CBS News found itself at the center of a heated national controversy in February 2020 after journalist Gayle King was targeted with threats following an interview about Kobe Bryant’s legacy. During a sit-down with WNBA star Lisa Leslie, King had raised the subject of the late basketball player’s 2003 sexual assault case, asking whether it complicated how he would be remembered. The interview itself was wide-ranging, but when CBS mistakenly released a clip focusing solely on the sexual assault discussion, the backlash quickly intensified. Among those who attacked King online was rapper Snoop Dogg, whose profane video called her out and warned her to “back off … before we come get you.” What might have been a thoughtful and nuanced exchange was suddenly reduced to a social media firestorm that spiraled far beyond the original conversation.
As the criticism escalated, CBS News president Susan Zirinsky issued a firm defense of King, calling the threats “reprehensible.” In a statement to the Associated Press, Zirinsky said, “We fully support Gayle King and her integrity as a journalist. We find the threats against her or any journalist doing their job reprehensible.” Zirinsky also emphasized that King had asked a fair question within the context of a much broader interview, and that dangerous, hateful responses were unacceptable in a society that values free debate. The network declined to detail the specific threats King had received, but her close friend Oprah Winfrey later revealed that King had been facing death threats and was traveling with security as a result of the uproar.
Much of the anger centered on the perception that King had shown disrespect by raising the allegation so soon after Bryant’s death in a helicopter crash in January 2020. Leslie, who was a close friend of Bryant, had responded during the interview that she did not believe the case defined his legacy and that the media should show more respect for him in death. Critics echoed this sentiment, often in harsher terms, insisting that journalists should have avoided revisiting the allegations at such a sensitive time. For Snoop Dogg and others, King’s line of questioning was viewed not simply as insensitive, but as a betrayal of the Black community, an accusation that drew swift condemnation from many public figures who rallied to her defense.
Support came from across political and media circles. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey tweeted, “For those threatening her and inciting violence, stop it immediately. This is unacceptable. We must do better.” Former U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice issued an even stronger statement on Twitter, calling Snoop Dogg’s video “despicable” and warning, “You come against Gayle King, you come against an army. You will lose, and it won’t be pretty.” Morning show host Willie Geist also weighed in, describing King as “one of the most thoughtful people in our business” and condemning the threats as “absolutely disgusting.” Their statements reframed the backlash not as a debate over journalism but as an unacceptable instance of misogyny and intimidation.
Commentators within the journalism community also reflected on the deeper issues at play. Jelani Cobb of The New Yorker argued that there was space to disagree with King’s decision to raise the question without lapsing into misogyny, threats, or ignorance. Morehouse College journalism professor David Dennis Jr., in an essay for The Undefeated, questioned why it had fallen on two Black women—King and Leslie—to publicly wrestle with such a fraught subject. He wrote that while it was fair to recognize the meaningful work Bryant had done for women’s sports in later years, nothing could erase the seriousness of the allegation. “To demand silence over the case does an injustice to the victims of sexual violence as well as the work Bryant did to try to make it right,” Dennis concluded, underlining the tension between public mourning and accountability.
For King, the ordeal was both personal and professional. Known for her poise, fairness, and empathy as an interviewer, she had become the target of vitriol not for sensationalism but for fulfilling the basic duty of journalism: asking difficult questions. Zirinsky’s public support underscored the importance of protecting journalists from intimidation while affirming that King had not stepped outside the bounds of ethical reporting. Yet the ferocity of the response revealed how volatile the intersection of celebrity, grief, and accountability can be in an age of social media amplification. What began as a thoughtful interview was reduced to a viral clip, stripped of context, and weaponized in ways that placed King’s safety in jeopardy.
The incident remains a cautionary tale about how quickly media narratives can spiral out of control. On one hand, it reflects the risks journalists face when tackling sensitive subjects in a polarized and highly reactive environment. On the other, it highlights the responsibility of media organizations to contextualize reporting and of society to engage in debate without resorting to threats or harassment. King’s experience also demonstrated the fragility of public discourse when fueled by outrage rather than understanding. In defending her, figures like Zirinsky, Rice, and Booker sought not only to protect one journalist but also to defend the principle that difficult questions, even those that make us uncomfortable, must have a place in public conversation. The episode ultimately reaffirmed that while mourning and respect are important, they cannot come at the expense of silencing accountability or the safety of those who pursue it.
