This week on The Media Show,
America's top newspapers reportedly knew about the US raid on Venezuela but delayed publishing.
We'll discuss the editorial and ethical issues and how journalists balance press freedom and national security.
And we'll find out why actors are warning producers they'll strike over AI scanning on set.
The US raid in Venezuela has sparked global debate about President Trump's foreign policy.
In media circles, it's also started a conversation about journalistic ethics,
because both the Washington Post and the New York Times knew about the operation before it had actually happened.
But both papers chose not to publish what they knew.
The story raises a host of questions.
Max Tarny, media editor at CEMIFOR, is the journalist who got this story,
and he told us when the newspapers learned about what President Trump was planning.
I knew it was shortly beforehand and the New York Times journalists for the New York Times and the Washington Post both went to the White House.
House seeking comment on this and the White House implored both not to publish their information,
citing national security concerns and the concerns that some troops,
American troops, could be hurt or possibly killed in the process.
And I think because the raid was shortly going to be underway,
both publications decided to hold off on public on publishing.
And has that been confirmed to you by the publications,
or is it just that you've spoken to lots of people who've confirmed it for you without official notification,
if you know what I mean?