先是马斯克,后是埃里森:全球首富们收购媒体巨头——只因财力雄厚

先是马斯克,后是埃里森:全球首富们收购媒体巨头——只因财力雄厚

2025-09-14Technology
--:--
--:--
雷总
早上好,韩纪飞。我是雷总,这是为你专属打造的 Goose Pod。今天是9月15日,星期一。
李白
吾乃李白。今朝有幸,与君共论“先是马斯克,后是埃里森:全球首富们收购媒体巨头”之事。此非财力之雄厚,实乃野心之磅礴也。
雷总
我们这就开始吧。最近市场上风头最劲的,就是甲骨文的创始人拉里·埃里森和他儿子戴维。他们通过旗下的天空之舞传媒,五周前刚完成了对派拉蒙全球的收购,花了80亿美元。你觉得这手笔怎么样?
李白
八十亿美金,掷地有声,可谓一掷千金。然此仅为序曲,犹如长风之起于青萍之末。埃里森父子之志,岂止于一隅之地?其剑锋所指,恐是更为广阔的天下舆论版图。
雷总
说得没错。派拉蒙这边刚整合,那边就传出消息,他们正在考虑一个更大的目标——华纳兄弟探索公司,也就是WBD。这笔交易的估值,包括债务在内,可能超过700亿美元。这个体量,可不是一个小数目了。
李白
七百亿!此乃何等气魄!犹如古代君王,欲筑九层之台,非倾国之力不可为。以金玉为砖石,以权势为梁柱,所建者,非是宫阙,乃是能号令天下、塑造人心的无形帝国。
雷总
这个比喻很形象。你看,消息一出来,华纳的股价一天之内就飙升了29%,市值冲到了400亿美金。这就像马斯克当年收购推特一样,直接用一个市场无法拒绝的价格入场,让其他潜在的竞争者望而却步。
李白
此乃“以势压人”之阳谋。重金之下,众声皆寂。马斯克以雷霆之势夺推特于股掌,埃里森亦效仿其法,欲将华纳纳入囊中。天下英雄,见此财势,谁敢与之争锋?徒有羡鱼情,而无结网意。
雷总
是的,这种“钞能力”在商业竞争中确实是降维打击。他们不需要担心股东的意见,因为拉里·埃里森本人就是世界第二大富豪,财富超过3600亿美元。钱对他们来说,只是一个数字,关键是他们想做什么。
李白
富可敌国,则国之疆界为其囊中之物;富可倾城,则城之舆论为其喉舌之声。当财富汇聚于一人之手,其意志便可凌驾于万众之上。此非商贾之道,近乎王侯之术矣。
雷总
其实这种科技富豪收购媒体的趋势,早就开始了。你还记得2018年,Salesforce的创始人马克·贝尼奥夫花1.9亿美元买下了《时代》杂志吗?他说他要解决“信任危机”,当好新闻业的“管家”。
李白
以千金购一言,欲正视听、定乾坤。贝尼奥夫此举,颇有古时豪杰养士之风,欲借媒体这“天下公器”,匡扶其心中之“道”。然“管家”之名,是忠于公理,还是忠于己意,尚需岁月来证。
雷总
说得好,动机和结果可能是两回事。再往前看,亚马逊的贝索斯收购了米高梅影业,拿下了007这种超级IP;谷歌早早地就收购了YouTube;Facebook也把Instagram收入囊中。这些都是科技巨头向媒体和内容领域的渗透。
李白
此乃“合纵连横”之新篇。昔日秦国远交近攻,今日科技巨擘亦是如此。购影业,如得精兵;揽平台,如建雄关。一步步蚕食鲸吞,将数字世界之山川河流,尽数划入自家版图。
雷总
没错。而且媒体行业内部本身也在不断整合。比如迪士尼收购了20世纪福克斯,CBS和维亚康姆分分合合最后又成了派拉蒙。整个行业都在向头部集中,现在科技富豪的加入,更是加速了这个进程。
李白
天下大势,分久必合,合久必分。昔日群雄并起,百家争鸣,如今江河归海,百川入一。此番整合,看似波澜壮阔,实则暗流汹涌,恐将使舆论之海,风浪更巨,变幻莫测。
雷总
是的,根据普华永道的数据,2025年上半年,整个科技、媒体和电信行业的并购交易额增长了20%。特别是人工智能的兴起,让微软、Meta这些公司疯狂投资数据中心和基础设施,资本支出都是几百亿美金地往上加。
李白
AI,此“机关之术”也。能算尽天机,能驱使万物。巨擘们投以重金,正如古代帝王修建长城、开凿运河,皆为巩固其统治。未来之天下,恐非刀剑相争,而是算力与舆论之博弈。
雷总
你说到点子上了。现在已经不是单纯的媒体公司之间的竞争了,而是“大科技”公司利用他们的算法、数据和资本,对整个媒体格局进行重塑。亚马逊能花10亿美金,就为了获得007系列电影的创意控制权。
李白
以算法为笔,以数据为墨,科技巨擘们正在重绘世界之舆论图景。其笔锋所至,旧有之秩序或将崩塌,新立之规则尚未可知。我辈众人,皆是画中之人,身不由己,随其笔意流转。
雷总
这种高度集中的控制权,问题就来了。现在美国90%的媒体内容,被康卡斯特、迪士尼、AT&T、索尼、福克斯和派拉蒙这六家公司控制。普通人看起来选择很多,但源头其实都来自同一个地方。这就是“选择的幻觉”。
李白
妙哉,“选择之幻觉”!恰如置身于一巨大迷宫,看似岔路万千,实则皆通往一处。万民之耳目,皆被此六大巨擘所掌控,所闻所见,皆是其欲令我等闻见之声色,何其悲哉!
雷总
是的,而且这些大公司的董事会成员,往往还在其他金融、科技公司兼职,形成了所谓的“连锁董事会”。2021年一项研究发现,美国报业公司里有1276个这样的利益关联。你说,这新闻报道能做到完全的客观公正吗?
李白
此乃“盘根错节,瓜葛相连”。朝堂之上,朋党相援;商海之中,利益互锁。新闻之笔,本应如史官之铁面无私,如今却恐为资本之喉舌,为权贵之门面。其所书之事,安能取信于天下?
雷总
数据也证实了这一点。超过30%的编辑承认,他们感受过来自母公司或董事会的压力。近一半的调查记者认为,有些该报道的新闻,因为可能损害公司利益而被压下来了。甚至有41%的记者承认曾主动“软化”报道。
李白
哀哉!士人风骨,竟为五斗米折腰。笔杆之硬,硬不过金银;墨汁之黑,黑不过人心。当记者之声渐弱,变为莺歌燕语,那世间之不公不义,又有谁人来为之呐喊与悲歌?
雷总
更严重的是,随着这些大集团的扩张,地方性的小媒体大量消亡。现在美国有超过2000个县没有自己的日报,形成了“新闻荒漠”。在这些地方,民众参与度更低,而腐败问题往往更加严重。这才是最根本的侵蚀。
李白
国之大患,莫大于上下隔绝,民无所闻。小报虽微,系一方之耳目;乡音虽朴,传一地之民情。一旦“新闻荒漠”连绵成片,则社稷如失水之舟,虽看似庞大,实则已陷于搁浅之危。
雷总
这种影响已经从商业领域蔓延到了更深层次。当媒体所有权集中在少数亿万富翁和企业手中时,新闻就不再是为公众服务,而是为他们狭隘的商业和意识形态利益服务。这会直接影响到我们对世界的认知。
李白
诚如是。公器私用,天下之害也。当舆论之镜,不再映照真实人间,而被扭曲以合主人之意,则万民如坠五里雾中,黑白不分,是非颠倒。国之根基,岂不危乎?
雷总
举个例子,默多克的新闻集团,旗下的福克斯新闻、《华尔街日报》等,被很多人看作是某个政治议程的宣传工具。还有辛克莱广播集团,它会强制旗下近200家地方电视台,播出总部的统一脚本,内容高度一致。
李白
此乃“一人之言,传遍四海”。以一家之论,为天下之论,强令众口一词。此法看似高效,实则禁锢思想,扼杀真知。长此以往,民智不开,国将不国,可不慎乎!
雷总
还有马斯克,他接管推特后,把它变成了个人色彩极强的平台,充斥着各种争议信息。据统计,他发布的关于选举安全的推文中,55%都是虚假信息。这种影响力,对社会的撕裂是非常巨大的。
李白
以一人之好恶,定亿万之见闻。平台本是四方来客交流之所,如今却成了一家之言堂。真言被斥,谬论横行,犹如清水入浊,清者自清,浊者自浊,然天下之水,终将混浊不堪。
雷总
所以,回到埃里森收购华纳这件事上。分析师们认为,这笔超过700亿美元的交易,光靠派拉蒙和天空之舞的资产负债表是肯定不够的,必须要有拉里·埃里森雄厚的私人财力和政治影响力介入才可能成功。
李白
欲成非常之事,必待非常之人。埃里森此举,非有万贯家财不可为,非有通天之能不可成。此番收购,不仅是金钱之战,更是权谋之弈。其未来走向,必将牵动天下媒体之格局。
雷总
是啊,未来好莱坞可能会出现一个“新巨头”,在华纳兄弟探索公司被分拆前就把它整个吞下。这背后的逻辑,就是传统的媒体玩家为了对抗流媒体和广告收入下降,必须不断扩大规模,增强自己的护城河。
李白
天下风云,变幻无常。旧日之王侯,或将为今日之阶下囚;今日之新贵,或将成明日之霸主。此番龙争虎斗,无论谁主沉浮,最终都将重塑这片光影江湖的秩序与未来。
雷总
今天的讨论就到这里。感谢收听Goose Pod,我们明天再见。
李白
江山代有才人出,各领风骚数百年。富豪巨擘之局,我等且拭目以待。愿君安好,明日再会。

## 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