What does the hostile bid launch by Billionaire David Ellison’s Paramount Skydance mean for the future of CNN and electronic news media at large?
David is the scion of Larry Ellison, the staunchly pro-Israel, Trump administration backer who just took control of Tik Tok. The Ellisons are backed by Trump’s son in law Jared Kushner’s Affinity Partners, as well as Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund and the Qatar Investment Authority.
An all-cash tender offer over $108 billion is likely impossible to refuse for Warner Brothers and Disney shareholders. It offers them more money per share than Netflix and for the entire company, including CNN, and has arguably much greater chances of regulators/ approval under the Trump Administration.
One might think this is another nail in the coffin of American free press, but for any observer of global media trends, finding unbiased TV news in the US has long been a challenge. From wars in Gaza and Sudan to the Bangladesh revolution and destruction of the Amazon, how often do American news networks cover major socio-political events in the Global South with full transparency? Profit-driven corporate owners already influence major media outlets here, with fairness a frequent casualty.
Going from several differently composed governing bodies to one powerful family with firm political interests, choosing your news minimizes any scope for diversity or dissent.”
But undoubtedly, this potential deal makes it worse. Going from several differently composed governing bodies to one powerful family with international political interests choosing what news American public sees further minimizes the scope for diversity or dissent. If you look at board compositions of most corporate media, there’s already a strong chance that the interest groups influencing their decisions are largely similar. But whatever limited diversity they’ve had, it is at risk now.
Financial viability is a key factor here. As media markets continue to die due to digital content and AI, consolidation is even more tempting to networks out of fear of survival. While this may boost higher demand for digital news creators as public trust in broadcast media dips even further, consider who’s in charge of the very few platforms used most for news consumption (TikTok, X?)
What are the alternatives? Independent creators seldom follow journalistic standards around reporting and source vetting. Their content is a hazy mix of analysis and views pulled into newsfeeds by the thread of the algorithm, giving the public exactly and only what it wants to see.
In today’s ratings-driven world though, if a show runner gets top-down direction on topics—like avoiding government critiques—they are likely to go with it for sheer survival.”
Full transparency in electronic news media has never been a reality anywhere in the world—corporate or government controlled. But some regulations have always been present. In years past, including during my own time in broadcast media, established news anchors with a strong following could choose their topics with limited editorial control. In today’s ratings-driven world though, if a show runner gets top-down direction on topics-like avoiding government critiques-they are likely to go with it for sheer survival.
In the last century, we’ve seen the western world regulated by certain ethical standards. Now that post-World War II system appears to be collapsing, and we are the first generation to witness that collapse. Do we need a new, multilateral regulatory body to enforce some semblance of journalistic standards in an increasingly chaotic media landscape? That might be the last frontier for proponents of free electronic media if the Paramount bid is accepted.
