先是埃隆·马斯克,现在是拉里·埃里森:世界首富们收购巨型媒体公司,有钱就是任性

先是埃隆·马斯克,现在是拉里·埃里森:世界首富们收购巨型媒体公司,有钱就是任性

2025-09-14Technology
--:--
--:--
马老师
小王早上好,我是马老师。现在是周日9月14号晚上10点36分,欢迎收听专为你打造的 Goose Pod。
雷总
我是雷总。今天我们来聊一个热门话题:先是埃隆·马斯克,现在是拉里·埃里森,世界首富们收购巨型媒体公司,真是有钱任性。
雷总
好,我们马上开始。朋友们,我们来看一下最新的一个大新闻。Skydance Media,就是那个拍《碟中谍》的公司,刚刚花了80亿美元收购了派拉蒙影业,这已经是个大动作了。
马老师
雷总,这个事情不简单。这背后是David Ellison,他老爸是Larry Ellison,Oracle的创始人,你懂的。这就像武林中的一场大并购,刚刚吞下一个门派,马上又盯上了另一个更大的——华纳兄弟探索公司。
雷总
没错。而且这个胃口非常大。对华纳的收购估值可能超过700亿美元!消息一出来,华纳的股价直接飙升了29%,市值冲到了400亿美元。这个体量,这个速度,不得了。
马老师
这就是'capital'的力量,power of money。这让我想起了马斯克收购Twitter,也是一样的路数,出价高到让对手无法跟进。我认为,这是顶级富豪们对媒体行业的'降维打击'。
雷总
其实,科技大佬收购媒体不是新鲜事。我记得2018年,Salesforce的创始人Marc Benioff就花了1.9亿美元收购了《时代》杂志。当时他说,是为了应对‘信任危机’,想做‘真实新闻的管家’。
马老师
这个'管家'的比喻很有意思。他们是想输出价值观。你看,从Benioff到Bezos收购《华盛顿邮报》,再到现在的Ellison,他们不缺钱,他们要的是话语权,是'narrative control',你懂的。这是更高层面的商业布局。
雷总
是的。整个行业都在整合。你看PPT,啊不,你看这个趋势:亚马逊花85亿美元买了MGM,拿下了007系列;谷歌早就收了YouTube;Facebook也收了Instagram。AT&T和华纳也是分分合合。大家都在拼规模,打造自己的内容生态。
马老师
这就是武林中的'门派兼并'。以前是百家争鸣,现在是几个超级大派一统江湖。他们不仅有武功秘籍,也就是内容IP,还有独门兵器,也就是技术平台,比如亚马逊的云服务,谷歌的算法。这让小门派怎么活?
雷总
而且现在AI是最大的变量。PwC的报告说,AI每天驱动超过10亿美元的投资。科技巨头掌握了AI和数据,他们进入媒体行业,就像是开了‘外挂’,对传统媒体的冲击是颠覆性的。这是技术驱动的必然结果。
马老师
但这里面有个很大的'conflict'。当媒体高度集中在少数人手里,问题就来了。现在美国90%的媒体内容被6家公司控制。这就像江湖被六大门派把持,他们说什么是'侠义',什么就是'侠义',别人没有发言权。
雷总
是的,这背后有1996年《电信法》的推波助澜。而且,这些媒体公司的董事会成员,很多人同时也在其他大公司任职。这就很尴尬了,报道自己董事的公司,能做到客观公正吗?很多调查记者都说,有些新闻因为可能损害公司利益,就没法报。
马老师
所以我们看到的是'illusion of choice',选择的幻觉。你以为有很多新闻台、报纸,但背后老板都是一家人。就像你逛庙会,看起来有很多小吃摊,其实都是一个老板开的连锁店,味道都一样。缺乏真正的'百家争鸣'。
雷总
这就引出一个问题:我们真的需要这些超级富豪吗?他们的成功是必然的,还是运气加持?如果通过税收限制这种财富顶端,会不会影响创新?这个争论一直都在,也没有标准答案。
雷总
影响非常直接。他们控制了平台,就控制了信息分发。通过算法,他们可以决定你看什么,不看什么。这直接塑造了公众舆论,这是民主的基石啊。这比直接捐款给政客的影响力大多了,而且更隐蔽。
马老师
没错,你看Bezos的《华盛顿邮报》,默多克的福克斯新闻,还有马斯克现在的X平台。这些媒体都带有强烈的'owner's imprint',老板的印记。他们可以为自己的商业帝国服务,也可以推广自己的意识形态。这已经不是简单的商业行为了。
雷总
最关键的是,媒体的使命是服务公众利益,但当它被个人或公司控制,就变成了服务于少数人的商业和意识形态利益。这是最让人担忧的,用户的信任会被慢慢消耗掉。
马老师
展望未来,我认为这种'大鱼吃小鱼'的趋势还会继续。Ellison这个局,如果要做成,不仅需要天文数字的资金,还需要强大的'political clout',也就是政治影响力,来摆平反垄断的审查。这盘棋很大。
雷总
是的,整个媒体行业都在寻求规模效应,为了在流媒体大战中生存下去。可以预见,未来我们看到的媒体巨头会越来越少,但体量会越来越大,竞争会更加激烈。对用户来说,选择可能更多,也可能更少。
马老师
今天讨论就到这里。感谢收听Goose Pod。
雷总
我们明天再见。

## Summary of News: Richest Men Buying Media Giants - A Parallel Between Elon Musk and Larry Ellison **News Title:** First Elon Musk, now Larry Ellison: The world’s richest men are buying huge media companies — because they can **Report Provider:** Business Insider **Author:** Peter Kafka **Date/Time Period Covered:** The article references events in 2022 (Elon Musk's Twitter acquisition) and discusses current contemplation by Larry Ellison regarding Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) and a recent acquisition of Paramount. The publication date is September 12, 2025. **Key News Identifiers:** * **Topic:** Technology, Media, AI (implied by the context of tech billionaires' influence) * **Keywords:** Tech, Twitter, Elon Musk, TV, Hollywood, Regulation, Donald Trump --- ### Main Findings and Conclusions: The news article draws a striking parallel between Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter in 2022 and Larry Ellison's current contemplation of acquiring Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), following his son David's recent purchase of Paramount. The central theme is that the world's wealthiest individuals are increasingly leveraging their immense financial power to acquire influential media assets, often with little apparent regard for traditional business concerns or market sentiment. The article suggests that the Ellisons' pursuit of WBD is not a direct replica of the Musk/Twitter situation but shares significant parallels, particularly in the apparent lack of significant competition due to their financial capacity. ### Key Statistics and Metrics: * **Elon Musk's Wealth:** * Estimated to be around **$200 billion** when he bought Twitter three years ago (from the article's publication date of 2025, this would be around 2022). * Estimated to be around **$385 billion** currently (as of September 2025). * **WBD Price Increase:** WBD's price has reportedly **shot up by $10 billion** in the last day since news of the planned bid broke. * **David Ellison's Donation:** Supported Joe Biden with a **million-dollar donation** in the last election (presumably the 2024 election, given the article's publication date). ### Important Recommendations: The article doesn't offer explicit recommendations but implicitly highlights the lack of public or investor agency in these high-stakes acquisitions. It suggests that the public has "not much say in it" when billionaires decide to purchase major media companies. ### Significant Trends or Changes: * **Concentration of Media Ownership:** A growing trend of ultra-wealthy individuals acquiring influential media companies, potentially consolidating control over information dissemination. * **Financial Power Over Market Dynamics:** The ability of billionaires to bypass traditional financial hurdles (like shareholder approval or market valuation concerns) due to their personal wealth. * **Shifting Media Landscape:** The potential for these acquisitions to drastically alter the direction and operation of major media entities like HBO, CNN, Warner Bros. studios, and Paramount. ### Notable Risks or Concerns: * **Erratic Management:** The article points to Elon Musk's transformation of Twitter into a "personal messaging service, run according to his erratic whims" as a potential risk for WBD under Ellison ownership. * **Financial Viability:** While Musk claims Twitter is worth what he paid, the article notes it has been a "financial disaster" as an operating company. The financial implications for WBD under new ownership remain uncertain. * **Ideological Influence:** While Musk had a clear ideological agenda for Twitter, the Ellisons' plans for WBD are unclear, with David Ellison having a mixed political donation history. This raises questions about the editorial independence and future direction of news outlets like CNN and CBS News. * **Regulatory Approval:** While Larry Ellison's backing of Donald Trump might facilitate regulatory approval, the article notes this is a factor. ### Material Financial Data: * **Larry Ellison's Wealth:** Described as the "world's second-richest man," indicating immense financial resources. * **David Ellison's Acquisition of Paramount:** This acquisition has already occurred, with Larry Ellison now backing his son's potential bid for WBD. * **WBD Acquisition:** The Ellisons are contemplating buying Warner Bros. Discovery. The article notes that the price of WBD has increased by $10 billion following the news of their interest. * **Musk's Twitter Acquisition:** Purchased in 2022 for an undisclosed sum, but the article implies it was a significant financial undertaking for Musk, despite his wealth. --- ### Interpretation and Context: The core of this news piece is the comparison between two instances of billionaires making massive media acquisitions. * **Elon Musk and Twitter:** Musk's purchase of Twitter is presented as a case study of a wealthy individual acquiring a platform and reshaping it according to personal vision, regardless of financial performance or user sentiment. The article highlights his immense wealth growth even after the acquisition and the platform's continued, albeit controversial, influence. The "asterisks" on Musk's claim of Twitter's current worth suggest skepticism about its financial recovery. * **Larry Ellison and Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD):** The article posits that Larry Ellison, through his son David, is poised to replicate Musk's move by acquiring WBD. The key takeaway is that the Ellisons' financial power is so substantial that they can effectively overcome any potential rivals or financial concerns that would typically hinder such a large acquisition. The $10 billion price surge in WBD is framed not as a deterrent but as a potential mechanism to further discourage other bidders, a tactic reminiscent of Musk's approach. * **Political Connections:** The article touches upon the political leanings of both billionaires. Larry Ellison's Republican ties and support for Donald Trump are noted as potentially easing regulatory hurdles. David Ellison's past Democratic donations and his insistence on being an "apolitical owner" add a layer of complexity to the potential political implications of their media ownership. * **Uncertainty of Future Plans:** A significant point of speculation is what the Ellisons intend to do with WBD. Unlike Musk, who had stated intentions for Twitter, the Ellisons' plans for WBD are unknown, leaving open questions about the future of its various assets, including HBO, CNN, and the Warner Bros. studio. The fact that they are bidding for the entire company, which was already planned to be split, suggests potential restructuring or divestment. In essence, the article argues that the era of billionaires buying and reshaping major media companies is upon us, driven by sheer financial capacity rather than traditional market forces, and the implications for the media landscape are significant and largely unpredictable.

First Elon Musk, now Larry Ellison: The world’s richest men are buying huge media companies — because they can

Read original at Business Insider

Chief Correspondent covering media and technology Larry Ellison is one of the world's richest men, so he can buy anything he wants, like a media company or two. That's what Elon Musk did with Twitter. Anna Moneymaker; Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images When you're one of the world's richest men, you can afford to buy anything you want.

Like a media giant. That's what Elon Musk did in 2022. And it's what Larry Ellison is contemplating now, by backing his son David's adventures in Hollywood. We don't know what the Ellisons owning Warner Bros. Discovery as well as Paramount would actually mean. But that scenario is theirs if they want it.

One of the world's richest men wants to buy one of the world's most influential media assets. It's unlikely anyone will stand in his way.Does this sound familiar?Yup: That's Larry Ellison, financing his son David's plan to buy Warner Bros. Discovery — the company that owns HBO, CNN, and the Warner Bros movie studio — weeks after buying Paramount.

And yup: That was also Elon Musk in 2022, buying what we used to call Twitter.You know how the Twitter story panned out: Musk made an offer for the service, no rivals showed up, and he quickly had a deal. Once he owned it, he turned Twitter into his own personal messaging service, run according to his erratic whims.

Twitter has been a financial disaster (as an operating company, that is — Musk now says Twitter is worth what he originally paid for it, but that claim comes with lots of asterisks), but that's immaterial for Musk. He was worth around $200 billion when he bought Twitter three years ago; today that number is something like $385 billion.

And despite the fact that many of Twitter's most high-profile users have bailed on the platform since Musk took over, it remains a crucial information source, for better and for worse. The Ellisons' pursuit of WBD, first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Thursday, isn't a full replica of Musk/Twitter.

But there are some parallels. Most striking is that it's hard to see anyone else walking away with WBD now that the Ellisons have raised their hands.Unlike would-be competitors like Comcast or Disney, the Ellisons don't need to worry about where the money comes from, or whether their shareholders like the deal.

That's because Larry Ellison is the world's second-richest man — and while Paramount is publicly traded, the Ellisons have effective control of the company, insulating them from investor concerns.And the fact that WBD's price has shot up by $10 billion in the last day, since news of the planned bid broke, isn't a problem for the Ellisons.

If anything, it helps limit any rival bids from the jump.That echoes Musk's "best and final" offer for Twitter, pricing it way higher than the market had. Any normal person would have a difficult time convincing investors that it was a good idea — but for Musk, it was a non-issue. The same for the Ellisons.

If they think it's worth overpaying for a company investors have largely given up on, who's going to tell them they're wrong?Another Musk parallel: Larry Ellison is also a Donald Trump backer — except that unlike Musk, he has stayed in Trump's good graces. That certainly makes it more likely that the deal gets any regulatory approval it would need.

We're not sure what the Ellisons' plans would beOne meaningful difference between Musk and the Ellisons is that in 2022, Musk was already talking about turning Twitter into something else, away from the "woke mind virus" he said it had infected it. He showed up with an ideological program he wanted to implement.

There's no obvious echo here. Larry Ellison is a longtime Republican — a rarity in tech circles — but David Ellison has been a Democratic donor, and supported Joe Biden with a million-dollar donation in last year's election. And while David Ellison has gone through lots of hoops to placate the Trump administration while getting the Paramount deal approved, he insists he is now an apolitical owner.

How would all of that affect the way the Ellison ran a combined Paramount/WBD?We have no idea. Despite the news media's (appropriate) focus on the future of CBS News under Ellison, that's a speculative exercise for now — just like wondering what would happen to CNN if the WBD deal goes through. The fact that the Ellisons are bidding for all of WBD — which was already slated to get split in half — doesn't mean they won't sell or spin out some of those assets once they have them.

But what we do know is striking enough. We've already seen one of the world's richest men snap up one of the world's most important media companies, more or less because he could. Now we're bracing for a repeat. We don't know how this one will play out. But we don't have much say in it, either. Tech Twitter Elon Musk More TV Hollywood Regulation Donald Trump Read next

Analysis

Conflict+
Related Info+
Core Event+
Background+
Impact+
Future+

Related Podcasts