She says she didn't go back to Musk with the demand from CBS News that it be a taped interview instead of live, which is on her.
I'm assuming it's the Catherine Herridge thing. She talked about it more than a year ago:
Herridge claims her former bosses blocked an interview she had snagged with Elon Musk in early 2023 because they were afraid what the outspoken tech mogul might say.
nypost.com
And look, it absolutely DOES matter whether it's live or not (I did TV news interviews every day for 30 years and radio interviews for 10 more years after that---until two years ago this month).
There are people that you can trust with a live shot. A ketamine addict who's blowing up the conventions of social media and speech ain't one of them.
Herridge quoted CBS brass as saying "We don't know what he's going to say." She'd like you to think that means in terms of a message or opinion.
I promise you what they meant was "We don't know what anti-semitic rant he's likely to go on, who he'll personally slander, which of the words the FCC says we can't say he will say and whether he'll be in some altered state."
There is nothing objectionable about editing a newsmaker interview for time, context and clarity. That, most often, provides better insights into a topic. And at the time of the Herridge/Musk thing, CBS News had a Standards and Practices unit with stringent rules about editing.
Until fairly recently, there was only ONE person who could insist that you take them live, and that was the President of the United States. In the last 20 years, even that has become negotiable. The networks are more willing to say "no" to a sitting president.