Media Nation

Saudis and Kushner and Trump, oh my: Why it matters that CNN stay out of Paramount’s clutches

CNN: Can’t live with it. Can’t live without it.

I like to say that friends don’t let friends watch cable news. I rarely watch any of the prime-time talk shows on cable — certainly not Fox, but not MS NOW or CNN, either. They all rely on the same formula, which I’d describe as keeping you enraged and upset so that you don’t touch that dial.

On the other hand, I will tune in to CNN when there’s significant breaking news. And I think it’s vitally important that we have news organizations that aren’t totally in thrall to the Trump regime, which is why I’m glad that CNN and MS NOW are there even if I don’t watch them very often.

Sign up for free email delivery of Media Nation. You can also become a supporter for just $6 a month and receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content.

So I was relieved at the recent announcement that Warner Bros. Discovery would sell itself to Netflix, even though that left the fate of CNN uncertain. And I was horrified when the Trump-friendly Ellison family, the new owners of Paramount, decided to launch a hostile takeover attempt after losing the initial sweepstakes.

How bad is this? Let us count the ways.

► Paramount recently acquired CBS News, and its head, conservative opinion journalist Bari Weiss, is lined up to run CNN as well should the Ellison bid prevail. Not only does that raise ideological concerns, but it also would likely lead to major job cuts as the two operations are consolidated.

► After CBS News’ “60 Minutes” broadcast an interview in which ex-MAGA congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene criticized Trump, Paramount executives all but apologized to Trump, reports Charles Gasparino of the New York Post.

► Investors in the Paramount bid include the Saudi, Qatari and United Arab Emirates sovereign wealth funds. As Oliver Darcy of Status News observes, “Most startlingly, Saudi Arabia, which ordered the brutal killing of American journalist Jamal Khashoggi just a few short years ago, would effectively own a slice of one of the world’s leading newsrooms, if Ellison should get his way.

► Another investor in the Paramount quest is Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, by way of his private equity firm, Affinity Partners. Dan Primack writes at Axios, “Paramount is telling WBD shareholders that it has a smoother path to regulatory approval than does Netflix, and Kushner’s involvement only strengthens that case.”

► Trump himself has been lashing out at CNN this week, pushing for a sale and saying he might get involved in any antitrust proceedings over whether the sale of WBD to Netflix would be legal or not, reports NPR’s David Folkenflik. It goes without saying that a sale to Paramount would be just as problematic, but we all know that Trump will use antitrust law to reward his friends and punish his enemies.

We should not be in the position of having to root for Netflix to win the WBD sweepstakes. Giant media monopolies are bad for the economy and bad for democracy. In this case, though, a sale to Netflix would at least give CNN a fighting chance of remaining an independent monitor of power — rather than yet another news outlet that’s sold its soul to the forces of authoritarianism.

The Globe’s paid digital circulation has stopped growing, according to newly revealed numbers

Boston Globe Media CEO Linda Henry shared some numbers, forwarded to me by a trusted source, when she addressed the staff at a town hall-style meeting earlier this week. Probably her most newsworthy revelation was that the Globe’s paid digital circulation is now 260,500 — essentially unchanged from the fall of 2024, when it was 261,000.

Sign up for free email delivery of Media Nation. You can also become a supporter for just $6 a month and receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content.

In October 2023, paid digital was 245,000, which means that it grew by 6.5% over the next year before stalling out. Given that digital growth has been the key to the Globe’s growth in recent years, the company’s executives need to figure out how to get back on an upward trajectory.

I’d suggest some improvements in the user experience. Newspaper homepages tend to be a jumble, but the Globe’s is busier than most. I also hear complaints on occasion from subscribers who have trouble logging on. And, to drag out one of my favorite laments, providing subscribers with a few gift links each month that they can share on social media might entice some occasional visitors into handing over their credit-card information. (As I recently noted, you can already email gift links to non-subscribers.)

Digging deeper, the Globe has boosted circulation by rolling out digital editions in Rhode Island and New Hampshire in recent years. What other areas might they target? The Worcester area (an ironic choice given that John and Linda Henry briefly owned the Telegram & Gazette after buying the Globe in 2013) and Western Massachusetts would make some sense. Its recent decision to bolster high school sports coverage was a smart one, too.

In other news from the town hall, Linda Henry said that average paid print circulation is 66,086. I wish I had more context for that number, but I don’t. In October, the Globe reported in its legally required postal statement that paid print averaged 51,626 on weekdays and 89,809 on Sundays. The Globe also recently reported to the Alliance for Audited Media that its average weekday circulation for the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2025, was 44,835 on weekdays and 79,742 on Sundays.

What to make of these differences? Circulation numbers are a dark art, and they can vary quite a bit depending on the reporting requirements of whoever it is you’re providing numbers to. Globe Media spokeswoman Carla Kath told me by email:

The print subscriber number shared today is a point in time snapshot of our home delivery subscribers, regardless of delivery frequency. The AAM numbers are averages over a six month period. However, the bigger reason for the difference is that the numbers shared today are home delivery subscribers only and don’t include newsstand sales. The AAM numbers are circulation figures that do include newsstand sales.

Let me suggest another possibility: perhaps 66,086 is a seven-day average that includes the larger Sunday figure.

Stat, Globe Media’s digital publication covering health and medicine, now has 50,337 paid subscribers, Henry told the staff. And she said that total subscribers (paid and unpaid) across all Globe Media publications is 411,857. Kath told me that comprises the Globe digital and print, Boston magazine, Boston.com, The B-Side newsletter and Stat.

For some context, Henry announced several years ago that her long-term “North Star” goal for paid digital circulation was 500,000 — 400,000 for the Globe and 100,000 for Stat. At the moment, the combined number for those two outlets is just shy of 311,000, but that was before Globe Media added Boston magazine, a paid product, and unveiled a paywall for Boston.com.

By the way, the Boston Herald has not reported numbers to the Alliance for Audited Media since this past spring, when it said that its weekday average paid print circulation was 10,902; the Sunday average was 13,454. Paid digital was a bit north of 41,000.

Chris Fitzsimon tells us how States Newsroom has built a nationwide statehouse news network

*Photo (cc) by Rebecca Rivas / Missouri Independent, part of the States Newsroom network.*

On the latest “What Works” podcast, Ellen Clegg and I talk with Chris Fitzsimon, publisher and CEO of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest nonprofit news organization covering state government. Chris is also the host of a new podcast called “Stories from The States.” Recent topics on the pod include the impact of Medicaid cuts, ICE detention and redistricting.

States Newsroom has a presence in all 50 states, with its own news organizations in 39 states and partnerships with existing nonprofits in the other 11. In Massachusetts, States Newsroom partners with CommonWealth Beacon. (Disclosure: I’m a member of CommonWealth’s editorial advisory board.) The project also has a bureau in Washington, D.C. States Newsroom publishes its journalism under a Creative Commons license, which means that it is free to republish as long as proper credit is given.

Chris Fitzsimon

Fitzsimon knows his way around state politics. From 2004 to 2017, he directed a team of seven journalists at NC Policy Watch, which he founded. He also hosted a weekly radio show and wrote a syndicated column on North Carolina politics and government. From 1991 to 1994, he was the spokesperson, speechwriter and policy adviser for the North Carolina speaker of the house. Before that, he was a television news reporter covering politics and government.

I’ve got a Quick Take about The Salt Lake Tribune in Utah. In 2019, the Tribune became the first legacy daily newspaper to become a nonprofit. Unlike a few notable hybrids like The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Tampa Bay Times, which are for-profit papers owned by nonprofit foundations, the Salt Lake paper is a true nonprofit, just like your local public television or radio station. And the Tribune has been so successful that it recently announced it plans to drop its paywall.

Ellen’s Quick Take is on an investigation by Spotlight PA into the director of the Penn State Cancer Institute. The news outlet, which is a nonprofit that provides reporting to more than 90 outlets throughout Pennsylvania, uncovered damaging clinical practices and a toxic work environment. After the story ran last month, the director resigned.

You can listen to our conversation here, or you can subscribe through your favorite podcast app.

A right-wing influencer smears CNN; plus, murder on the high seas, and an immigration outrage

*The Pentagon. Photo (cc) by Wiyre Media.*

On the latest edition of the public radio program “On the Media,” co-host Micah Loewinger engages in a wonderfully contentious interview with right-wing influencer Cam Higby, a newly minted member of the Pentagon press corps. Higby is among a gaggle of MAGA promoters who’ve moved in after actual reporters walked out rather than sign Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s directive that they agree not to report any unauthorized news.

Continue reading “A right-wing influencer smears CNN; plus, murder on the high seas, and an immigration outrage”

My new supporters newsletter is now up. Please join today!

An artist’s rendition of Onesimus, the father of modern vaccination.

Why an 18th-century slave and a witch-hunting minister knew more about vaccinations than RFK Jr. Plus photography, a roundup of the week’s posts and a tribute to the late, great Steve Cropper. It’s all in my supporters newsletter. Please sign up today for $6 a month!

In a lawsuit against Meta, the state’s highest court will rule on the limits of Section 230

Attorney General Andrea Campbell. Photo (cc) 2022 by Dan Kennedy.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 protects website owners from liability over third-party content. The classic example would be an anonymous commenter who libels someone. The offended party would be able to sue the commenter but not the publishing platform, although the platform might be required to turn over information that would help identify the commenter.

Sign up for free email delivery of Media Nation. You can also become a supporter for just $6 a month and receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content.

But where is the line between passively hosting third-party content and activity promoting certain types of material in order to boost engagement and, thus, profitability? That question will go before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Friday, reports Jennifer Smith of CommonWealth Beacon.

At issue is a lawsuit brought against Meta by 42 state attorneys general, including Andrea Campbell of Massachusetts. Meta operates Facebook, Instagram, Threads and other social media platforms, and it has long been criticized for using algorithms and other tactics that keep users hooked on content that, in some cases, provokes anger and depression, even suicide. Smith writes:

The Massachusetts complaint alleges that Meta violated state consumer protection law and created a public nuisance by deliberately designing Instagram with features like infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and “like” buttons to addict young users, then falsely represented the platform’s safety to the public. The company has also been reckless with age verification, the AG argues, and allowed children under 13 years old to access its content.

Meta and its allies counter that Section 230 protects not just the third-party content they host but also how Facebook et al. display that content to its users.

In an accompanying opinion piece, attorney Megan Iorio of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, computer scientist Laura Edelson of Northeastern University and policy analyst Yaël Eisenstat of Cybersecurity for Democracy argue that Section 230 was not designed to protect website operators from putting their thumbs on the scales to favor one type of third-party content over another. As they put it in describing the amicus brief they have filed:

Our brief explains how the platform features at the heart of the Commonwealth’s case — things like infinite scroll, autoplay, the timing and batching of push notifications, and other tactics borrowed from the gambling industry — have nothing to do with content moderation; they are designed to elicit a behavior on the part of the user that furthers the company’s own business goals.

As Smith makes clear, this is a long and complex legal action, and the SJC is being asked to rule only on the narrow question of whether Campbell can move ahead with the lawsuit to which she has lent the state’s support. (Double disclosure: I am a member of CommonWealth Beacon’s editorial advisory aboard as well as a fellow Northeastern professor.)

I’ve long argued (as I did in this GBH News commentary from 2020) that, just as a matter of logic, favoring some types of content over others is a publishing activity that goes beyond the mere passive hosting of third-party content, and thus website operators should be liable for whatever harm those decisions create. That argument has not found much support in the courts, however. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Don’t fall for shifting media narratives about Hegseth’s responsibility or the Nuzzi-Lizza mess

*Pete Hegseth x 4. Photo (cc) 2021 by Gage Skidmore.*

Beware the narrative shift. Two stories that have become media obsessions are slowly being recast. One is deadly serious; the other is ridiculous, although it nevertheless says a lot about journalism ethics.

Sign up for free email delivery of Media Nation. You can also become a supporter for just $6 a month and receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content.

First, the deadly serious story. We are beginning to see the emergence of a narrative that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is in the clear, more or less, as long as he can show that he didn’t order a second attack on that boat in the Caribbean in order to kill two wounded crew members.

Continue reading “Don’t fall for shifting media narratives about Hegseth’s responsibility or the Nuzzi-Lizza mess”

Why polling averages may not capture the depths of Trump’s growing unpopularity

*The New York Times average of Trump polls.*

For most of his first term and now his second, Donald Trump has been deeply unpopular. Both The New York Times and polling analyst Nate Silver track his approval/disapproval ratings based on an average of polls.

As of Monday, Trump was at 55% disapprove/41% approve using the Times’ methodology. Silver has him at a nearly identical 55.4% disapproval/41% approval. There are others who do the same thing, but the Times and Silver may be the best known.

Sign up for free email delivery of Media Nation. You can also become a supporter for just $6 a month and receive a weekly newsletter with exclusive content.

Yet despite everything, Trump’s numbers don’t move as much as you might think they would given the corrupt and chaotic nature of his presidency. Indeed, on Monday, Trump’s disapproval rating actually nudged down by a statistically insignificant amount, from 56% to 55%. And no matter what, a rock-solid minority of just over 40% sticks with him. How could this be?

This morning I’d like to suggest one possible explanation. I’m not a polling expert, but this is obvious and starting us right in the face. The Times’ average is based on a number of polls, some of which it regards as highly reliable, some of which it doesn’t. And, for the most part, Trump is doing considerably worse when measured solely by highly reliable polls.

For instance, the most recent Gallup poll shows Trump at minus 24, with 60% disapproving of his job performance and just 36% approving. The American Research Group has him at minus 27, with 62% approval/35% disapproval. Beacon Research/Shaw and Co. reports that Trump is at minus 17, Ipsos at minus 22.

Now, as I said, the Times showed Trump’s disapproval rating ticked down slightly on Monday. And when you look at the chart, you see that it’s because a poll from TIPP Insights was added to the mix. TIPP, which does not meet the Times’ criteria for reliability, had Trump at just minus 4, based on 43% approval/47% disapproval.

Some of the less reliable polls, especially YouGov, do show Trump with a disapproval gap as wide as the reliable polls. But when you scan down the list, you see a number of less reliable polls showing that Trump’s disapproval rating is on the narrow side — Morning Consult (minus 7), InsiderAdvantage (minus 5), Big Data Poll (minus 5) and RMG Research (minus 7).

As I said, I’m not a polling expert, and it’s likely that the Times has weighted the reliable polls more heavily than the more dubious surveys. But Gallup, in particular, has been the gold standard for generations, and maybe we ought to take them more seriously than an index that includes both the good and the bad.

Why does it matter? Because if Trump is losing support, then the likelihood increases that House and Senate Republicans will be willing to stand up to him at least occasionally. Until recently, the Republicans have been utterly craven, cheering enthusiastically for Trump’s every incoherent pronouncement.

But now we’re starting to see a little movement. Marjorie Taylor Greene is one sign. Another is that Senate Armed Services Committee chair Roger Wicker the other day actually referred to Pete Hegseth as the “secretary of defense” rather than his cosplay role as the “secretary of war.”

Hegseth posts demented tweet following charges that he ordered the killings of two injured men

In case you haven’t seen it yet, Pete Hegseth, our seriously deranged secretary of defense, posted this on Twitter Sunday night. As of this moment, it’s still up.

The Washington Post reported on Friday that, back in September, Hegseth ordered that two injured men clinging to a boat in the Caribbean that U.S. forces had just blown apart be killed in a second attack. Experts have already said that Hegseth could be charged with murder, war crimes or both.

As you might expect, Hegseth’s shockingly demented tweet is inspiring a host of memes. Here’s one:

Donald Trump has denied that Hegseth ordered the killings, but we’re starting to see the first stirrings of Republicans Congress demanding accountability. We’ll see how far that goes.

A New York Times gift-link bacchanalia, from the hazards of AI to an aging Trump to chatty cats

OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman. Photo (cc) 2019 by TechCrunch.

Here we go again. It’s the last day of the month, and I haven’t shared all of my gift links to The New York Times. Use ’em or lose ’em. These should continue to work for some time to come; what matters is when I post them, not when you access them. So here we go.

Continue reading “A New York Times gift-link bacchanalia, from the hazards of AI to an aging Trump to chatty cats”