In a relatively short period, a standard practice within journalism—editing footage for broadcast—has escalated into a $16 million legal settlement, changes in interview procedures at major news networks, and the resignation of high-profile leaders at the BBC.
The catalyst for this upheaval: President Donald Trump.
The BBC is currently facing a crisis following the resignation of its director-general, Tim Davie, and news chief Deborah Turness amid claims of bias related to last year's documentary, Trump: A Second Chance. The BBC acknowledged that its filmmakers edited quotes from Trump’s speech delivered before the January 6, 2021, insurrection, suggesting he incited violence.
Trump also filed a lawsuit against CBS for an edited segment on 60 Minutes regarding Kamala Harris, leading to a significant settlement this summer, while his Homeland Security secretary, Kristi Noem, voiced grievances about her interview on Face the Nation,” prompting CBS to revise its interview policies.
In the past, the BBC’s controversy would have likely resulted in a straightforward admission of error, an apology, and a return to normalcy, according to Mark Lukasiewicz, a former NBC News executive. However, in today’s climate, where every editing move under scrutiny can be weaponized for political gain, newsrooms face intensified pressure.
Behind-the-Scenes Editing Under Fire
Under Trump's administration, questioning editorial choices has become a tactic to retaliate against unfavorable media coverage. The Associated Press faced restricted access after its decision not to comply with his proposed renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, and he has pursued legal action against outlets like The New York Times over coverage he deemed unfavorable.
The landscape of news reporting is further complicated by audience demand for shorter, snappier content across platforms like TikTok and Instagram, which adds pressure on news editors to streamline coverage. The emergence of AI technology that can create false video content also raises new ethical concerns in journalism.
In the BBC's contentious edit, quotes from Trump’s speech were spliced together to create the impression of a seamless statement—“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.” The reality was that the segments were delivered during different parts of the speech, with other significant content omitted.
Media professionals like Jamie Hoskins, who teaches video editing, emphasize the importance of conveying accurate representations of spoken words to avoid misleading audiences, especially in an era where fake narratives can easily proliferate.
Changing Media Practices
The fallout from these editing disputes has prompted networks to modify how they conduct interviews and manage public perceptions about their journalistic integrity. CBS News, in light of complaints from Noem about her interview edits, announced that it would only air interviews in full or live to uphold transparency and minimize backlash.
As part of their adaptation strategies, networks are more frequently releasing unedited transcripts of pivotal interviews. CBS News proactively provided a full transcript of a pre-taped interview with Trump after airing it, avoiding potential scrutiny.
While many argue that the fundamental journalistic standards haven’t changed, the consequences of missteps are now more severe due to the current political climate, which allows politicians to capitalize on any perceived errors for their advantage.
