Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I just realized that the netflix ceo is a big-time democratic party donor, and that paramount is supposedly being supported by larry ellison (big-time republican/trump donor) and saudis? I'm sensing a strong political/influence angle here by the billionaires.




There's no "supposedly."

His kids are nepobabies that each run their own media company. His son is running Paramount, and his daughter has Annapurna.


[flagged]


russia doesnt have oligarchs for 15 years at least, it has the opposite of it. Oligarchs control the big chunks of economy, media and have a lot of political influence direct and indirect. What they have right now is some friends of the dictator who own something until dictator allows them.

The closest US has to olugarcha is Bezos and Musk, but they dont have each their own party and a few poket ministers in addition to owm bank and 20ish percent gdp.

US is still too big and rich for this shit


I think we are well into uncharted territory. One thing's for sure - here be dragons. I'm sure the US version of oligarchy will come in its unique flavor. Probably people won't even fall out of windows! That mode of "suicide" is maybe distinctly Russian.

I don't want to disappoint, but you won't get oligarchy. You will get dictatorship and war.

It makes sense actually. :-( The US might be "free" and federated enough to not just bow down to a dictator.

Larry Ellison is also a very public supporter of Israel and the IDF, as recently as a few months ago speaking in support of Israel’s actions in Gaza.

He’s the largest individual donor to the IDF.

Wait...individuals can donate to a country's army?

Sure! And in return Oracle gets sweet IDF contracts payed by the US gov.

>supposedly

My man, you don't have to mince words here. This hostile bid is backed by Jared Kushner, who is the President's son in law. One Rich Asshole owns Paramount, and is most certainly supporting the bid here.

This deal would also leave CNN in a very vulnerable position (they are owned by WB), which is exactly what Trump wants.


Strong ”I am the State” vibes.

Does seem to be the direction things are going. The admin picks the winners and losers, and of course the real winners are Trump, family and allies.

One thing that is remarkable is how fast American media companies are folding or getting scooped up by the oligarchs in order to bring the sacrificed carcass to the ruler. Even Putin did not have it this easy - took him years.

More than that, Trump said yesterday that Netflix's purchase of WB "might be problematic" and that he would be "personally involved in the decision of approving it".

He's trying to shakedown Netflix to pay fealty.


> More than that, Trump said yesterday that Netflix's purchase of WB "might be problematic"

Adding Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn815egjqjpo

> He's trying to shakedown Netflix to pay fealty.

I am not a supporter of most things this admin is doing, but also wouldn't be too sure on this one. I found it interestingly odd that out of nowhere he makes a comment on the deal after attending an event dealing with celebrating music and film. A regular shakedown would have happened before the deal when he met with the Netflix CEO recently, which the added link article mentions and was a person who Trump liked.

And now we see the Paramount thing that leads me to think it fits more with the suggestion that he takes the side of the last person he speaks with, which was probably someone at the same event on the paramount side.

I wouldn't rule out that he now plays them against each other in order to get something from it, but don't think it was the original reason for helping to throw a wrench into it


That is exactly what is going on. Everyone at WB management knows that the Ellisons want to weaponize CNN before the midterms runoffs start in spring.

Netflix isn't buying CNN though, Paramount can just pick up Discovery on the cheap when its split off. There's no reason for them to even be trying to do a hostile bid either. I think this is just purely an ego/power trip thing.

> the midterms runoffs

Do you mean primaries? Runoffs are a thing in some elections in the US, but not a thing that would start in spring for the congressional midterms.


Doesn't that imply that Netflix was planning to do the same (for their party)? Or are you saying Netflix is innocent here

No, it doesn't imply that. Saying party X plans to do something implies nothing about what party Y plans to do.

> Saying party X plans to do something

but that's not the whole thing being said.

Party X may have been planning on something, but party Y threw a wrench in the middle, causing party X to have to make some response. By implication, party X believes party Y to be throwing a wrench, hence, party X must act. Therefore, party Y also must be planning something that counteracts party X's desires. If it weren't so, party X would not act (as that costs money).


Didn't you know? It's only bad when the people I don't like are doing it.

Well Netflix hasn’t given Trump a $15 million bribe or any other politician yet.

his son-in-law is outbidding netflix so $15bn maybe would do it :)

Netflix and those involved hasn't conclusively metamorphosed into a Larry Ellison-esque state of Lawn Moweriness.

Make no mistake, it (Netflix) is still a billionaire corp; on the humanity scale, it scores quite low, but not lawn mower low. They're still outside the Ellison event horizon.


> it (Netflix) is still a billionaire corp

What does that mean?


The President's son-in-law is involved in the hostile bid through his private equity firm Affinity Partners. https://www.axios.com/2025/12/08/jared-kushner-paramount-war...



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: