Veteran journalist Dan Rather, who spent 44 years at CBS News, has sharply criticized Paramount Global’s agreement to pay $16 million to former President Donald Trump, calling the action a “sell‑out to extortion” and “a sad day for journalism.”
Key Points from Rather’s Reaction:
Distortion & “kneeling down” by corporate media:
Rather declared that Trump “put the pressure on… and they would fold, because there’s too much money on the table.” He said the agreement amounted to “kneeling down and saying, ‘yes, sir,’ by billionaire corporate owners” .
Journalistic standards defended:
He emphasized that “60 Minutes did nothing wrong—it followed accepted journalistic practices.” Legal experts almost unanimously agreed the lawsuit held “no merit under the First Amendment,” making the settlement unnecessary.
Press freedom at risk:
Rather warned that succumbing to such pressure by Trump sets a dangerous precedent. “If major news organizations continue to kneel before power… we all lose,” he said.
Support for CBS staff:
While disappointed, he said he wasn’t surprised given corporate priorities, and praised 60 Minutes and CBS News staff. “My support for them is total, absolute,” he stated, noting they “fought a good fight”.
Context of the Settlement:
Trump’s lawsuit alleged that a 2024 “60 Minutes” interview with Vice President Kamala Harris was manipulated to create a misleading impression — a case legal experts called demonstrably weak.
Paramount and CBS agreed to settle to avoid expensive litigation and regulatory scrutiny during their pending $8 billion merger with Skydance Media, a deal that required Federal Communications Commission approval.
The funds will go toward Trump’s presidential library and legal fees, and Paramount also committed to publishing full transcripts of future presidential-candidate interviews on “60 Minutes”.
Journalist Backlash & Worries:
Numerous news figures, including 60 Minutes reporter Lesley Stahl, resigned or criticized the settlement, raising concerns about corporate interference and pipeline pressures on editorial independence.
Senators such as Elizabeth Warren have urged investigations, warning that the deal could be perceived as political bribery.
This incident highlights a broader challenge: as traditional media face financial pressures and regulatory entanglements, editorial independence may become increasingly vulnerable to political and corporate leverage. Dan Rather sees this case as emblematic of a growing trend — that news organizations might feel compelled to “kneel” rather than stand firm in the face of litigation threats.