Chances are high that by now you’ve gotten examine Paramount’s effort to purchase Warner Bros. Discovery. However what you possible have missed is the lawsuit filed by twelve state attorneys normal in federal court docket to dam the sale — and particularly, how that swimsuit infringes on First Modification protections for freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
I need to make my pursuits on this case clear. For the previous yr, I’ve been a senior adviser at RedBird Capital, a personal fairness firm with a big stake in Paramount and within the acquisition of WBD. However extra vital, I spent 55 years as a reporter — beginning in newspapers, then nearly three many years working at two of the key broadcast networks, and ending with 21 years in cable information.
What — it’s possible you’ll be asking — does the AGs’ antitrust lawsuit need to do with the First Modification? That’s exactly the query I need to deal with. If you happen to learn the lawsuit, it alleges the merger would hurt competitors in three narrowly-defined markets: wide-release theatrical movies, anticipated “top-grossing” theatrical movies, and affiliate charges from cable tv distributors.
There isn’t a point out of antitrust violations from the potential merger of CBS Information — which Paramount now owns — and CNN, which is a part of WBD. And there’s a good motive for that. The AGs’ lawsuit is predicated on California’s Cartwright Act, that state’s model of federal antitrust legislation. And what does the Cartwright Act say in regards to the merger of reports operations and the risk to information variety? Completely nothing.
Maybe, you assume, this can be a typical antitrust case — and any doable affect on blocking the mixture of CBS Information and CNN is an unintended, if fascinating, consequence. However that’s the place this actually will get fascinating. As a result of a few of the prime movers behind the lawsuit have mentioned the quiet half out loud.
In an interview on July 14, California Legal professional Basic Rob Bonta mentioned he was “very involved” about what’s occurred at CBS Information. And he expressed concern that “what’s occurring at CBS may very well be a part of an try and curry favor with the president who may need one thing just like occur at CNN.”
That very same day, in a streamed city corridor, one of many different state attorneys normal, Letitia James of New York, mentioned this: “We now have to dam this merger to make sure variety of opinions, variety of viewpoints, so we are able to have a strong viewpoint of the world.”
That concern about variety might need made sense within the Reagan period 40 years in the past, when there have been three main tv networks and CNN. However in at this time’s media market, it’s utter nonsense. Within the second quarter of this yr, CNN averaged 711,000 viewers in primetime. The CBS Night Information averaged 3.9 million viewers. That’s a mixed viewers of 4.6 million viewers on a given night — or 1.7 p.c of the adults on this nation. And that’s in a information market of broadcast, cable, streaming, podcasts, YouTube, TikTok, Substack, and on and on. There could also be plenty of issues with the information media in our nation, however variety of viewpoint is just not one in all them.
So, what’s the lawsuit actually about? The host of that city corridor was Norm Eisen, who was a co-counsel within the first impeachment of President Trump and now heads a corporation known as Democracy Defenders Motion. And for anybody nonetheless questioning, he gave away the sport. He celebrated the court docket’s momentary restraining order blocking the merger by going after the Ellison household — David and Larry — who maintain the bulk stake in Paramount. He mentioned, “The Ellisons believed their relationship with President Trump would assist them push by a disastrous deal that threatened democracy, artistic freedom, and impartial journalism.” Forgive me for doubting that Eisen’s advocacy for this case is animated by his concern about guaranteeing theatrical home windows for brand spanking new releases.
Now look, there may be nothing flawed with opposing the Ellisons or disapproving of adjustments over this previous yr at CBS Information. However for those who assume it’s flawed for the Trump Justice Division to make use of authorized weaponization for political functions, it’s simply as indefensible for a dozen Democratic AG’s to do the identical factor. And that’s what’s going on right here. Actually, there are stories that a few of the plaintiffs within the lawsuit have recommended any settlement must embody Paramount divesting CNN from the merged firm.
Over my 55 years within the information enterprise, I’ve constructed a repute for being truthful, for enjoying it straight. Right here’s some straight discuss. I’ve issues with a few of the journalism at CBS Information. Simply as I had issues with a few of the journalism at Fox and CNN once I labored at each of these information operations. However I don’t imagine authorities — both on the federal or state stage, whether or not it’s managed by Republicans or Democrats — ought to use its powers to find out who owns a information platform or to manage how that outlet stories the information. If you happen to don’t like protection on a community, change the channel. If you happen to don’t like what you learn in a newspaper, cancel your subscription.
However when state attorneys normal deliver an antitrust lawsuit largely to get round First Modification protections, that’s deeply troubling. It turns into a backdoor manner for politicians to resolve which media proprietor — and what sort of journalism — is suitable. Then the case is just not about defending free speech, however as a substitute about implementing accredited speech.
Chris Wallace is a senior advisor at RedBird Capital Companions. He has served as an anchor on NBC, ABC, Fox Information and CNN.
