Bill Owens, executive producer of television’s most popular and influential newsmagazine since 2019, said in a note to staff that it has “become clear that I would not be allowed to run the show as I have always run it, to make independent decisions based on what was right for ’60 Minutes,’ right for the audience.”

“The show is too important to the country,” he wrote. “It has to continue, just not with me as the executive producer.”

At the same time, CBS parent Paramount Global, run by Shari Redstone, is seeking approval for a merger with Skydance Media, founded by Larry Ellison. They are reportedly in mediation to settle the lawsuit with Trump, a prospect that has been bitterly opposed by Owens and others at “60 Minutes.”

  • TheKMAP@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    “this show is so important, it must continue, but instead of dying on that hill and getting fired, I’m gonna quit so I can be replaced by someone who won’t rock the boat”

    • Eyro Elloyn@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It’s the same as all the times you hear about small companies “making it” because they managed to get bought out. IMO, just like how I don’t think success is using money as a high score, I don’t think “fighting fascism” means washing your hands of anything to do with it.

      • TheKMAP@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I think there’s some distinction there. The founder selling out is one thing. But private equity, VC, etc all want a return on their investment and once you IPO, you become a fiduciary. Those companies produced a tool and sold it to a customer that by definition is required to be unethical.

        But I agree that fighting implies an active component to it.

    • obvs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      1 day ago

      Isn’t it amazing how so many people have used the reasoning “I want to fight fascism, and I think the best way to do it is to quit and give my job to a fascist”?

      • Etterra@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Yeah, I agree. Force them to fire you. Resigning in protest has no benefit when the powers that be have no ethics whatsoever.

        • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You know he does have to consider the safety of himself/his family, not to mention his professional career.

          I agree this is an important hill to die on, but we’re a little presumptuous if we think we can make that decision for someone else. We don’t really know what is informing his decision at the end of the day.

    • Raltoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yeah, you’d think a guy in that position would be smarter. If you don’t fight facism, you’ve already lost.

      Although he could be afraid I guess.

  • adarza@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    137
    ·
    2 days ago

    can’t wait to see which former faux news producer gets the gig.

  • Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 day ago

    Challenges to the citizenship birthright, bypassing due process and courts, deporting legal residents, putting them in a famously brutal concentration camp, and now taking more news media companies captive under the accusation that they’re the “lying press.” Yep, totally normal.

  • rothaine@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 day ago

    approval for a merger with Skydance Media

    NO

    STOP IT

    Actually enforce anti-trust instead

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I mean tbf people have been calling 60 minutes a legacy production of the bygone era of quality journalism for years now.

    • mako@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You’re half-right.

      It’s real, researched, well-produced journalism which is definitely a relic of the past at this point.

      I don’t think that’s what you were saying, though. Since your opinion hinges on what “people have been calling” it, I think you probably don’t watch it and believe that since it’s an old show and format, it must be inferior to… sound bites, inflammatory remarks, click/rage-bait, “X slammed Y,” etc.

      And that’s sad.

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Actually I did use to watch it quite often.

        My point was not that it dropped in quality, it’s just that it became slow to keep up with ongoing events with details and information readily available via basic OSINT on primary sources or even regular quality news outlets.

        Ex: https://youtu.be/dRRJmOTCqqQ

        Pretty much everything presented in this report was already well known and available for months, making the the rest essentially a PR moneyshot for the US Navy.

        I still watch it occasionally for its direct interviews with select people, but it’s still a legacy production that struggles to keep up with info you can get even from AP or Reuters.

        Mind you it’s still miles better than flaming trash like Washington Post or NYT, but I could easily see CBS axeing it years ago.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      It’s been in decay for a while, thanks to corporate and ultra-conservative ideological interests leaning on it. A lot more of the content has drifted towards anti-immigrant fearmongering, pro-war jingoism, and paleoconservative fixations on Big Government (in the form of social programs rather than police power) and public debt. The parade of hagiographies for the ultra-wealthy and the endless pumping of tech sector vaporware haven’t been great, either.

      But enshittification has been strangling every major television news publication for a long while now. Owens isn’t exactly a radical. He made his bones giving Bush Jr an hour long platform in between 9/11 retrospectives on the eve of the 2002 election and then spent a big chunk of his career producing glossy sports media spreads for the benefit of some of the most shamelessly corrupt billionaires in the country. Since taking the “60 Minutes” producer’s desk, he’s bent over backwards to accommodate the studio’s biggest advertisers.

      If the job is too miserable for him now, I have to assume it is because he is just answering angry phone call after angry phone call from a corporate advertising base that’s plunged right off the reactionary cliff.

    • brianary@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I mean, they are also responsible for making news a for-profit enterprise, which has arguably ultimately killed it.