Critics blasted Paramount Global's decision to pay $16 million to settle President Donald Trump's lawsuit over "60 Minutes" edits, calling the move a "spineless capitulation" that erodes U.S. press freedoms.

Paramount late Tuesday agreed to a landmark settlement with Trump to end his $20-billion broadside against CBS News. The president will not be paid directly, or indirectly, as part of the deal, Paramount said. Instead, the money will go to cover Trump's legal fees and help finance his future presidential library.

Paramount's leaders hope the settlement will help clear a path for Trump-appointed regulators to bless the company's $8-billion sale to David Ellison's Skydance Media. They wanted to tamp down tensions with the president.

But journalists and others on Wednesday said the payoff will embolden attacks by Trump and his allies on news outlets. Some called the settlement a stain on the proud legacy of CBS News, the one-time home of such fearless journalists as Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and Mike Wallace.

"This is a shameful decision by Paramount," Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders USA, said in a statement. "Shari Redstone and Paramount's board should have stood by CBS journalists and the integrity of press freedom. Instead, they chose to reward Donald Trump for his petty legal assault."

Trump's legal team quickly celebrated the settlement, saying: "President Donald J. Trump delivers another win for the American people as he, once again, holds the Fake News media accountable for their wrongdoing and deceit."

Bob Corn-Revere, chief counsel for the non-profit 1st Amendment advocacy organization Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, took an opposing view, saying wider repercussions would result.

"A cold wind just blew through every newsroom," Corn-Revere said in a statement. "Paramount may have closed this case, but it opened the door to the idea that the government should be the media's editor-in-chief."

Federal Communications Commissioner Anna M. Gomez, the lone Democrat on the panel, said the settlement was "a desperate move (by Paramount) to appease the Administration and secure regulatory approval of a major transaction currently pending before the FCC."

"This moment marks a dangerous precedent for the 1st Amendment, and it should alarm anyone who values a free and independent press," Gomez said.

For months, Paramount executives have been torn over how to handle Trump's $20-billion lawsuit. The dispute helped prompt the departure of two senior CBS News executives who tried to hold their ground, particularly as "60 Minutes" continued airing stories that took a hard look at Trump's policies and actions.

Journalists were horrified by the board's willingness to settle the case rather than defend 1st Amendment freedoms.

CBS News staffers feared the company would be forced to apologize when they said they did nothing wrong. (The settlement, negotiated through a mediator, did not require an apology.)

The legal wrangling began in October when CBS broadcast different portions of an answer given by then-Vice President Kamala Harris to a question about the Biden administration's waning clout with Israel's prime minister.

CBS' "Face the Nation" program ran a clip of Harris giving a muddled response to the question. A day later, "60 Minutes" aired a different portion of her answer. This one was forceful and succinct.

CBS has acknowledged editing Harris' answer.

Trump and fellow conservatives seized on the edits, claiming CBS had manipulated Harris' answer to make her appear more authoritative to enhance her standing with voters. He called the edits an example of election interference.

CBS has long denied such claims.

Paramount Co-Chief Executive George Cheeks said during the company's shareholder meeting Wednesday that settlements are designed for companies to avoid "being mired in uncertainty and distraction."

"Companies often settle litigation to avoid the high and somewhat unpredictable costs of legal defense, the risk of an adverse judgment that could result in significant financial or reputational damage, and the disruption to business operations that prolonged legal battles can cause," Cheeks said.

That rationale did little to mollify detractors who alleged that Trump's complaints were thin.

Paramount's settlement "will be remembered as one of the most shameful capitulations by the press to a president in history," said Seth Stern, director of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation.

Paramount said the agreement with Trump included a release from threatened defamation claims.

But it's not clear that Paramount's headaches will go away.

Three left-leaning U.S. Senators — Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., want to take a closer look at Paramount's decision-making.

In May, the senators sent a strongly worded letter to Paramount's controlling shareholder, Redstone. They cautioned that a settlement could be viewed as bribing an elected official to win favorable regulatory treatment with regard to the Skydance merger.

"This could be bribery in plain sight," Warren said in a statement Wednesday. "I'm calling for a full investigation into whether or not any anti-bribery laws were broken."

"When Democrats retake power, I'll be first in line calling for federal charges," Wyden separately wrote in a post on the Bluesky social media site. "In the meantime, state prosecutors should make the corporate execs who sold out our democracy answer in court."

Some journalists said they feared the settlement could have a chilling effect, particularly among news organizations that lack deep pockets or have unrelated business pending before the federal government.

"CBS News may weather the financial hit, but smaller newsrooms facing similar legal threats could be pushed to the brink," Tim Richardson, journalism and disinformation program director at the nonprofit PEN America, said in a statement.

"The danger is clear," Richardson said, calling the settlement a "spineless capitulation."

"Emboldened politicians and powerful actors will feel more free than ever to weaponize lawsuits and bring regulatory pressure to bear to silence and censor independent journalism."

_____

©2025 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.