PM
Heck, the Simpsons parodied them for this type of stuff back in 1994.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEGFaOeUm2A
Anyone fooled by 60 Minutes wants to be fooled.
Ben at April 8, 2021 1:29 PM
I recollect a college dorm-mate whose father had once been interviewed by Mike Wallace for 60 Minutes. Can't recall what for, exactly. Wallace apparently showed up drunk.
After that, I never trusted anything 60 Minutes produced and aired.
ruralcounsel at April 8, 2021 1:16 PM
In 1979 the 60 minutes crew was at my law school filming a episode on Roy Cohn, who was an adjunct professor there. It was mildly interesting. I didn’t know who Roy Cohn was at the time. I found out later.
Isab at April 8, 2021 2:23 PM
Srinivasan talks about this a lot: Old, East Coast-style media (wherever you find them in America) and most of their associated industries are lead by people who are selected for 'legitimacy' rather than talent… Where legitimacy comes from having a Dad who owned or ran the company, or who went to college with the guy who did.
Those people are screwed now that Bezos and Zuckerburg, who earned their authority by creating and building enormous & tentacled companies, with no means of coercion as their teams were encouraged and nurtured, have decided to eat their lunch. It sucks to be in the major media business. (I got out last year, and snicker as the last company I worked for crumbles from the clumsiness of management with neither technical nor showbiz savvy.) The NYT is rightly terrified by things like Substack and Clubhouse.
Of course, competence vs. 'legitimacy' applies in politics as well. If you get the votes, you're in.
Crid at April 8, 2021 3:52 PM
> Anyone fooled by 60 Minutes
> wants to be fooled.
Exactly. As the conman says, "The mark has to *want* to be taken."
People are desperate for stories of big guys brought low, and don't get concerned if the teller of the tale has to make stuff up.
Crid at April 8, 2021 4:02 PM
For thousands of years, slavery has stirred debate and produced strong reactions.
But in the end it wasn't worth continuing, and today anyone who engages in it is a criminal pariah.
Now there's an idea...
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at April 9, 2021 10:35 AM
Leave a comment