That would require a massive amount of people to actually subscribe to Paramount+ in the first place.
-
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
- Thread starter Mark Roberts
- Start date
That would require a massive amount of people to actually subscribe to Paramount+ in the first place.
Well I'm canceling my subscription anyway. For anyone else who wants to cancel, you can list a specific reason too:
My betting is that, despite what Miss Weiss says, the story will be shelved completely. What she and the Trump administration are hoping for is that public interest in the story will die down with the passage of time. As someone earlier in this thread noted, not running the story *after* it had already cleared Legal and Standards and Practices *and* been advertised to the public is actually going to create more press against the administration than had it been allowed to run. I think we'll see not only places like pacifica, Daily Kos and the Thom Hartmann newsletter (the latter two of which I subscribe to) cover this but some more moderate and even (dare I say) a few conservative outlets as well. A presidential administration killing a news story that is supposed to be aired by a privately-held network, even if it's temporary, has major (and not good) First Amendment implications.
That doesn't matter. I can tell you from having been held to CBS News Standards and Practices that the request for comment comes at the point where you know what the story will say. You're offering them the chance to air their side of the story.
Refusing to air a story because one party was offered time to comment and refused or didn't respond is absolutely how you kill a story---which is why solid journalistic outlets don't do that. They go ahead and air the story, with the disclaimer that the party either didn't respond or refused to participate.
This basically says anything the White House would rather not talk about doesn't get on 60 Minutes.
And I think that's why you don't see Stephen a lot.
It is an impossible standard to wait until the federal government comments on camera. They will simply run out the clock under that scenario.
In one timeline, this makes Weiss look indecisive. The story preceded her arrival of course, but other media accounts indicate she screened it personally. Legal signed off. Standards approved it. The marketing team promoted it on air for two days. Then she decided to hold the story?
It is easy to speculate the other timeline. I expect 60 Minutes will be doing a lot more soft features in the future and any story critical of the regime will die before the reporter finishes the initial pitch.
In one timeline, this makes Weiss look indecisive. The story preceded her arrival of course, but other media accounts indicate she screened it personally. Legal signed off. Standards approved it. The marketing team promoted it on air for two days. Then she decided to hold the story?
It is easy to speculate the other timeline. I expect 60 Minutes will be doing a lot more soft features in the future and any story critical of the regime will die before the reporter finishes the initial pitch.
Aren't you the person who told me they eliminated CBS News S&P?
Bari Weiss is new to TV. She doesn't know any of the procedures, but she has the job & the responsibilities. So now she knows what happens when you do something like this. I'm more interested in seeing what happens next. People shouldn't quit. They need to keep fighting.
Personally I think that's a mistake. His views are not very popular with the public.
I think that's counterproductive. They need to work harder and hit harder. What was good journalism before needs to be better.
The division. I'm sure the SOP (as opposed to S&P) still is in place. The interview only works if you know what it is you're offering the subject the opportunity to respond to.
From the day this was announced, you've made it sound like the problem with Bari is a lack of broadcast experience. I'll state it bluntly. She was hand-picked by the Ellisons specifically to undo what CBS News is all about---to remove a thorn from Trump's paw.
Which is why the White House doesn't make him available very often.
I think either one or both is a problem. So this is the beginning. We still have 3 more years.
If they blow up CBS News, that's just another log on the fire with CPB, USAID, USAGM, and DOE.
Did you read the story I linked in post 48? The white house thinks he's great on TV. They've been pushing him on CNN:
CNN Blows Up Stephen Miller’s Claim He’s Banned From Network
The network said it would welcome the top White House aide “as the news warrants.”
Put him on, let him talk about how great it is to send US citizens to foreign prisons.
Sy Sims has been dead for a long time (like 16 years). Nowadays, it would have been more accurate to write, "An 'educated*' consumer is our biggest patsy."
*'Educated' through our propagandist friends at Fox News and other right-wing fellow travelers, who will tell the story the way we want it told. Or no story at all, if we can't sell that.
Last edited:
Did you read the story I linked in post 48? The white house thinks he's great on TV. They've been pushing him on CNN:
CNN Blows Up Stephen Miller’s Claim He’s Banned From Network
The network said it would welcome the top White House aide “as the news warrants.”www.thedailybeast.com
That's what the White House said. The White House says a lot of things.
The White House could have said yes to 60 Minutes' request and made Miller available. But then, that would mean a 17-minute piece on how bad CECOT really was, including video evidence, would actually air, and Miller would get to say literally nothing that would change anyone's mind.
There's a calculus the White House---any White House---makes in deciding whether to participate in a story and which of their people fronts it. Until now, they knew the story would air with or without their participation.
They just did. We know…what she did was perfectly fine and perfectly normal, just like the litany of other decisions at the behest of the regime. She’s learning. She’s new. It’s no biggie. We don’t know the exact second everything happened (despite clear history of how such stories are handled). Dear lord. The excuse-making for every single way the broadcast media cowers to avoid offending the toddler and his minions borders on comical.
CNN. 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆 The network that feeds viewers a steady diet of Scott Jennings? That CNN? It’s become Fox News lite.
Put him on what? CNN? CBS? Both have decided that pressing and calling out evasiveness are no-nos. He’s not going to answer a question, he’s going to jump to some other BS about Biden or whatever other boogeyman.
In ordinary times, I would agree with you, but these aren't ordinary times. Weiss has a history, the current administration has a history, and key business moves involving CBS depend on a favorable response by the current administration. In other words, there's a lot of context here. Absent that context, many of the things Weiss is saying sound reasonable. But when you look at the practical effect, her moves are disturbing.
Definitely she has come into the job with a lot of suspicion from the staff. Moreover, 60 Minutes has been famously independent of the rest of the organization, and blow-ups over editorial content and control have been a regular feature of CBS News since the 19th century. Clearly, some of the staff believes she's acting in bad faith.
It did seem as though some staff members realized that CBS News had a problem of losing relevance and were open to some of her ideas. That door has now slammed shut. Some of the things Weiss said today read to me as if she's trashing her own staff's work. That's poor leadership. Critiques in a good newsroom can be harsh sometimes. I've experienced that myself. But it appears as though all reasonable steps were taken to get White House comment. While superficially it can be claimed that the story said nothing new, much of the previous reporting on CECOT has been in print. Seeing people on camera to attest personally to that torture is something else altogether. Does Weiss really understand television? If she's going to lead a TV news organization, she had better.
Exactly.
It feels like a rookie mistake but, again, due to the circumstances under which she came to the post, no one's going to give her any slack. And it's a really bad rookie mistake. What she's really done is give the story legs. Now everyone's talking about it. The Streisand Effect lives. Weiss knows how to promote herself, but that's backfired here.
(@michael hagerty 's quote of Brian Seltzer : )
Does Weiss not know the history of CBS News? That place has had more leaks than a roof after a hailstorm. The internal politics of the place have been notoriously rough for decades. Entire books have been written about it. She should have been prepared for it.
Also, such statements coming from someone who trashed her own newspaper (after leaving it) for various perceived sins are rather rich.
People may quit over it...and maybe that's what Weiss really wants as she attempts to exert control to steer the organization in the ideological direction that, it's widely perceived, she was brought in to institute. She seems to approach the staff as if it's acting in bad faith; the staff views her as acting in bad faith. Presumably that's what her bosses want.
(more from the quote : )
As @TheRob says, this is a pocket veto. As long as reasonable efforts have been made to get those comments, it's perfectly good journalistic practice to run without any response as long as there's a disclaimer that there were attempts to get it and comment was refused or there was otherwise no response.
Weiss also doesn't seem to understand that much of what 60 Minutes does isn't breaking news. It often repackages stories reported elsewhere, but which haven't gotten much attention or have been forgotten, for viewing in a mass visual medium. Either she doesn't understand that, or it's a pretext. It depends on whether you think she's acting in good faith or bad faith. Because of Weiss' history and the way she was installed in her job, it's hard to believe she's acting in good faith.
Whether she is or not, there's nothing you or I can do about it. This is for the staff to deal with. As I said, what happens next is more important than what just happened.
Exactly.
Well, I mean if you're looking to RadioDiscussions for practical solutions, I think you're going to be disappointed.
You (BigA) are missing the point. You don't see Stephen Miller a lot is because they all know he's detestable. He's the slimiest reptile in an administration of reptiles. His presence in a story instantly biases viewers/listeners against whatever position or action this administration is trying to do in our name.
I think it's both, plus a lack of management/leadership experience. But it's equally likely that she was brought in to destroy the place as it was that she was brought in to run it.
(apologies for the awkward sentence structure; my writing seems to be somewhat convoluted today...or maybe the whole damn situation is convoluted)
From Morning Edition, here is NPR's take on the story.
What I like about this take is the point made near the end that David Ellison's company, with Trump's backing, is still trying to get CNN. That puts what happened at 60 Minutes in an even larger context.
What I like about this take is the point made near the end that David Ellison's company, with Trump's backing, is still trying to get CNN. That puts what happened at 60 Minutes in an even larger context.
No they don't. They all agree with him. Once again, read the story about him and CNN. The administration WANTS him on TV.