Received this email from a friend? Sign up here.

That famous line from "Anchorman" comes to mind today: "Boy, that escalated quickly." But with Netflix and Warner, "that fizzled quickly."

Netflix was in a corporate tug-of-war, and yesterday it suddenly dropped the rope,  catching almost everyone off guard and making Paramount the winner of the WBD bidding war. This special edition of Reliable is focused on what's next:

CNN braces for a new owner

Viewers and readers of CNN might be wondering the same thing that CNN employees are asking right now: What will Paramount's ownership mean?

Answers are in short supply. Paramount has not commented publicly about its victory over Netflix or its intentions for CNN.

Anxieties are running high. It's an especially fraught moment for journalists — with rising political pressures and shrinking job prospects across the industry.

But CNN has changed hands many times in its 46-year history. After covering this bidding war for months, and after speaking with a dozen sources overnight, here's what I can share: Paramount executives have privately expressed admiration for CNN's newsgathering machine and global reach. They have also talked about the prospect of combining CBS News with CNN, though that's a lot easier said than done, and is not imminent.

More broadly, Paramount CEO David Ellison has talked about his commitment to sustaining the news business and his belief that "the majority of the country longs for news that is balanced and fact-based."

His words, as well as the words of CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, sound a lot like CNN CEO Mark Thompson's words about the future of CNN. 

But you know the old saying that actions speak louder than words. And some of Paramount's actions have unnerved journalists both inside and outside the company.

So CNN employees and viewers have serious concerns about whether Ellison will uphold the news network's editorial independence amid severe political turbulence.

President Trump, after all, has long sought to weaken CNN, and he viewed the WBD bidding war as another way to exert control. "It's imperative that CNN be sold," Trump said in December. And now Trump is getting what he wanted.

Political questions surround this deal, even more so since Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos was at the Justice Department and the White House for meetings yesterday; was photographed leaving the White House looking glum; and was out of the race for Warner an hour later.

The timeline suggests "an unprecedented level of politically motivated involvement in media consolidation as Trump seeks to defang major news networks," said Courtney Radsch, director of the Center for Journalism and Liberty at Open Markets, a liberal think tank.

Some of my sources have bluntly acknowledged Trump's influence, while others have been cagey about it. Some view Paramount as wholly Trump-aligned, while others view it as a nimble shapeshifter.

I've been making this point on CNN: Paramount is complicated. Left-wing claims about CBS turning into right-wing state TV don't reflect the full reality of what's airing on CBS. Let's put a pin in that and come back to it...

'Sweeping changes' promised? 

There are two Ellisons to talk about here: David and his father, Larry, one of the richest men in the world and a close ally of the president.

"The two are on the brink of overseeing an empire that touches nearly every corner of news, entertainment and tech," the NYT's John Koblin and Brooks Barnes wrote this morning, noting that Larry is deeply involved in the Trump-brokered deal that kept TikTok online in the US.

Last December, the NYT's Theodore Schleifer reported that "Trump has privately said Larry Ellison assured him that he would turn CBS News, which the Ellisons took over when they bought Paramount, into a more conservative outlet, two people with knowledge of the president’s comments said."

That same month, the WSJ's Joe Flint, Brian Schwartz and Natalie Andrews reported that "David Ellison offered assurances to Trump administration officials that if he bought Warner, he'd make sweeping changes to CNN, a common target of President Trump's ire, people familiar with the matter said."

Paramount has not commented on those anonymously sourced assertions.

"One part of the Paramount-Warners story that has been so underreported is the extent of the Trump White House's ties to the Ellisons," The Guardian's Hugo Lowell tweeted last night. He said "multiple very senior admin officials previously consulted for Oracle or the Ellisons and have been mounting a monumental effort behind the scenes."

So there's ample reason for skepticism and scrutiny right now. Trump's DOJ signaled that Netflix had a very steep hill to climb. Maybe an insurmountable one. Will Paramount really have a smoother path?

A new point of leverage?

Paramount's win is still sinking in. "This all happened very quickly," WBD CEO David Zaslav said on a company-wide town hall just now. He acknowledged the "whiplash-y" feeling and said it will take Paramount six months plus to close the deal. Remember, Paramount has a financial incentive to wrap this up before the "ticking fee" starts in October.

The outcome — a clear win for WBD shareholders — required many months of corporate strategy. Charlie Gasparino commented, "I remember in September of last year when David Zaslav said he thought he could get at least $30 a share for WBD in a bidding war and the whole media-Wall Street world scoffed. Well here we are at $31 a share."

During the town hall, Zaslav included the standard disclaimer that the Paramount deal "may not close" at all — though the conventional wisdom is that the Trump admin will wave it right through.

One thing's for sure: Democratic lawmakers clearly believe this mega-merger is an example of DOJ weaponization.

Sen. Chris Murphy tweeted just now, "Paramount should enjoy its growing news monopoly while they have it because when Democrats win back power we are going to break up these anti-democratic information conglomerates. All of them."

More urgently, Paramount will also have to win over European regulators — not to mention US state attorneys general. California AG Rob Bonta said last night that "we intend to be vigorous in our review." His office could file a lawsuit to block Paramount from moving forward.

 >> Thought bubble: Will Trump now see this pending deal as a point of leverage against CBS?

Here's why it is complicated

Now let me throw a few more ingredients in the proverbial pot. I said Paramount is politically complicated. In this new CNN.com story, I listed some of the reasons why.

The same company that cancelled Stephen Colbert's late-night show on CBS also renewed Jon Stewart's contract on Comedy Central and ordered more episodes of the Trump-skewering comedy "South Park."

The same CEO, David Ellison, who has forged a close relationship with Trump, previously donated $1 million to Joe Biden's reelection campaign.

And the same news boss, Weiss, who delayed a "60 Minutes" story that was critical of the Trump admin also greenlit the story for TV a few weeks later and expressed regret about the controversy.

Maybe most importantly, CBS News continues to break hard-hitting stories about the Trump administration and other topics. The Free Press does call out Trump's illiberalism. Last week, it decried FCC chair Brendan Carr as "Trump's chief censor."

"Judge us by the work," Ellison said on the day he took control of Paramount last August. That's a fair request and one that still applies today.

For folks inside and outside CNN who are curious about Ellison and Weiss, I'd recommend rereading his October letter to employees about why he acquired The Free Press, and her January town hall presentation to CBS News.

Also, take a look at what Paramount told investors earlier this week:

"At CBS News, the leadership team is focused on building 'one newsroom with one mission' — delivering exceptional journalism to the broadest possible audience. With trust in mainstream news and legacy media at historic lows, transformation is essential. The goal is to build a modern news organization equipped for the digital age and rooted in facts, rigorous reporting, and audience-first storytelling."

"As part of this revitalization, we are focused on expanding the range of stories covered and the voices amplified," the shareholder letter continued. "We are reimagining CBS News 24/7 with new formats and programming and by investing in key brands such as 60 Minutes, 48 Hours, and Sunday Morning through podcasts, newsletters, live journalism events, and more."

If you squint a little bit, it's easy to see CNN in the same sentences. CNN is taking many of the same steps, for example, by rolling out a streaming subscription service.

 >> Bottom line: As I remarked to Wolf Blitzer on air this morning, CNN is a highly profitable business, and it would be foolish to put that at risk.

 >> And what I should have said to Wolf, but didn't, is that we will continue to cover this ownership change thoroughly. Questions? Email the Reliable team here.

A union roadblock?

"Genuine question," a reader wrote me last night on Bluesky: "What happens when you own a company with two competing news brands? Do you just... shut one down?"

Great question. Paramount hasn't answered. A merger of CNN and CBS News has been contemplated for literally decades. Plans have been drawn up, talks have been held, but it's never materialized.

Now, of course, it is much closer to happening. But a tie-up may be impeded by the fact that the CBS News workforce is heavily unionized while CNN's is not. My take: The combo of the two storied news brands is both eminently logical — but potentially really hard to accomplish.

The Hollywood angle

"Less than a year ago, David Ellison was the head of a small production company" called Skydance. "Now, he's on the verge of becoming the king of Hollywood," CNN's David Goldman wrote overnight.

Ellison has never been shy about his ambitions — first vaulting Skydance into the big leagues with Paramount, and now likely gobbling up WBD as well. 

It's "the biggest leveraged buy-out in history," Claire Atkinson wrote in her Media Mix newsletter.

Zaslav observed this morning that WBD is about "five times the size" of Paramount.

Ellison, backed by his father's fortune and Middle Eastern financing partners, believes he can pull it off. A person in Ellison's camp credited his "clear vision" and "unrelenting pursuit" of WBD. 

But as this morning's THR headline — "David Ellison Wins. It Doesn't Yet Make Him a Winner" — suggests, the crown comes with enormous weight.

There will have to be cuts, consolidations, and more cuts to make the math work. "The fate of many jobs on the studio production side is a big question mark, both in film and TV," Variety's Michael Schneider and Cynthia Littleton wrote. "There's a general sense that 1+1 will still equal 1, as a combined Paramount/Warner Bros. will need to shed some of its production infrastructure, particularly in TV." 

Moments ago, THR's Pamela McClintock reported that the movie theater trade group Cinema United "will ask Capitol Hill lawmakers, the Justice Department and states to stop further consolidation of the contracting movie industry by blocking David Ellison's bold bid."

Did Netflix win by losing?

Some analysts say Netflix is walking away wounded after wasting months of energy promoting its ill-fated deal. On the other hand, as Sara Fischer wrote on X, "Netflix walked away from an expensive bidding war that wasn't prudent and in doing so, it conveniently leaves one competitor saddled with debt and two competitors burdened by a very long, distracting regulatory approval process."

Shareholders are clearly relieved; Netflix shares are up 10% in midday trading after being pummeled for months.

The Ringer's Sean Fennessey remarked that "Netflix may have just played the most successful game of chicken in the history of modern media. It lost the battle for Warner Brothers, but almost certainly won the long-term fight for primacy."

And Puck's Eriq Gardner offered some advice for Sarandos: "Take 10% of the $2.8B breakup fee — roughly $280 million — and go hire the best investigative journalists in the world. Build a next-gen 60 Minutes. A better CNN."

IN OTHER NEWS...

Savannah intends to return to the 'Today' show, someday

Savannah Guthrie intends to return to work at NBC's "Today" show at some point, two sources close to the network told me yesterday. When that might happen is highly uncertain, and completely up to Guthrie, given this month’s agonizing and all-consuming search for her mother Nancy.

But I hope word of Guthrie's intentions calms some of the speculation among viewers and TV news insiders about whether she will be back on air. For Guthrie, as hard as it might be to imagine resuming work, it might also be a comforting routine after the most unsettling chapter of her life...

 >> When asked about Guthrie’s status, an NBC source said "her ‘Today’ family will welcome her back with open arms on her timeline."

Layoffs at CNBC

"CNBC is cutting some newsroom jobs in a reorganization meant to unify its digital and TV news operations," impacting "fewer than a dozen roles," THR's Alex Weprin reports. Ultimately, however, CNBC "plans to ultimately hire more people to expand its TV and digital business," per Weprin.

Reuters' Dawn Chmielewski and Aditya Soni, who first reported on the looming cuts, said it was "part of an overhaul under Editor-in-Chief David Cho, as CNBC prepares to introduce a paywall on its website."

Briefly…

 >> Trump hasn't commented yet on the Paramount-WBD news, but he's posted multiple times this morning about alleged bias at Apple News. 

 >> Nexstar CEO Perry Sook "told Wall Street analysts that the company's executives 'appreciate the support' of President Trump of the pending $6.2 billion merger with Tegna," Dade Hayes reports. (Deadline)

 >> TKO president Mark Shapiro warned investors during an earnings call earlier this week "that the company is expecting to potentially lose $30 million on UFC's June event at the White House," Alex Welch reports. (TheWrap) 

 >> Next month, WaPo will launch a newsletter about the creator economy, helmed by reporter Dylan Wells on the beehiiv platform. Axios' Eleanor Hawkins writes that "the Post is the latest legacy media outlet to turn to Beehiiv as a way to expand reach and regain relevance by meeting readers in their inbox." (Axios)

COMING UP TODAY...

👀 All eyes on Anthropic

Yesterday, Anthropic announced it "cannot in good conscience accede" to Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon's demands to remove certain AI safeguards or risk losing a lucrative contract and being blacklisted, CNN's Hadas Gold reported.

And now "the clock is ticking down," Gold writes. Anthropic "has until 5:01 pm ET to give in to the Pentagon's demands or face being labeled a 'supply chain risk,' a type of designation usually reserved for companies thought to be extensions of foreign adversaries."

This edition of Reliable Sources was edited by Andrew Kirell and produced with Liam Reilly. Email us your feedback and tips here. We'll be back this weekend with more 😉