Email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]


** OPINION
------------------------------------------------------------


** We all watched the same videos from Minneapolis. Why did we see different things?
------------------------------------------------------------
A woman gets emotional around a makeshift memorial honoring Renee Good, who was fatally shot by an ICE officer, near the site of the shooting in Minneapolis. (AP Photo/John Locher)

Last week, a Minneapolis woman was shot and killed by an ICE agent during an immigration enforcement operation. That is a true statement.

We all know that. We’ve all seen the videos.

Actually, let me stop right here and ask: What exactly did we see?

It depends on who you ask.

Many saw Renee Good, a mother of three, trying to flee U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents when she was shot three times in the face as she drove past the agent who pulled the trigger.

Others, including those inside the Trump administration, claim those very same videos show a woman trying to use her car to ram into an agent, who reacted in self-defense.

Same videos. Two totally different conclusions. A country very much divided.

What’s striking is that the divide isn’t about access to information. It’s about interpretation. People are watching the same footage, replaying the same moments, freezing the same frames and coming away convinced they’ve seen something fundamentally different.

While sports obviously pale in comparison to last week’s tragedy, please allow me to make this analogy. It’s like fans from different teams looking at a replay of the same play and seeing two different outcomes. Not necessarily because their eyes tell them what they’re seeing. But because their hearts are telling them what they are seeing. What they see is based on who they are rooting for.

Conclusions as to what happened in Minneapolis are based on which “team” you’re on.

It doesn’t stop there.

Beyond the video, there are also deeper questions that have been asked in recent days.

What was Good doing on that street to begin with? Why is ICE even in Minneapolis? Did the agent really need to shoot? Why didn’t Good just get out of her car?

The questions aren’t designed to get truthful answers. They are asked to bolster the arguments of each side. For every question asked, two more pop up. It’s point-counterpoint, over and over and over again, with no clear agreed-upon answers. And, seemingly, no end in sight.

Associated Press media reporter David Bauder wrote about this topic ([link removed]) . Duy Linh Tu, a documentarian and professor at the Columbia University journalism school, told Bauder, “These ICE videos do present irrefutable facts — a woman drove her car and then she was shot dead by an ICE agent. What the videos can’t show is the intent of the woman or the officer. And that’s the tricky part.”

The videos will never produce a final and refutable result. We will never know with certainty. Because of that, each side will dig in, convinced they are right.

It makes you think back to that time former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway went on “Meet the Press” and talked about “alternative facts.” In some ways, you wonder if this is exactly what she was talking about.

News outlets such as The New York Times ([link removed]) and The Washington Post ([link removed]) have published detailed analyses of the videos, and their reporting seems to indicate that Good was not a threat to the agent who shot her. She did appear to be trying to simply flee the area.

Even the latest video — one from the bodycam of the agent who shot Good — is divisive. Some claim the video shows the agent being struck by the car. Yet, it also appears to show that Good is turning her steering wheel to the right in an attempt to avoid the agent.

Sadly, as Bauder points out, “Good, obviously, can’t speak to what motivated her to put her SUV in drive and move on Portland Avenue South.”

It’s in these moments that we need places such as the Times and Post to use their resources to do the kind of forensic work that they are doing.

Unfortunately, no matter how impressive and detailed and convincing their work may be, a large segment of the population, including those currently in charge of our country, will refuse to give in to what appears to be the facts of the case.

In these times, facts are no longer based on what is true, but on what each person wants to believe is true.

A MESSAGE FROM POYNTER
[link removed]


** Contest now open!
------------------------------------------------------------

The 2026 Poynter Journalism Prizes contest is now open for entries. Awards honor journalism excellence in accountability, public service and justice reporting, to writing, editorials and columns, innovation, diversity and First Amendment work. Two new categories for climate change and poverty coverage are being added this year. Early bird entry fee of $75 until Jan. 31. Deadline is Feb. 13.

Enter now ([link removed])


** Paramount launches attack
------------------------------------------------------------

Paramount wants Warner Bros. Discovery. When Paramount lost out on its bid to buy WBD to Netflix, it mounted a hostile takeover attempt. That didn’t work out either, as WBD advised shareholders to stick with the Netflix bid.

Now, it appears, Paramount is ticked off and isn’t going away quietly.

On Monday, Paramount sued Warner Bros. Discovery, demanding to know why it sees Netflix as a better offer. In addition, Paramount announced it intends to nominate directors to the Warner Bros. board to help spark a deal.

A spokesperson for Warner Bros. Discovery said in a statement, "Despite six weeks and just as many press releases from Paramount Skydance, it has yet to raise the price or address the numerous and obvious deficiencies of its offer. Instead, Paramount Skydance is seeking to distract with a meritless lawsuit and attacks on a board that has delivered an unprecedented amount of shareholder value.”

The New York Times’ Lauren Hirsch wrote ([link removed]) , “The Warner board last week rebuffed Paramount’s latest $108 billion bid to acquire the company, sticking with its deal to sell a large portion of its business to Netflix for $83 billion.”

Netflix’s deal does not include WBD’s cable TV properties, most notably CNN. It is interested in WBD’s film and TV studios, its gaming business, HBO Max and HBO. Paramount has made it clear that it wants all of WBD, including the cable TV properties.


** Bongino’s return
------------------------------------------------------------

As expected, Dan Bongino, who stepped down as deputy director of the FBI earlier this month, is cranking up his podcast once again. His podcast — called, appropriately enough, “The Dan Bongino Show” — will return Feb. 2. That’s about a year after he put it on hold to join the Trump administration.

In a statement, Bongino said, “I’m excited to get back behind the mic and reconnect directly with the audience. We’re coming back bigger, bolder, and always unfiltered — exactly how people want it.”

For now, the show will be a podcast only, unlike the last time when it was both a podcast and a radio show.

Unlike his tenure in the FBI, Bongino’s show was very successful.

The New York Times’ Reggie Ugwu wrote ([link removed]) , “That show frequently ranked near the top of the Apple Podcast charts and was downloaded more than 200 million times in 2023, according to Cumulus Media, which will handle the new show’s ad sales through one of its subsidiaries. Bongino is also the founder of The Bongino Report, a conservative news aggregator, and he has hosted a Saturday night talk show on Fox News.”

This is just speculation, but it wouldn’t be surprising to see Bongino once again start to make regular appearances on Fox News.


** A golden night
------------------------------------------------------------

Comedian Nikki Glaser, arriving at the Golden Globes on Sunday evening in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP)

Sunday’s Golden Globes turned out to be a pretty good night, if you’re into awards shows. Big winners in the movie categories included “One Battle After Another” and “Hamnet.” For television, the big winners were “The Pitt” and “Adolescence.”

For the first time, Best Podcast was a category. That went to “Good Hang with Amy Poehler,” featuring the “Saturday Night Live” alum who now does her podcast for The Ringer.

Once again, comedian Nikki Glaser slayed it as host. The New York Times’ Jason Zinoman wrote ([link removed]) , “For her second consecutive year as Golden Globes host, she delivered a killer set of rapid-fire, very short jokes. A few were slashing (one about stars in the Jeffrey Epstein files), some were soft and silly (one about The Rock punning on the game rock, paper, scissors), but all were completely assured as she put on a clinic in how to win over a room without pandering to it.”

Glaser even took a jab at the host network: CBS. Glaser said, “The award for most editing goes to CBS News. Yes, CBS News: America’s newest place to see BS news.”


** Sports media kerfuffle
------------------------------------------------------------

Some in the sports media world were split over something that happened ([link removed]) during a press conference following the NFL playoff game this past weekend between the Buffalo Bills and Jacksonville Jaguars.

Following Buffalo’s dramatic 27-24 victory over the Jags, first-year Jacksonville coach Liam Coen met the media to talk about the heartbreaking loss. That’s when Lynn Jones of the Jacksonville Free Press — a weekly newspaper that serves the local African-American community — introduced herself and then said, “I just want to tell you, congratulations on your success, young man. You hold your head up, alright? You guys have had a most magnificent season. You did a great job out there today. You just hold your head up, OK? Ladies and gentlemen, Duval, you the one. Keep it going. We got another season, OK? Take care, and much continued success to you and the entire team.”

Coen said, “Appreciate it. Thank you, ma’am.”

Jones’ comments blew up on social media, especially after ESPN NFL insider Adam Schefter described ([link removed]) the post-game exchange as “awesome.” Many media members not only blasted Jones for what she said, but also roundly criticized Schefter for calling it “awesome.”

Look, to be clear, reporters are not supposed to be cheerleaders and, yes, you can understand the raised eyebrows in some traditional sports media circles. With no context, Jones sounded overly encouraging, and the fact is sports reporters are constantly battling a perception that they are fans — which they most certainly are not. Moments like this probably don’t help.

But I’m not going to beat Jones up over it. There’s a little more nuance here. Jones, from what it sounds like, is a staple in the community. Her place in Jacksonville is not the same as a beat reporter covering the team. The role of the local Black press is not the same as that of a daily newspaper that covers the team. (For more on that, read this insightful piece ([link removed]) from Detroit journalist Phil Lewis.)

In the end, it was an odd and unexpected exchange, but it was nothing more than that. It was a rare moment, not a part of some widespread problem. No need to make it bigger than it was.

However, it did lead ESPN’s Pat McAfee to blast the media, particularly the ones being criticized for calling out Jones’ comments.

In a lengthy social media post ([link removed]) , McAfee — the former NFL punter turned media giant — wrote, in part:

Love seeing these sports “journalists” getting ABSOLUTELY BURIED for being curmudgeon bums..

OBVIOUSLY NOT ALL OF THEM but a LARGE % of these things hate sports.. they hate what sports are for people (happiness).. They hate what sports are for society (unifier).. they’re political journalists by nature who’ve preyed on sports because they saw it as an easier path to “make it”

Their days are numbered.. my show being broadcasted on ESPN 10 hours a week with ZERO creative say from any “journalism school” puppets is living proof of that.. that’s why they attack me as much as possible.. I’m happy the world is starting to see what they truly are.

Now… We as a society have to stop taking these particular humans seriously. Their opinions and thoughts are coming from a place of wanting to destroy sports.

Sports are the greatest thing on Earth, these (expletives) have no idea… and will never get it.

As a former longtime sports journalist, I could write for a week on McAfee’s post. But I’ll just write that, no, those who cover sports do not hate sports. No, sports journalists don’t want to destroy sports. That’s just ridiculous. Why would they want to destroy the way they make a living?

And they don’t attack McAfee because of how he got on TV. In fact, most sports reporters who write or talk about McAfee do so with overwhelming praise for the impact he has had. Whenever he is criticized, it’s not out of envy or jealousy. It’s because he deserves to be criticized — such as when he amplified a damaging story without proof ([link removed]) or refused to push back on Aaron Rodgers’ deceptions about COVID-19.

If McAfee wants to slam journalists, that’s fine. And there’s no question he’s leading a new wave of sports media. As Awful Announcing’s Ben Axelrod wrote ([link removed]) , “Regardless of if you agree with McAfee’s opinion regarding the reaction to Coen’s press conference, it would be tough to dispute his belief that his own recent rise to prominence has been indicative of a major shift within the industry. Whether that’s been for the better or the worse is ultimately in the eye of the beholder.”

The issue is that McAfee seems to have little respect for the principles of journalism. And if I’m ESPN, that attitude worries me.

McAfee is on top of the sports media world, no doubt about it. I’m a fan myself. (We’re both Pittsburghers — Yinzers — for crying out loud!) I also greatly appreciate and admire the brand he has built almost entirely on his own. And, yeah, I like it when he uses his power to poke the eyes of ESPN suits from time to time.

But his lack of respect for journalism ethics, as well as his hubris that he is too big to punish and too big to fail, is a combination that could end up biting him someday. I hope not, because I enjoy watching him.


** Media tidbits
------------------------------------------------------------
* For The New York Times Magazine, Jim Rutenberg with “The MAGA Plan to Take Over TV Is Just Beginning.” ([link removed])
* Last week, The New York Times sat down with President Donald Trump. Here is the entire transcript of the interview: “Two Hours, Scores of Questions, 23,000 Words: Our Interview With President Trump.” ([link removed])
* My Poynter colleague, Amaris Castillo, with “Venezuelan journalists see gaps — and risks — in coverage of Nicolás Maduro’s capture.” ([link removed])
* And this is from The New York Times’ “The Morning” newsletter: “Your Venezuela Questions.” ([link removed])


** Hot type
------------------------------------------------------------
* The New York Times’ Dave Philipps with “A Green Beret Went on a Shooting Rampage. Is the Army at Fault?” ([link removed])
* Another remembrance of the great Bob Weir, who died over the weekend. It’s The Atlantic’s David A. Graham with “The Soul of the Grateful Dead.” ([link removed])


** More resources for journalists
------------------------------------------------------------
* Join a foundational career and leadership development 101 course — fully virtual for ambitious media professionals without direct reports. Apply now ([link removed]) .
* Get tools to cover America’s loneliness epidemic. Sign up today ([link removed]) .
* Gain the skills to spot AI risks like bias, misinformation and hallucinations before they harm your work. Enroll now ([link removed]) .

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) .

The Poynter Report is your daily dive into the world of media, packed with the latest news and insights. Get it delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday by signing up here ([link removed]) . And don’t forget to tune into our biweekly podcast ([link removed]) for even more.
[link removed]
Support the journalism that keeps you informed. ([link removed])
GIVE NOW ([link removed])

ADVERTISE ([link removed]) // DONATE ([link removed]) // LEARN ([link removed]) // JOBS ([link removed])
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here. ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed] [link removed] [link removed] mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20for%20Poynter
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
© All rights reserved Poynter Institute 2026
801 Third Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
If you don't want to receive email updates from Poynter, we understand.
You can change your subscription preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe from all Poynter emails ([link removed]) .