As you probably know, CBS "News" had an interview with Kristi Noem. They asked her, of course, about Noted Maryland Man Kilmar Albrego-Garcia.
Noem explained that Garcia is an MS-13 gang member, a drug smuggler, human trafficker, and wife-beater.
CBS "News" didn't want that information to reach its very small number of viewers, so they clipped this entire answer to just show Noem insisting, for apparently no reason whatsoever, that Garcia would be deported one way or the other.
They made a mistake: Noem had a copy of the interview video and published it.
Supposably, CBS will no longer edit politician statements at all.
But only on Face the Nation. They'll continue editing people's quotes to prop them up or tear them down on every other show.
Days after complaints over the handling of an interview with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on "Face the Nation," CBS News said Friday it would no longer allow editing of its guests' words on the Sunday morning public affairs show.
Noem charged that CBS had "shamefully edited the interview to whitewash the truth" about Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation to El Salvador made him a symbol of controversies about President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Her interview had been taped in advance.
Going forward, CBS said it would only broadcast live or live-to-tape interviews on the show, meaning guests' statements could not be edited, subject to legal or national security restrictions. CBS said the change was made "in response to audience feedback."
The network's news division is being watched closely for how it deals with the Trump administration following the FCC's recent approval of its parent company's takeover by Skydance Media. Shortly before Paramount Global's sale to Skydance was given the OK, Paramount paid $16 million to settle a lawsuit from Trump over a "60 Minutes" interview with Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
CBS said it had edited four minutes out of its Noem interview for time. On social media, Noem focused on an excised clip where she made a series of unproven accusations about Abrego Garcia, which she said emphasize "the threat he poses to American public safety."
The pro-terrorist AP says that as if there is some rule that requires a media company to censor "unproven allegations" made by politicians. As the last ten years have shown, there is no such rule: CBS and all the other communist communications nodes have featured the left slandering Trump and all other Republicans with fake allegations for decades.
Remember when CBS picked up on the leftwing hoax that Nicholas Sandmann was a racist taunting a well-meaning Tribal Elder who himself didn't do nuffin?
This might be real: This might be the new management stepping in to take the power to edit away from its incorrigible communist propagandists. Maybe the new conservative-leaning management is serving up a lesson to the rest of the propangandists and serial defamers.
Or, it might be another lie. More fake and gay ops.
Update to prior post: Glenn Reynolds on the media's schizophrenic attitude of rabble-rousing and then rabble-snoozing.
One of the things we've learned over the years is that the press can rile people up about pretty much anything. Not long ago, a pro-life high-schooler, Nicholas Sandmann, who had the temerity to smile uncomfortably at a leftist agitator who got in his face was tarred nationally as a racist, at least until he started suing (and recovering).
George Floyd, a not very savory fellow who died questionably while struggling with police became a martyr, with protests in his name blowing through Covid restrictions and, for a while at least, remaking institutions. (His longest-lasting impact may be the utter discrediting of public health authorities, whose turn-on-a-dime shift for draconian lockdowns to endorsement of mass public gatherings destroyed their credibility with the vast majority of the public.)
The "trans" fad, now winding down, also remade many institutions, which are now trying to recover. For a while, pronouns were in, "gender affirming care" was unchallengeable, and anyone who dared criticize the fad was in danger of cancellation. All of these fads were mediated, and to some degree outright created, by the press.
But while rabble-rousing is the most obvious exercise of press power, rabble-snoozing -- the power to keep a news story dormant and out of the general public's notice -- is undoubtedly a bigger one. And we see that exercised again...
They're not even making excuses. They might say that violence on commuter trains isn't news -- though I don't know if that's true when you're talking Charlotte instead of the Bronx. They might say that black on white violence isn't news, though that's kind of an iffy position. Everyone knows, and DOJ statistics demonstrate, that's it's much more common than white on black, but do they want to invoke that as a justification? Maybe they don't want to encourage random violence by crazy people? But they cover that all the time.
The truth is, this story just hurts the narrative. The black-on-white angle hurts, but the real problem is that Decarlos Brown, Jr., is a repeat violent offender who has spun through the revolving door of the criminal justice system for years, a man with 14 arrests, many for violent crimes such as larceny, armed robbery, and violent threats. But despite being regularly arrested, he was repeatedly released.
Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles said that you can't arrest your way out of these problems. Well, not if you keep letting people go, anyway...
The reason why the story is being snoozed is that the press doesn't want to support President Trump's national program against violent urban crime, which involves swift arrests and prosecution, with substantial penalties. This approach flies in the face of the mild "no cash bail"/ "restorative justice" approach being pushed in many big blue cities, which has had predictable results. Blue cities send social workers; Trump sends the National Guard.
...
Since the number one rule for the legacy media is "thou shalt not support anything Trump does," naturally the Zarutska murder can't be covered. And it won't be, unless they can find -- or manufacture -- some alternative angle that will make Trump look bad. So far, they've come up a dry hole.
So nothing.