The AP Tries to Defend the ’60 Minutes’ Editing Debacle and Just Makes Matters Worse

It was one week ago when “60 Minutes” broadcast its interview with the election hopefuls and Democratic disasters Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. After an initial flurry of mockery last Sunday morning, with the release of some teaser clips from the Harris interview, it was then noticed once the Monday primetime broadcast was shown that there had been some significant alterations to the presentation. Namely, on not one but two instances, the answers given by Harris to interviewer Bill Whitaker’s questions had been altered.

The accusations as to why were flying almost instantly, and for good reason. The interview was conducted on October 5 and recorded, then edited. But once the ridicule emerged over how incompetent Harris sounded, by the October 7 broadcast, her answers to the same questions shown in those Sunday clips were completely different, meaning they had been edited a second time. It looks like clear manipulation on the part of CBS News, but David Bauder – the national media correspondent for the Associated Press – is here to straighten out the matter for those of us not media savvy.

In a piece that could be sub-headed, “Why You Normies Just Don’t Get It,” Bauder invokes “Trump’s Complaints” in the headline to justify his defense of the “60 Minutes” hatchet job on its interview. He opens by rehashing that Trump ducked out of the same interview broadcast, before getting to the generalities of the issue. He sets it up as a premise that we, the common folk, cannot grasp.

For CBS News, it was considered part of the typical editing and cross-promotion process that takes place for a big interview. Yet to those unfamiliar with journalism and television production, the effect can be jarring.

That Bauder thinks it is a good look to explain that a news network caught characterizing divergent responses by a presidential candidate as a “typical” practice is just the start of the problems. He then offers up the explanation for the differences that came from the production. 

In a question from Whitaker about Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu seemingly disregarding the White House in suggestions on how the war with Hamas should be conducted, the clips from Sunday’s “Face The Nation” features Harris giving one answer, and then on Monday’s full broadcast she answers differently. CBS News brass claimed these were two halves of her full answer, when Monday’s display was a crisp, brief answer, in contrast to the meandering response seen on Monday.

CBS said the need to make the “60 Minutes” interview segment concise prompted the editing. The full interview with Harris took 45 minutes, and it was fit into a 20-minute slot on the broadcast. Yet the editing made it appear that the answer shown on “60 Minutes” was the first thing Harris said in response to the question. Having “Face the Nation” show Whitaker asking the question — instead of having someone paraphrase it — added to the confusion and made CBS vulnerable to criticism.

Okay…problems. You admit to a problem by saying the Monday version made it appear it was her direct answer. Then this claim that the editing was done for time constraints makes no sense whatsoever. Sunday was the brief promotional clips, running about 45-90 seconds. The Monday broadcast was a 20 minute segment, so there was far more time to allow for a fleshed out answer. Instead we were presented her truncated (that is, cleaned up) answer. 

Also, saying that CBS being errant in the editing and displaying altered versions of the same Q&A caused “confusion” with the audience, and that made CBS News “vulnerable” is turning them into the victim, when they created this with dysfunctional journalism practice. This is not a poor network being unfairly criticized by inexperienced viewers, it is a production caught altering its product and not being forthright in their intentions. They were clearly in the wrong.

The next example of editing changes was in the question prior from Bill Whitaker (who, it needs to be said, did a good job in this interview. These issues are stemming from the post-production moves by the producers.) In that question, again relating to US relations with Netanyahu, Harris was seen on the Sunday clip giving a lengthy and obtuse response that stretched over a minute long. By Monday night her retort was brief, all of one sentence, and not pulled from the Sunday clip. 

And what is the explanation for this editing, from either Bauder, or the “60 Minutes” team? There is no explanation given. Bauder leans back on Trump, quoting a spokesperson who was calling for the network to release the full transcript of the 45 minute Harris interview, but then injecting more defense for CBS News.

The show sometimes airs longer versions of interviews online but does not release unedited transcripts.

This false claim was completely exposed by former CBS News reporter Catherine Herridge. She provided examples of past instances where interviews had the entire transcripted posted by the network; that is, not the transcript of the edited down broadcast version, but the full interview as it was conducted.

So as CBS News is running from this exposed sham they are receiving cover from the Associated Press. It just continues to lend evidence to the reality that there is a severe problem in the news industry. Instead of being made accountable the network is defended for its bad practice, and journalism takes another credibility hit in the process.