The End of 60 Minutes

We have become so accustomed to media manipulation and propaganda that when we first saw the two versions of a part of CBS's recent interview with Kamala Harris on 60 Minutes, we did not fully grasp the extent of the deception.

The two versions, which were spotted by Twitter user Maze (figure 1), both show 60 Minutes moderator Bill Whitaker asking Kamala Harris the exact same question about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's relationship with the United States. However, Kamala’s answer is different in each clip.

A promotional video aired before the full 60 Minutes episode, featured a confusing word salad answer that bordered on incomprehensible. However, when the actual 60 Minutes episode aired on Sunday night, the answer was drastically different. In fact, the original word salad was gone altogether. Instead, CBS showed Kamala providing a one-sentence answer that, while not particularly insightful, was at least somewhat coherent.

What we initially thought had happened was that CBS cleaned up Kamala’s answer by cutting out all the incoherent parts and airing what was left. But that is not what happened. Instead, CBS cut out Kamala’s entire answer to the Netanyahu question and appears to have replaced it with an answer to a completely different question. 

Figure 1

In CBS's official transcript of the entire 60 Minutes episode, posted on its website, Kamala provides the edited, one-sentence answer. There is no mention anywhere in the entire transcript of Kamala's original word salad answer, the one that aired earlier as a preview. 

This is beyond media malpractice. It is outright fraud.

Many readers will recall that this is not the first instance in which CBS has engaged in such a stunt. In 2004, also in the lead-up to a presidential election, 60 Minutes aired a segment claiming that George W. Bush had disobeyed orders while serving in the National Guard and that undue influence had been exerted to expunge his record. To support this claim, CBS presented a purported letter from 1973 that allegedly documented Bush’s indiscretions (figure 2). Similar to this week’s events, the deception was swiftly uncovered by internet users who noted that the letter was created using Microsoft Word, which, of course, did not exist in 1973. In other words, it was a forgery. However, that is where the parallels end. 

Figure 2

Dan Rather, who produced the anti-Bush hit piece, was forced to apologize and subsequently retired in disgrace. So far, no one has been held accountable for CBS’s deception. However, that is almost beside the point. The fact of the matter is that the entire Bush incident pales in comparison to what has just transpired. Rather and his CBS team fell for a transparent elaborate hoax. Perhaps their fervent anti-Bush sentiment led them to take the letter at face value instead of verifying it.

Be that as it may, CBS’s latest stunt is so much worse. No one was duped by a hoax. It is CBS that perpetrated the hoax. Their only mistake was airing the promotional clip, which provided evidence of their fraud. Had they not aired that clip, everyone would now believe that Kamala gave a somewhat coherent answer to a critical question, when in truth, her actual response was total gibberish.

For the past eight years, we have been inundated with fraudulent narratives claiming that Russia elected Trump by purchasing a handful of Facebook ads. However, the same groups and individuals who incessantly criticize Russia remain conspicuously silent when a domestic public broadcasting network propagates a deception that is far more extensive and impactful than anything Putin has ever done.

Just as we are bombarded with stories about Russia, we are similarly inundated with daily warnings regarding the perils of disinformation. We are told that democracy itself is under threat. Yet, the very individuals who promote the disinformation hysteria are often the worst purveyors of disinformation.

President Trump has a remarkable history of facing criticism for various actions, only to be later vindicated. His choice to decline an appearance on 60 Minutes is yet another example of this pattern.