Former CBS anchor slams Paramount settlement with Trump: ‘It was a sellout'
'It's a sad day for 60 Minutes and CBS News,' Rather, a veteran journalist who was a CBS News anchor for over 20 years, told Variety in an interview published on Wednesday. 'I hope people will read the details of this and understand what it was. It was distortion by the president and a kneeling down and saying, 'yes, sir,' by billionaire corporate owners.'
Last November, Trump sued CBS News, claiming that the network's interview with the Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, had been doctored to portray her in a favorable light – which he alleged amounted to 'election interference'.
Many legal experts had widely dismissed the lawsuit as 'meritless' and unlikely to hold up under the first amendment, but on Wednesday Paramount announced that it had agreed to pay Trump $16m to settle the case over the interview that was broadcast on the CBS News program 60 Minutes.
The settlement comes as Paramount is preparing for a $8bn merger with Skydance Media, which requires approval from the US Federal Communications Commission. Paramount has said that the lawsuit is separate from the company's merger.
A spokesperson for Trump's legal team said in a statement to the Guardian that 'With this record settlement, President Donald J. Trump delivers another win for the American people as he, once again, holds the Fake News media accountable for their wrongdoing and deceit.
'CBS and Paramount Global realized the strength of this historic case and had no choice but to settle,' the spokesperson added.
According to Wednesday's announcement, the settlement funds will not be paid to Trump directly, but instead would be allocated to Trump's future presidential library. The settlement did not include an apology.
Rather told Variety on Wednesday that in his opinion 'you settle a lawsuit when you've done something wrong' and '60 minutes did nothing wrong, it followed accepted journalistic practices'.
'Lawyers almost unanimously said the case wouldn't stand up in court,' he said.
Ultimately though, Rather said he was disappointed but not surprised by the settlement.
'Big billionaire businesspeople make decisions about money,' he said. 'We could always hope that they will make an exception when it comes to freedom of the press, but it wasn't to be.
'Trump knew if he put the pressure on and threatened and just held that they would fold, because there's too much money on the table,' Rather said. 'Trump is now forcing a whole news organization to pay millions of dollars for doing something protected by the constitution – which is, of course, free and independent reporting. Now, you take today's sellout. And that's what it was: It was a sellout to extortion by the president. Who can now say where all this ends?'
He continued: 'It has to do with not just journalism, but more importantly, with the country as a whole. What kind of country we're going to have, what kind of country we're going to be. If major news organizations continue to kneel before power and stop trying to hold the powerful accountable, then we all lose.'
In his more than 60 years in journalism, Rather told Variety he had never seen the profession face the kind of challenges as those it faces today.
'Journalism has had its trials and tribulations before, and it takes courage to just soldier on,' Rather said. 'Keep trying, keep fighting. It takes guts to do that. And I know the people at CBS News, and particularly those at 60 Minutes, they'll do their dead level best under these circumstances. But the question is what [is] this development and the message it sends to us. And that's what I'm trying to concentrate on.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Hamas gives 'positive' response to ceasefire proposal but asks for amendments
Hamas has said it has "submitted its positive response" to the latest proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza to mediators. The proposal for a 60-day ceasefire was presented by US President Donald Trump, who has been pushing hard for a deal to end the fighting in Gaza, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set to visit the White House next week to discuss a deal. Mr Trump said Israel had agreed to his proposed ceasefire terms, and he urged Hamas to accept the deal as well. Hamas' "positive" response to the proposal had slightly different wording on three issues around humanitarian aid, the status of the Israeli Defence Forces inside Gaza and the language around guarantees beyond the 60-day ceasefire, a source with knowledge of the negotiations revealed. But the source told Sky News: "Things are looking good." Hamas said it is "fully prepared to immediately enter into a round of negotiations regarding the mechanism for implementing this framework" without elaborating on what needed to be worked out in the proposal's implementation. The US said during the ceasefire it would "work with all parties to end the war". A Hamas official said on condition of anonymity that the truce could start as early as next week. But he added that talks were needed first to establish how many Palestinian prisoners would be released in return for each freed Israeli hostage and to specify the amount of humanitarian aid that will be allowed to enter Gaza during the ceasefire. He said negotiations on a permanent ceasefire and the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza in return for the release of the remaining hostages would start on the first day of the truce. Hamas has been seeking guarantees that the 60-day ceasefire would lead to a total end to the nearly 21-month-old war, which caused previous rounds of negotiations to fail as Mr Netanyahu has insisted that Israel would continue fighting in Gaza to ensure the destruction of Hamas. The Hamas official said that Mr Trump has guaranteed that the ceasefire will extend beyond 60 days if necessary to reach a peace deal, but there is no confirmation from the US of such a guarantee. Speaking to journalists on Air Force One, Mr Trump welcomed Hamas's "positive spirit" to the proposal, adding that there could be a ceasefire deal by next week. Hamas also said it wants more aid to flow through the United Nations and other humanitarian agencies, which comes as the UN human rights officer said it recorded 613 Palestinians killed in Gaza within a month while trying to obtain aid. Most of them were said to have been killed while trying to reach food distribution points by the controversial US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). The spokeswoman for the UN human rights office, Ravina Shamdasani, said the agency was not able to attribute responsibility for the killings, but added that "it is clear that the Israeli military has shelled and shot at Palestinians trying to reach the distribution points" operated by GHF. Ms Shamdasani said that of the total tallied, 509 killings were "GHF-related", meaning at or near its distribution sites. The GHF accused the UN of taking its casualty figures "directly from the Hamas-controlled Gaza health ministry" and of trying "to falsely smear our effort", which echoed statements to Sky News by the executive director of GHF, Johnnie Moore.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump says 10 to 12 countries will get letters on tariff rate on Friday
WASHINGTON, July 4 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday his administration later in the day will begin sending letters to 10 to 12 countries informing them of the tariff rate their products will face in the United States.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Has Trump taken leadership lessons from cold war-era Africa?
Ever since Donald Trump returned to power, pundits have struggled to find apt analogies for his style of governance. Some liken his loyalty demands, patronage networks and intimidation tactics to the methods of a mafia don. Others cast him as a feudal overlord, operating a personality cult rooted in charisma and bound by oaths, rewards and threats rather than laws and institutions. A growing number of artists and AI creatives are depicting him as a Viking warrior. And of course, fierce debates continue over whether the moment has arrived for serious comparisons with fascist regimes. While some of these analogies may offer a degree of insight, they are fundamentally limited by their Eurocentrism – as if 21st-century US politics must still be interpreted solely through the lens of old-world history. If we truly want to understand what is unfolding, we must move beyond Scandinavian sagas and Sicilian crime lore. I've found it increasingly difficult not to see striking parallels between recent events in the US and the rise of cold war-era dictatorships in Africa. It began with Trump's renaming of the Gulf of Mexico and Denali, which recalled how Mobutu Sese Seko, on a personal whim, changed Congo into Zaire in 1971. Geographical renaming has been extensive in Africa because of its history of colonialism, but now the US has started changing names too. Trump's deployment of national guard troops and marines to Los Angeles after protests over immigration raids also echoed Mobutu's preferred method for dealing with civil unrest: presidential guards patrolling the streets to crush protests. The blunt use of military force to suppress domestic opposition is a tactic associated with figures such as Idi Amin in Uganda, Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and Paul Biya in Cameroon – albeit with deadlier consequences. Trump's aggressive deportation of undocumented Latino workers also resembles Amin's 1972 expulsion of Uganda's Asian minority. Amin framed it as a way to return economic power to 'the ordinary Ugandan', but it led to financial ruin. The embrace of bizarre, theatrical economic measures that look great on television but wreak havoc in practice is another striking parallel. Trump's tariffs, announced with patriotic fanfare on 'liberation day', evoke Mugabe's grandiose land reforms of the 1980s, which hastened Zimbabwe's collapse. Anti-intellectualism, egomania and delusions of grandeur were hallmarks of dictatorships in Africa. Ivory Coast's Félix Houphouët-Boigny built a replica of St Peter's Basilica in his home town. Jean-Bédel Bokassa crowned himself 'emperor' of Central African Republic. 'Marshal' Mobutu ensured that Concorde could land in his native village. A similar extravaganza of ambition has reached the US, with Trump accepting a luxury Boeing 747 from Qatar and hoping his face will be carved into Mount Rushmore beside George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln. The army parade in Washington on the day the US military turned 250 and Trump turned 79 was another moment of self-aggrandising narcissism. A populist personality cult and masculine pride often go hand in hand with deep paranoia and contempt. Trump's relentless war on academia and the free press fits squarely within this tradition. In Equatorial Guinea, President Francisco Macías Nguema outlawed the word 'intellectual' and prosecuted academics. Amin terrorised universities to the point of brain-drain. At first glance, viewing Trump as a westernised version of one of Africa's dictators may seem jarring. After all, his interest in the continent appears limited to its natural resources, not its political models. The trade tariffs and travel bans he recently unleashed have hit several African countries hard, and his cruel withdrawal of aid hardly suggests admiration for anything African. What's more, Trump has never set foot on African soil and reportedly dismissed the continent as a cluster of 'shithole countries'. Only when a raw materials deal is in sight does he spring into life, such as last week when a 'peace deal' between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda was signed at the White House. 'We're getting, for the United States, a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo as part of it,' Trump said. But once the comparison between Trump and a cold war dictator is made, it becomes hard to unsee. And it shouldn't surprise us. The postcolonial dictator was, to a significant degree, an American creation. Sooner or later, it had to come home. The US supported repressive regimes unconditionally during the cold war, viewing them as bulwarks against communism – not just in Africa, but in Asia and Latin America. Dictators such as Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Suharto in Indonesia, Augusto Pinochet in Chile and Jorge Rafaél Videla in Argentina remained in power for decades thanks to US backing. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US abruptly abandoned these allies and championed the gospel of democratisation. Though the 1990s were rich in rhetoric about human rights, good governance and the rule of law, on the ground the spectre of autocracy never vanished entirely. We're now witnessing a startling reversal. With the demise of USAID and its retreat from a role promoting global democracy, it's not only that the US has turned its back on democratising countries in Africa and elsewhere – but that it has begun to imitate some of the worst historical examples of authoritarian rule. Viewing Trump's regime through the lens of cold war-era autocracies in postcolonial states offers a framework that is both alarming and oddly reassuring. If there is one enduring lesson from the history of autocracy in Africa, it is this: things can turn ugly, fast. Cold war dictatorships were ruthless, bloody and often ended in chaos and state collapse. Yet their histories also show that when courts are neutered and legislatures reduced to rubber stamps, civil society, independent media and the moral force of religious and academic institutions can emerge as the last formidable strongholds against tyranny. After all, sooner or later, dictators die, whereas collective efforts remain. David Van Reybrouck is philosopher laureate for the Netherlands and Flanders. His books include Congo: The Epic History of a People and Revolusi: Indonesia and the Birth of the Modern World
