• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

"Newsroom culture clash" at CBS News

I remember when Bill Whitaker was a local reporter on Charlotte's CBS affiliate WBTV.

Scott Pelley was the last anchor of the nightly newscast that I felt belonged in the role.

How does all this affect Steve Hartman? His "On the Road" is all I watch.
 

Yes in Nexstars case its about protecting the Newsnation brand and the Tegna merger. But in CBS case its about the Paramount WB merger as the factor here.

*Note Jennifer Mitchell is the current president of the local CBS Stations that has to respond to this one about network news segments airing anywhere they have contracts with.

 


Here is more this time states question the Paramount WB deal. Yes and California has the lead in this lawsuit in the same way they were the lead group investigating the Tegna/Nexstar deal.

A group of states, including California and New York, are preparing a lawsuit to block Paramount Skydance’s $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros., two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Friday.

The lawsuit is expected to be filed in the coming weeks, the sources said. The case would mark the boldest move yet by the states in their effort to be at the forefront of US antitrust enforcement, as their better-funded counterpart agencies in the Trump administration take a more business-friendly view of enforcement.

Analysts have also viewed Paramount as facing an easier road to regulatory clearance from federal antitrust watchdogs in the US in part because of its political connections. Paramount CEO David Ellison’s father, billionaire Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, has cultivated ties with President Trump.
 
There continues to be some very good reporting on what's going on at CBS News and 60 Minutes. Apparently Leslie Stahl had dinner Thursday night with new executive producer Nick Bilton. She's going about things very differently from Scott Pelley:



Meanwhile Puck asks an interesting question. This article requires a subscription:


My take is Ellison has much bigger fish to fry with WBD, and won't do anything more with CBS until that deal closes.
 
Scott Pelley may not be Mr. Excitement, but he is not an idiot. He knew very well what he was getting into. He had to. I haven't heard, but I have to ass-u-me that he took advice from his agent and/or his attorney before speaking out. I mean, what he did was something that every employed person is guaranteed to get fired for: Insubordination.

Not every. And especially not in news.

I had three instances in my career where I put it all on the line, and none of them cost me my job.

The first was at KTVN, the CBS television affiliate in Reno. It was 1984, and it was the first of my three days off (I produced and anchored weekends, which were 12-hour days) when I got a phone call saying that the General Manager (there since 1967), News Director (there since 1969) and our consultant, former KRON, San Francisco ND Mitch Farris, had been fired and the new guy was calling an all-staff meeting for 4:00 p.m. that day.

I showered, got dressed and went to the station. In the former GM's parking spot, a new Saab 900 Turbo in black, with paper plates. The new guy, who a few days before had been Sales Manager at the company's station in Chattanooga, Tennessee, walks in and tells us all how lucky he is to be there. Way too slick, way too pompous.

So when he asked for questions, my hand was the first one up.

New GM: "Yes. You."

Me: "Where are you right now?"

New GM: "You mean with my 90-day plan, or my six-month plan, or my one-year plan?"

Me: "No. Physically. What's the address of the building you're standing in?"

New guy takes about a seven count, blinks and says:

"Well, that's not really fair...I just flew into town last night."

Me: "And you've already had time to find the Saab dealer and fire three guys who had this station number one at 5 and 5:30, tied for number one at 6:00 and 6:30 and a solid second at 11, which is about as good as a CBS affiliate can hope for. By the way, it's 4925 Energy Way."

New guy does another seven count and blinks:

"I'm gonna have trouble with you aren't I?"

Me: "Not for long, I wouldn't think, no."

Well, somehow I left the building still employed, got home to find a phone call from Mitch Farris who'd already heard about the meeting and who'd set up lunch for me the following day with the ABC affiliate in Las Vegas.

I came back to KTVN the day after to give notice and the new guy tried to keep me despite what I did in that meeting. Said I had "moxie". I left despite or maybe because of that.

It took them 14 years to get back to the ratings they had before they did that.

The second one was about ten years later, when the guys who ran the newsroom at KTVK in Phoenix sprung the news on us at a staff meeting that they had hired a legendarily unsafe helicopter pilot. Our anchor, Cameron Harper, and I immediately went after them for the wisdom of the hire and told them we wouldn't be flying with this guy.

The guys: "Where you planning on working, then?"

Me: "That'll be one REALLY interesting lawsuit."

They caved, the pilot did his own reports and none of us apart from one volunteer photographer (who was taking lessons and ultimately replaced him as the pilot) flew with him for the short while it took for him to do something illegal and be gone.

We all kept our gigs.

And the third time was just a couple of years ago at Capital Public Radio, when we knew something was very wrong financially (our company health insurance was suspended for non-payment---which I found out AT my doctor's office) but did not know that it was (as has been alleged in a criminal proceeding) fraud and embezzlement.

During that staff meeting, I went up one side of Jun Reina and down the other. I treated him and the management of the station the way I would have if they were any other business that had done that to their employees.

And I kept my job.

The Boss gets to define what that is, even if it's just disagreement with management. But he had a contract. I have to believe that he will get some kind of 6-figure severance settlement from CBS, or will sue. Regardless, he'll land on his feet.

Word is that CBS is calling his termination "for cause", which would void his contract and the severance clause within. He'll absolutely sue. And yeah, he'll be somewhere else doing good work soon.
 
And I kept my job.

This is one of the reasons I keep coming back to this board...the stories! I've got nothing to top these, but I did have a funny interaction with a new (polished and slick) GM. There was a time at the old (and soon to meet the wrecking ball) 840 N. Central building when we had gone through a number of General Managers in fairly rapid succession. One came in and insisted that he meet personally with every member of the full time staff. I was joking around telling everyone that I was gonna go up there and tell him "you know what? You're number five."

Thing is...I kinda did. The big office upstairs was very long, with the desk at one end, far away from the door, and as such had a button underneath that remotely closed the door behind you when privacy was needed. He was pretty stoked to show it off, and said "look at this!" when he closed the door with the button.

I laughed and said "yeah, every time we get a new guy in here they love to play with that." He laughed, too...unaware of the underlying message.
 
CBS response to Pelley's characterization of the Bari Weiss suggestions:

“As is frequently the case in any newsroom that operates with collaboration, not everything she raised made it into the final piece.”

That's no excuse. My question when I read that: Supposing there had been no push back from Pelley? Would her editorial suggestions have been used? Probably. But the fact that the editor in chief is making biased suggestions. Wouldn't that be wrong either way? Yes. There is no excuse for that kind of person in the room. Either way.

“They don’t know what they’re doing,” Pelley said. “And there’s a subtle political bias that I’ve never seen at ‘60 Minutes’ before, or at CBS News before. So that is my hope: a return to sanity. We can save this. It’s possible to land this plane. But right now, CBS News is on fire.”
 

Here is more this time Paramount decided that Nick Bilton is worthy of higher pay than even their previous EP Tanya Simon. If CBS News needed cuts why did they decide it had to be that way. As always the fired staff at 60 minutes question the priorities of Bari Weiss and David Ellison all through this thread.


It's insult to career injury for Tanya Simon, a former executive producer of 60 Minutes. Days into Nick Bilton's tumultuous gig as Simon's replacement at the CBS newsmagazine, a new report claims he's earning far more money than she did doing the same job.
Bilton is making $2.5 million per year in his 60 Minutes position, $1 million more than what Simon was earning, according to Page Six Hollywood.

Simon lost her job at 60 Minutes in late May, alongside correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega, per Variety. In a memo to staffers, Simon said that "leadership has decided it is time for a new chapter." CBS News is now under the leadership of editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, and the news organization is part of Paramount Skydance, the CEO of which is David Ellison.

In this related one we have to watch out for the Paramount WB deal and the concerns surrounding that. Yes its the rumored plans to get Bari Weiss to run CNN too in the same way we are talking about CBS News today.
 
CBS response to Pelley's characterization of the Bari Weiss suggestions:



That's no excuse. My question when I read that: Supposing there had been no push back from Pelley? Would her editorial suggestions have been used? Probably. But the fact that the editor in chief is making biased suggestions. Wouldn't that be wrong either way? Yes. There is no excuse for that kind of person in the room. Either way.

What struck me about the article was the comment at the end about CBS News "being on fire" but that it still "could be saved." The *only* way that "60 Minutes" and truthfully, all of CBS News, can be saved would be the removal of not only Bari Weiss but also 1) the removal of David Ellison from day-to-day operations from the network; and 2) the removal of any communication between U.S. President Donald Trump and the Ellisons regarding any stances the CBS reporters are likely to take based upon factual information. Since none of this is expected to happen, especially in the short term, I think we can kiss the non-biased nature of all of CBS News goodbye. And, as long as they can hold out, I'm sticking with NPR, BIN, and (if worst comes to worst) Pacifica. (The last network's news is definitely biased towards the left but you need a counterweight, no matter how small and biased, to the Goliath sitting at the top of the other end of the see-saw.)
 
Last edited:
"Can we make the protesters look more violent?" He obviously had enough:
CBS response to Pelley's characterization of the Bari Weiss suggestions: (tl;dr: that it was part of ordinary collaborative give-and-take)

That's no excuse. My question when I read that: Supposing there had been no push back from Pelley? Would her editorial suggestions have been used? Probably. But the fact that the editor in chief is making biased suggestions. Wouldn't that be wrong either way? Yes. There is no excuse for that kind of person in the room. Either way.
Especially harrowing is the fact that Weiss' last-minute insertion of herself into the process nearly caused the show not to go on...and if Pelley had done what she had told him to do, it probably wouldn't have gone on. On a night when it was the lead-in to the Grammy Awards. Can you imagine the disaster if that hour ended up being test patterns?

(quote)
"And the bigger problem, Lulu, frankly, is not any kind of political influence. The problem was the incompetence. You don't break a deadline. That episode came within 19 minutes of not making it to air. ... I pledged to myself that no matter what Bari Weiss wanted to do in a story, I would never break the deadline again because we put the entire network in jeopardy."
(end quote)

It appears that Pelley had a better sense of the best interests of the network than Weiss did.
The ship has sailed. This is all by design.
I think both malice and incompetence are involved.

The Dunning-Kruger effect lives on:

 
It appears that Pelley had a better sense of the best interests of the network than Weiss did.

Because she's never had to work under that kind of deadline. Network TV is not like the print press.

That's why you never put inexperienced people in charge of network TV. But when you have an inexperienced owner, this is what you get.
 


Back
Top Bottom