As you know, when Paramount Skydance acquired the television station CBS, Bari Weiss, still editor of the Free Press, was also appointed editor-in-chief of CBS News. I worried about that, as CBS has a long reputation for quality news, and I couldn’t see Weiss—whose Free Press site seems both center-right and lacking gravitas as well as reportorial quality—actually improving CBS News. But we’ll give her a chance. So far, she’s blown it, but it’s early days.
Weiss is new on the job, but is already putting her fingerprints on the broadcast news, and not in a good way. First, she held a Town Hall in which Weiss (unusual for an editor) appeared as an interviewer questioning Erika Kirk, the widow of the assassinated Turning Point USA head Charlie Kirk. It was a debacle, with Weiss not pressing Erika and letting her spew Christianity all over the show. (We’re promised more town halls with Weiss in the future.)
Now, according to several sources, including the NYT article below, Weiss has done something even more serious: she had a segment of the excellent news show “60 minutes” pulled—and apparently for ideological reasons, Click below to read, or find the article archived free here.
Here’s an excerpt:
In a move that drew harsh criticism from its own correspondent, CBS News abruptly removed a segment from Sunday’s episode of “60 Minutes” that was to feature the stories of Venezuelan men deported by the Trump administration to what the program called a “brutal” prison in El Salvador.
CBS announced the change three hours before the broadcast, a highly unusual last-minute switch. The decision was made after Bari Weiss, the new editor in chief of CBS News, requested numerous changes to the segment. CBS News said in a statement that the segment would air at a later date and “needed additional reporting.”
But Sharyn Alfonsi, the veteran “60 Minutes” correspondent who reported the segment, rejected that criticism in a private note to CBS colleagues on Sunday, in which she accused CBS News of pulling the segment for “political” reasons.
“Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices,” Ms. Alfonsi wrote in the note, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times. “It is factually correct. In my view, pulling it now, after every rigorous internal check has been met, is not an editorial decision, it is a political one.”
Ms. Weiss said in a statement late Sunday: “My job is to make sure that all stories we publish are the best they can be. Holding stories that aren’t ready for whatever reason — that they lack sufficient context, say, or that they are missing critical voices — happens every day in every newsroom. I look forward to airing this important piece when it’s ready.”
Here’s an excerpt from Wikipedia about Alfonsi, who’s been with the show for a decade:
Sharyn Elizabeth Alfonsi (born June 3, 1972) is an American journalist and correspondent for 60 Minutes. She made her debut appearance on the show on March 1, 2015. In 2019, she received the Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award journalism award and has reported from war zones in Iraq, Gaza, and Afghanistan.
More clues as to why the story was spiked:
The segment was focused on Venezuelan men who were sent by the Trump administration to the Terrorism Confinement Center, a notorious prison in El Salvador. In a news release on Friday promoting the segment, CBS News said that Ms. Alfonsi had spoken with several men now released from the prison “who describe the brutal and torturous conditions they endured.”
Ms. Weiss first saw the segment on Thursday and raised numerous concerns to “60 Minutes” producers about Ms. Alfonsi’s segment on Friday and Saturday, and she asked for a significant amount of new material to be added, according to three people familiar with the internal discussions.
One of Ms. Weiss’s suggestions was to include a fresh interview with Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff and the architect of Mr. Trump’s immigration crackdown, or a similarly high-ranking Trump administration official, two of the people said. Ms. Weiss provided contact information for Mr. Miller to the “60 Minutes” staff.
Ms. Weiss also questioned the use of the term “migrants” to describe the Venezuelan men who were deported, noting that they were in the United States illegally, two of the people said.
In her note, Ms. Alfonsi said that her team had requested comment from the White House, the State Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. “If the administration’s refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, we have effectively handed them a ‘kill switch’ for any reporting they find inconvenient,” Ms. Alfonsi wrote.
This is ludicrous. The story was vetted five times and cleared by CBS sttorneys. The team working on the story asked for comment from the three most relevant agencies: the White House, the State Department, and the Department of Homeland Security. They refused to participate. That would have been enough to add to the story: three “no comments”. But Weiss stuck her nose in and helpfully supplied Alfonsi with yet another administration official, a deputy chief of staff in the White House. (Did Weiss know what that person would say? If so, how?) It’s not the job of the reporter to keep asking administration officials until they find a cricial comment. Alfonsi is right: this appears to be Weiss’s attempt to get someone to badmouth or contradict the story. Alfonsi added this:
“We have been promoting this story on social media for days,” Ms. Alfonsi added. “Our viewers are expecting it. When it fails to air without a credible explanation, the public will correctly identify this as corporate censorship. We are trading 50 years of ‘gold standard’ reputation for a single week of political quiet.”
“I care too much about this broadcast to watch it be dismantled without a fight,” she wrote.
Reached on Sunday evening, Ms. Alfonsi said, “I refer all questions to Bari Weiss.”
Here, from “X”, is Alfonsi’s full email to the “news team,” presumably those people who worked on the story (click screenshot to go to site, Stelter is CNN’s chief media analys):
Alfonsi is clearly pissed off, and is going to fight (given Weiss’s position, Alfonsi will probably lose). But the whole thing smacks not only of censorship, but of Weiss’s attempt to micromanage “60 Minutes” stories, makng sure the Trump administration can weigh in publicly. That’s not what reporting should do., Alfoni’s memo and stand is proper, and is that of a working reporter. Weiss has little experience with this end of reporting, and she screwed up by desperately trying to get someone from the Trump administration to criticize the story. Weiss’s overweening ambition to build news organizations is already starting to do her in. If she keeps acting this way towards CBS reporters, they will leave and the station will be left with a bunch of neophytes. (Some CBS employees are already threatening to quit.)
If you want other versions of this story, you can find them at CNN, NBC News, The Wall Street Journal, and Fox News, which adds a response from Weiss:
“My job is to make sure that all stories we publish are the best they can be. Holding stories that aren’t ready for whatever reason — that they lack sufficient context, say, or that they are missing critical voices — happens every day in every newsroom. I look forward to airing this important piece when it’s ready,” Weiss said in a statement.
Weiss should never have taken this job, for I foresee a lot of micromanagement that is not to the taste of the newspeople themselves. She is is clearly not ready to be CBS’s news editor-in-chief, and we may have to watch the news division go down the tubes before Weiss learns enough to manage the news section properly.
h/t: Douglas, David
Getting a story spiked hurts – and I think the 60 min reporter is angry for ego reasons.
My editors are obvious lunatics who let me off my leash to loudmouth away at will … but the one or two times my articles have been spiked…. it is hard to not take it personally.
D.A.
NYC
-themoderatevoice
-jihadwatch
-various Jewish newes
-Forbes magazine
Meanwhile, the Ellisons, via Paramount Skydance, are renewing their bid for Warner Bros Discovery, which would allow them to censor CNN as well.
Didn’t know she was so MAGA. Would have surmised she mostly wanted to ban anti-Israel content.
It only became clear after Trump was re-elected. I’ve cancelled my Free Press subscription.
60 Minutes and CBS News is unwatchable. There will be a lot of blood on the floor if the news division is to be relevant again. Look at CNN, new owners, very few changes…CNN continues to lose viewers.
As a former news executive, I would have pulled the segment Thursday, not hours before air. That Ms. Weiss doesn’t have television experience is not significant. Formats differ, journalism principals are the same. To call an illegal immigrant a “migrant” is misleading the viewer, which is a willful act.
The truth is, one can not change the culture of CBS News with the same people (like Leslie Stahl) and practices that led it to mediocrity. Good luck Ms. Weiss.
Replacement Migration: Is it a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?
Population Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs
United Nations Secretariat
21 March 2000
https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/unpd-egm_200010_un_2001_replacementmigration.pdf
Bryan, I’m going to assume your point is the U.S. needs immigration, specifically working age people, to sustain its economy and population. Point taken. But a country doesn’t need illegal immigrants to achieve that goal. My original point that legal (good) and illegal (bad) immigrants are two different things.
I don’t have much to add – The United Nations is proposing and likely practicing “replacement migration”.
This “migration” will be according to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
It is clear from their literature what that means in practice.
It is clear from their literature what that means esoterically.
Got it. Thanks for the clarification. Hopefully, this study will be updated.
A country doesn’t need to maintain its population. Why would it? A smaller population means cheaper housing, less traffic congestion, all sorts of good things.
As for the economy, large numbers of jobs will be automated in the next decade or two. Taxi driver and delivery driver are two that will shortly disappear, replaced with self-driving vehicles. Many jobs revolving around the generation of “paperwork” are being replaced by AI.
And then there are humanoid robots: AI intelligence tied to capable robotic arms that can do a vast range of tasks, such as cleaning and cooking to fruit picking. It’s unclear how far off they are (consider a robot that can be programmed to do all nursing tasks, more reliably than a human nurse), but I’ve not seen a properly constructed argument that we do need migrants to maintain the economy.
I mostly agree. But I worry about China and the Muslim world. I don’t care about the ethnicity of the future world’s humans, but I do fervently hope that a civilization descended from the Enlightenment does not wind up overwhelmed by authoritarian cultures through sheer attrition.
I am not sure what to think here.
True, the segment was ready to go out after having checked all the boxes, and it should have aired and Weiss should not have interfered with that practice. Let that one go out. Her role might be to try to steer the development of segments to exhibit dissenting points of view, but spiking a segment that is ready to go out is not good for morale.
But what is wrong with re-grouping, rolling up your sleeves, and seeing about adding a comment from the White House deputy chief of staff after Weiss seemed to promise that this person would comment? If they refused, then 60 minutes could say that four, rather than three contacts from the White House refused to explain their policies. If they did provide a comment, then see about putting it in for balance. 60 Minutes could (and should) then factually contextualize that comment as being either a pile of dog crap or a salient alternative point of view. If it is found to be dog crap (my expectation, tbh), then Weiss had goddamn better not interfere further.
How many news stories have you read that ended by saying
Millions of them, I suspect, as have I. Do you think that every such story should be spiked until then go through a list of people and GET a critical comment? I dont think so. And they tried three times. You are expecting from 60 Minutes what you do not tolerate from normal news.
I’m willing to give her more time. It’s possible that she is a micromanager, which will p*ss everyone off, particularly if the existing team is used to making its own editorial decisions. If so, she probably won’t last. But it’s also possible that the existing team, too, needs to adapt. Bringing an existing team under new leadership is fraught with peril. Time will test the mettle of all involved.
Regarding this particular case, the story was most likely in preparation for months before Weiss joined CBS News. She should have let it go out as planned. It was definitely bad for morale.
Watching from outside what’s happening in the Usa is really discomforting. It will take time but there will be a price to be paid, although I don’t think we will see Trump (without Melania) poisoning himself in a bunker.
Just because it was fact-checked and vetted, especially at CBS, doesn’t mean it was honest. From what I’ve heard of the segment, it was definitely of the “Maryland man” flavor. All the injustice of these men being deported to El Salvador, but nothing about the crimes they committed or why it was they couldn’t be sent back to Venezuela. You should give her the benefit of the doubt and remember that she has critics merely because of who she is, and that one of the issues she is trying to fix is the terrible bias in the MSM.
Sorry, but please don’t tell me what do do.
Given that these two men had no hearing before a US court, how do you know about the crimes they have committed?
If you’re OK with deportation without court involvement, then please don’t talk as if a court was involved.
TPS, or Temporary Protected Status, was offered to Venezuelans on two occasions, in 2021 and 2023. It was ended earlier this year, reinstated by a court, and is still being litigated. I don’t know the legal disposition of the men deported to the Salvadoran prison, but some of them might have entered the US legally, making “migrant” an apt description.
Sorry but 60 minutes has a history of emotional manipulation and “facts” can be presented in different ways.. I will wait to see how this ends and how cbs news changes. You have a bone about religion which I understand but that shouldn’t get you on the preachie high horse
Roolz violation. You are new here, aren’t you? Thanks for the insults and farewell. And your characterization of 60 Minutes is laughable.
Reports with all the same details are appearing all over the place at the same time – this brazen abuse of power must go all the way to the top.
It is simply impossible that the agitation was planned and coordinated using the mythical Vertically Integrated Messaging Apparatus and Institutional Array that manipulates emotions along a dialectical trajectory — promoting objectives of Leftism, while identifying pockets of resistance among the enemies of the people with false consciousness and incorrect political opinions that refuse compliance with Mass Lines.
Your comment makes no sense.
I haven’t watched television in 30 years, so I truly don’t know the answer to this. But is 60 Minutes still relevant in the way it was back when my grandmother would refuse to take my call if I mistakenly phoned during or shortly before it went on the air?
I don’t watch television either. But I think it is as good an excuse for not doing something that one does not like to do as it ever was 🙂
Did you ever have a “Kill your television” bumper sticker on your car?
I had some respect for Bari after leaving the NYT and fighting wokeness on the left and the slanted coverage of Israel after they were attacked. But she was the wrong person for this job and her second call after a nauseating interview with Mrs. Kirk is to capitulate to Trump threats and completely denigrate one of the few remaining traditional news outlets with a storied history of independent news reporting? She just stabbed CBS in the back by discrediting it. For all that false bravado before, it looks like cowardice and appeasement now. Fire her!
Maybe traditional news truly is dead.
The illegal immigrant open borders topic is an 80/20 issue with the public.
It does indeed look like this is a repeat of the Maryland Man story.
The right wingers approve of the cancelation of the segment, which would have reminded viewers of the DOJ’s unlawful conduct.
Meanwhile, the billionaire owner “has chosen to inject contrarian right-leaning opinion journalism into an American icon” by removing a vetted piece, as John Oliver predicted.
Whatever her original motivations, Bari Weiss is now just a tool for the Ellisons.
If, as you say, Bari Weiss is now just a tool for the Ellisons and if, as I believe, the Ellisons are tools of Trump, we’re in world of even deeper shit than before. Watch the dominos fall. Tik Tok, CNN, Warner Bros, Netflix…
It is unfair to criticize Bari before getting all the facts — we should do some digging into the issue before passing judgement. We know how biased and inaccurate MSM outlets have been — and it was The Free Press who exposed many of such flawed stories. Remember hospital hit by Israeli rocket (turned out it was Gaza rocket hitting parking), starvation in Gaza (turned out the images were of people with medical problems unrelated to Gaza war), and “fiery but mostly peaceful protests”? CBS has its history of biased reporting too, some of the examples enumerated in this post by Public News: “CBS Reporter Making Unsupported Allegations Of Censorship Against Bari Weiss Has History Of Biased And Inaccurate Reporting”
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzQdzvvvgtJkJPHXbSrNCcgSGVzj
The Free Press has been doing an excellent job in covering news, tackling hard topics (transgender ideology, ideological corruption of medicine, crime, antisemitism), exposing media bias, and remaining dead-center.
The only “sin” of TFP is pieces on religion. Like Jerry, I am an avowed atheist, but it does not bother me if some op-eds take a different view. After all op-eds is just that — opinions.
+1 Prof K.
best,
D.A.
NYC
==== I’m surprised at how heated this debate is here.
Like it or not, but Bukele (CECOT) is the future (part of the future). The murder rate in El Salvador has ‘only’ gone down by 98%. El Salvador was once described (correctly) as the ‘murder capital of the Americas’. Not any more. The AI Overview reads
“Due to a significant drop in crime rates, people in El Salvador are now more able to go outside and enjoy public spaces
, resulting in a boom in local life and tourism.
El Salvador was previously known as one of the most violent countries in the world due to widespread gang activity, which limited where and when people could safely go out. However, recent government crackdowns under a “state of exception” have drastically reduced homicides and other violent crimes, leading to a new sense of safety.
Impact on Daily Life and Tourism:
Increased Safety: Many locals and tourists report feeling safe enough to walk the streets and visit places that were once highly dangerous, even at night. The homicide rate in 2024 dropped to approximately 1.9 per 100,000 inhabitants, a dramatic decrease from previous years.
Tourism Growth: The improved security has led to a major increase in tourism, with visitors flocking to the country's beaches (known for surfing), volcanoes, and historic sites. The "Surf City" marketing push has been particularly successful.
Renovated Public Spaces: Cities like San Salvador have seen renovations of their historic centers, including new libraries and restored national palaces, creating more appealing public gathering areas for residents and visitors.
Economic Conditions: While safety has improved, some challenges remain, including rising costs of living and economic concerns for some residents.
In essence, the improved security situation has transformed the daily experience for many in El Salvador, making public life more accessible and vibrant than it has been in decades.”
I suggest you learn something about CECOT, which is a horrible place that could be secure but tortures prisoners in violation of human-rights dicta, before you praise the place. Plus the piece, which I have managed to watch, is about the VENEZUELANS that the US has put there, and does not concentrate on El Salvadorans.
If the 60 Minutes piece is still up (in a hard to find place) tomorrow, I suggest that all the critics of the piece who have not watched it have a look at it and THEN weigh in. I have seen the whole thing and I see nothing that would warrant pulling it off the air. There is even a note about them asking the government and the US government referring all questions to El Salvador. I will post the link to the piece tomorrow morning.
Whose dicta though? Do El Salvadoreans care that human rights of gang criminals are being violated in CECOT? Apparently not, from what Frank writes. If they don’t, why should readers of WEIT care?
I think it is germane to the Venezuelans in that the only reason they are going to El Salvador (and to CECOT) is that Venezuela won’t take its citizens back whom the U.S. wants to deport. The only third country that wants these illegal aliens from Venezuela is El Salvador, and the only condition under which it will take them is that they go directly to jail, a famously highly secure one, on stipend from the U.S. Government presumably. Mr. Bukele clearly doesn’t want them running around loose in El Salvador getting into trouble. Let them file a writ of habeas corpus against the Government of El Salvador, whose custody the Venezuelans are now in. They aren’t in US Government custody anymore, who correctly refers all questions about their status to El Salvador.
Personally, I don’t see why the spiking of this “60 Minutes” piece is any of our business. It’s an internal political spat inside a giant private-sector media corporation whose only obligation is to its shareholders. If Ms Weiss’s boss is OK with her action on the story, she’s golden. If he’s not, her head will roll (expensively for CBS having just hired her.) His is the only opinion about her that counts. The aggrieved Sharyn Alfonsi will either quit or sulk, or preen triumphantly if she gets Bari’s head. Whatever. Office politics. Bari Weiss is not our property or employee or mascot to judge her performance, and CBS is not beholden to us either.
Frank writes nothing about El Salvadorians not caring about the human rights violations. The DO like the improved security situation and in exchange accept that gangsters get sent to the gulag without due process.
I haven’t heard of any preferring torture and lack of due process to the same security gains without the abuse. It’s just that the resources were not available to crack down on crime to this extent and by the book.
What prevents you from ending up in the torture prison? There is no due process to get sent there and no due process when you get there. Is that why your critique of the Trump administration is more muted?
I avoid the risk of ending up in CECOT by the simple expedient of never entering the United States illegally, not breaching the terms of visa-free tourist entry offered to Canadian citizens (particularly by not working illegally), and not over-staying. I also make sure not to make myself unwelcome as a guest by getting arrested for something or publishing statements critical of the U.S. on social media that could get me declared persona non grata and booted out. As a visitor, I know that is U.S. law. If I don’t think it’s fair or “due process”, I don’t have to visit there.
Normally the consequences of such behaviour would be for me, a Canadian citizen, to be deported at once to Canada. I wouldn’t expect to have the right to a court hearing first as every country has the right to deport aliens at its pleasure. (Canada doesn’t put aliens it wants to deport before a court, just a lay Immigration Review Board. When European countries finally bite the bullet and start deporting Muslims and Africans, you’ll see how draconian the European state can behave when it wants to. Jus sanguinis citizenship will come in very handy.) If Canada for some perverse reason decided to refuse its obligation to take its citizens back whom the U.S. wishes to deport, I would, yes, have to face the possibility that I would be sent to a third country under whatever terms the U.S. could negotiate with it. I would decide to stay home then.
There is little point in criticizing the U.S. Administration. A second-term President is not subject to the will of the American voter except through impeachment or exercise of the taxing power by the Congress. (And Donald Trump pulled off the unprecedented feat of being twice elected while not an incumbent. He has a mandate to do whatever the Constitution permits.) A foreigner like me has even less influence.
Yes I do visit the U.S. from time to time. I don’t want gratuitous criticism of President Trump that might appear on my phone to be a reason to be denied entry. Anecdotes abound. A cranky old boomer couple from the Canadian border province of New Brunswick were asked during preliminary screen by the U.S. Border Patrol, “So what do you think of President Trump?” They unloaded their no-doubt heartfelt opinions on him, apparently gratified that an American even cared. The Border Patrol denied them entry. If they dislike the choice the U.S. made that bitterly, why do they want to visit there?
I agree with ‘FX Kober’. Of course, I don’t speak for all El Salvadorans or even Bukele supporters. However, they were faced with rather difficult choices.
She will be if enough people turn away from her. Eyeballs equal dollars. All of our opinions are valid.
Edit: i wrote this is response to Leslie Macmillan’s comment saying that CBS /Bari Weiss not beholden to our opinions. I came along late.
The only US news I used to watch (no more) here in the Land of Oz was PBS Newshour. Around 10 years ago I started to notice that they had changed the language they used on certain issues. “Illegal aliens” became simply “migrants” or “immigrants” – as in “Trump persecutes immigrants” (referring to his efforts to deport illegals). Another example was replacing “Islamic radicals” or “jihadists” with the vague term “militants”. These changes were deliberate and surely designed to obfuscate the relevant issues in ways PBS wanted. So good on Weiss to object to replacing the correct legal term “illegal aliens” with the intentionally vague and imprecise “migrants” in the 60 Minutes segment. (Australia has its own 60 Minutes show but I haven’t seen the original US show in decades.)
Whoops 😁
“It turns out that the network delivered the segment to Canada’s Global TV app (it has since been pulled).
As I understand it, this is only part of the overall story, but this 13-minute-long video— sent to me by a source —is what exists.”
https://www.thereset.news/p/breaking-heres-the-60-minutes-segment
Bari Weiss’s side of the story—her memo to 60 Minutes’ staff:
https://x.com/thesimonetti/status/2003142908854313225
I suggest you watch the video yourself before you start defending Bari Weiss. The story seems fair, and they asked for comment. Weiss wants comments FROM HER SPECIFIC HAND PICKED WHITE HOUSE MEMBER. That is not the way the news works.
I’m not defending Bari. But I do think her side of the story should be considered before passing judgment against her.
It seems that Global TV in Canada streamed this episode for a while (probably a mistake, but possibly a deliberate leak) and many have downloaded it and spread it around.