Paramount chief says Warner deal is about CNN trust, not market power

New York: The script may be about a blockbuster merger, but according to David Ellison, the real plot twist is trust. Breaking weeks of public silence, Ellison used a guest essay in The New York Times to defend Paramount Skydance’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, arguing that the legal battle has less to do with competition and more to do with fears over who will control CNN’s newsroom.

The $110 billion deal, which is currently facing antitrust challenges from a coalition of 12 US state attorneys general and the Writers Guild of America, has already been pushed into 2027 after a California judge agreed to hear the case next year.

Ellison said he deliberately avoided commenting while the legal process unfolded because he believes owners of news organisations should not influence debates involving their own companies. However, he admitted that staying quiet allowed others to define his motives.

“I quickly learned such restraint has costs. While I was silent, others were happy to write my story for me. No more,” said David Ellison.

At the centre of his argument is the claim that the lawsuits are based on an outdated view of Hollywood. Ellison said a combined Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery would account for less than 20 per cent of total television watch time in the US, competing against much larger technology companies such as Netflix, Amazon and Apple. Including YouTube, he said, the merged company’s share would fall to about 13 per cent.

He also noted that the combined studio represented only 18 per cent of the domestic box office over the past year and around 22 per cent on average across the past two years, figures he said hardly support claims of market dominance.

But Ellison argued the bigger concern is not market concentration. It is whether he can be trusted to oversee CNN after the merger.

Addressing speculation over his political leanings, Ellison said he has voted for candidates from both major US political parties and has no intention of steering newsrooms towards any political ideology.

“I believe that news should be based on facts and truth,” he wrote.

He pledged that both CNN and CBS News would remain editorially independent, saying journalists would continue to report to the facts rather than political interests.

Invoking the legacies of media pioneers such as Ted Turner and Edward R. Murrow, Ellison said independent journalism remains central to both news organisations. He also described 60 Minutes as an example of the kind of reporting he intends to preserve.

Ellison acknowledged that public confidence in journalism has eroded sharply, citing recent polling showing only 28 per cent of Americans trust the news, the lowest level ever recorded.

Rather than dismiss criticism of the media, he argued that news organisations must rebuild credibility through consistent reporting.

“In an age when so much of what fills our screens is machine-generated or engineered to enrage, journalism from real reporters matters more than ever,” said Ellison.

Beyond the newsroom, Ellison also used the essay to outline his vision for the combined entertainment giant.

He said Paramount has nearly doubled its annual theatrical slate since he took over, increasing from eight films last year to 15 this year. The company has also greenlit 40 new or returning series for Paramount+ and expects its television studios to produce around 90 series during 2026.

Looking ahead, Ellison said the merged company plans to produce 30 theatrical films and about 170 television series every year while investing more than $30 billion annually in content.

He admitted that no studio executive can guarantee blockbuster hits, referencing the mixed fortunes of films including Top Gun: Maverick, G.I. Joe: Retaliation and Terminator: Dark Fate. What he can promise, he said, is sustained investment in storytelling and creative talent.

The merger remains subject to court approval, with Paramount agreeing not to close the transaction until legal proceedings conclude. As the courtroom battle continues, Ellison is attempting to shift the conversation from monopoly concerns to media credibility, betting that audiences, rather than regulators alone, will ultimately decide whether his vision deserves a sequel.