Welcome back to “The Media Front.”

With the $110 billion merger of Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery officially complete, David Ellison now controls a media giant spanning two major film studios, CBS, CNN, HBO, streaming services and some of television’s most valuable sports rights. The deal gives Skydance greater scale to compete with Disney, Netflix, Amazon and other media giants, while strengthening its negotiating leverage over programming, distribution and advertising.

But there’s a contradiction at the heart of the merger: Skydance is meant to make traditional media more competitive against Big Tech, even as its creation reduces the number of independent competitors within traditional media itself.

Consider the streaming business. Paramount+ and HBO Max spent years competing for subscribers and programming. Bringing them together could give Skydance a stronger offering against Netflix and Disney while potentially simplifying the choices facing viewers.

But the consequences aren’t limited to subscribers. Producers who once had two separate companies bidding for projects could find themselves negotiating with one corporate buyer. And a larger streaming library doesn’t necessarily translate into better prices or more choices for consumers.

The implications extend to traditional television.

CBS and CNN now belong to the same corporate family, giving Skydance reach across broadcast, cable and digital news. The two organizations will remain editorially independent, according to company executives, but they still compete for audiences, advertising and talent. Both also face the challenge of reaching viewers beyond traditional television.

Meanwhile, CBS Sports and TNT Sports bring together major rights packages, including the NFL, March Madness, Major League Baseball and the NHL. Those properties become especially valuable when viewed alongside Skydance’s broader television and streaming portfolio.

For advertisers seeking audiences across news, entertainment and sports, Skydance can offer a wider range of programming through one corporate relationship. For cable and satellite distributors, negotiating with a company controlling more high-demand channels and live events could change the leverage on both sides of the table. That doesn’t mean every contract can be combined, but it gives Skydance more assets that distributors may find difficult to do without.

There is a reasonable argument that traditional media needs this kind of scale. YouTube commands enormous viewing time, Netflix has become a global entertainment powerhouse, and Amazon and Apple have the resources to compete aggressively for programming and sports rights. Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery faced those pressures separately, with no guarantee that remaining independent would leave them better positioned.

Ellison has also promised to increase production, with Skydance committing to at least 30 theatrical releases and more than 180 television shows and series annually. If those ambitions are realized, the combined company could create more opportunities for filmmakers, producers and audiences despite having fewer independent corporate owners.

Still, the broader tradeoff is hard to ignore. The same consolidation that could make Skydance a stronger competitor to technology companies also puts more decisions about programming, distribution and investment in fewer hands. For creators, that could mean fewer places to sell a project. For distributors, a more powerful negotiating partner. For viewers, potentially more content in one place, but less competition among the companies deciding what gets made.

Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery were hardly guaranteed a brighter future on their own. But joining forces changes more than their ability to compete with Netflix, YouTube and Amazon. It changes the choices available to everyone doing business with them.

Hollywood has spent years arguing that traditional media companies need greater scale to survive. Ellison has now put that argument to one of its biggest tests yet.

Skydance may help level the playing field against Big Tech. The question is whether doing so leaves enough room for everyone else to play.

Now on to the rest of this week’s Media Front column.

The White House Press Fight Is Far From Over

The legal fight over President Donald Trump’s decision to bar CNN, MS NOW and Politico from the White House is heading toward a consequential ruling. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly on Thursday extended an order temporarily blocking the ban, allowing the three news organizations to retain their credentials while he considers whether to grant a preliminary injunction. Kelly expects to rule by Tuesday, Oct. 13.

The outlets argue that Trump sought to punish them for unfavorable coverage, while Justice Department lawyers have defended the restrictions on national security grounds and maintained that the organizations were given an opportunity to challenge their exclusion. At issue is where legitimate government control over press access ends and unconstitutional retaliation begins.

Meanwhile, Trump on Saturday named conservative commentator Katie Zacharia his new press secretary, succeeding Karoline Leavitt, who departed in August. Zacharia previously advised Trump Media and Technology Group and frequently appeared on Fox News, extending the revolving door between conservative media and the administration.

My full piece: Trump’s Media Ban Block Extended as Judge Weighs Ruling

The Emmys Don’t Need Broadcast TV Anymore

After more than three decades rotating among ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, the Emmy Awards are moving to streaming. The Television Academy announced a six-year deal with Amazon that will bring the ceremony exclusively to Prime Video beginning in 2027, ending one of broadcast television’s longest-running awards partnerships.

The move reflects how the economics of live television are changing. In interviews with TheWrap, Television Academy chairman Cris Abrego and Amazon executive Mike Hopkins discussed the agreement, which will keep the ceremony free to viewers while giving Prime Video another major live event alongside its growing sports and entertainment offerings.

For decades, the Emmys were a showcase for the broadcast networks and the television industry they helped build. Now the industry’s signature awards ceremony is heading to a streaming platform. It’s another sign of how much the definition of television — and the business of distributing it — has changed.

Jose Alejandro Bastidas’ full piece: The Emmys Move to Prime Video in 6-Year Deal, TV Academy Chairman Explains Why

Fox News at 30: Building Beyond the Cable Empire

Fox News marked its 30th anniversary this week with its cable business still firmly in first place. The network averaged more than 1.7 million primetime viewers in September, more than double MS NOW’s audience and more than triple CNN’s, according to Nielsen. That strength has helped Fox expand its presence in streaming, podcasts and digital platforms.

In my examination of Fox’s next chapter, executives and industry observers described a company building around its cable business rather than rushing to replace it. “I do think Fox News Channel will still be the centerpiece of what Fox News Media is,” Fox News Media president and executive editor Jay Wallace told me.

Thirty years after launching as a challenger to the established cable news networks, Fox is now the incumbent. Its next challenge is maintaining that dominant television audience while following viewers onto platforms beyond the traditional cable bundle.

My full piece: Fox News Built a Cable Empire. Now It’s Building Around It

Local TV Anchors Are Doing More Than Anchoring

At Fox 26 Houston, Caroline Collins can find herself switching cameras, bringing up graphics and controlling audio while anchoring a livestream — duties traditionally handled by producers, directors and technical crews. Collins has described simultaneously anchoring and running her own show as “incredibly stressful.”

In my latest report, journalists and station executives described how production technology and growing demand for digital programming are changing expectations for local TV anchors. While the practice isn’t entirely new, leaner production models increasingly allow stations to produce more content with smaller teams.

That flexibility can give anchors greater control over their broadcasts, but it also raises questions about workloads, burnout and the future of behind-the-scenes jobs. With local television stations facing broader layoffs and pressure to operate with leaner newsrooms, the traditional division between anchoring and producing is becoming less distinct. For journalists, that increasingly means taking on responsibilities once spread among several employees.

My full piece: Local TV Anchors Are Becoming Their Own Production Crews

This Week on PRO: CNN and CBS News Can Stay Separate. But Can Their Operations?

CNN and CBS News now share a corporate owner, but Skydance executives insist the two organizations will remain editorially independent. That doesn’t necessarily mean the expensive operations supporting them will stay separate.

Former news executives and industry advisers told TheWrap that international bureaus, production crews, facilities and technology offer potential opportunities to reduce duplication. But combining resources also raises questions about who controls them and how two competing newsrooms maintain their ability to cover stories independently.

“Simply living under the same roof does not guarantee anything,” former CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein, who previously worked at CBS News, told TheWrap.

Next week, I’ll examine where CNN and CBS News could realistically share resources, why previous efforts to bring them closer together faced obstacles and where the pursuit of efficiencies could begin affecting the journalism itself.

Look for the full analysis this week on WrapPRO.

Also on TheWrap

Skip to content

Skip to content