The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a complete transcript of a controversial “60 Minutes” interview featuring former Vice President Kamala Harris on Wednesday. This development comes amid an ongoing lawsuit involving CBS and former President Donald Trump, who has accused the network of deceptive editing.

The transcript reveals that Harris provided an extensive response regarding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In a preview aired on “Face the Nation,” a 21-second clip of her answer was shown, while a different seven-second segment was broadcast the following day during the “60 Minutes” episode. The edits have prompted significant backlash from Trump, who is pursuing a $10 billion lawsuit, alleging that CBS manipulated the footage to skew the public perception of the Vice President during the election.

In a statement, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr noted that CBS provided the commission with unredacted materials, asserting, “CBS did not ask for confidential or non-public treatment of these materials.” The case has drawn considerable attention, sparking debates on whether CBS’s editing practices constituted news distortion. Trump’s legal claims center on the assertion that the network engaged in “malicious, deceptive, and substantial news distortion” in an attempt to interfere with the election.

The released transcript underscores discrepancies in Harris's answer to a question about the ongoing conflict in Gaza, which has been a point of contention. While her complete response on the matter included a comprehensive overview of the situation, the broadcast on “60 Minutes” was a significantly shortened version that limited the context of her statements.

Critics have expressed their reactions on social media, with many Trump supporters voicing their opinions. One user remarked, “It's ridiculous. They were attempting to help her,” echoing sentiments shared by others who believe the edits favored Harris's portrayal. Meanwhile, another user claimed, “We dodged a bullet!” in reference to the perception that Harris might have gained an unfair advantage through perceived media manipulation. The discussions reveal a polarized public reaction to media practices and political transparency.

Despite the legal and public scrutiny, CBS and “60 Minutes” have defended their practices, stating that it is standard for news organizations to edit interviews for brevity while aiming to represent the essence of the conversation. In a joint release with the FCC, CBS emphasized that their segment “was not doctored or deceitful.” With the ongoing lawsuit and investigation, all eyes remain on how this situation unfolds, potentially impacting future broadcasting standards and the relationship between media and politics.

For further details, visit The Hill and India Times.