Skydance’s Paramount Takeover Triggers Ideological Reckoning for Media Communicators
Photo credit Hannah Wernecke
In his recent article for Forbes, “Skydance Paramount Deal Approved But Drama Just Beginning,” media executive and analyst Howard Homonoff lays bare the deeper implications of the Federal Communications Commission’s approval of Skydance Media’s acquisition of Paramount Global. Far from a tidy resolution, Homonoff argues that the real conflict for the media world—and communicators in particular—is just beginning.
In a statement to CommPRO, Homonoff adds, “the Skydance Paramount agreement is not the typical government approval of a financial transaction - it is instead a framework for how the Trump Administration seeks to institutionalize oversight of first amendment-protected speech." And “this deal is hardly over,” is a warning that the regulatory greenlight is only the beginning of a “whole lot more turbulence in the skies ahead.”
Backed by Oracle founder Larry Ellison and led by his son, David Ellison, Skydance inherits a network facing political scrutiny, shifting consumer trust, and a communications environment where neutrality is no longer neutral. The FCC’s approval came with conditions that Homonoff identifies as both unprecedented and troubling: a mandated “commitment to unbiased journalism” and a requirement that “discriminatory DEI policies end.”
For media communicators and public relations professionals, this is not business as usual. Messaging strategies, brand positioning, and internal engagement now sit in the crosshairs of federal oversight—particularly under a Trump-aligned FCC.
“Remember when Republicans argued for less government interference in business?” Homonoff asks, sharply. “It is the Trump Administration that will now render its judgment as to whether Paramount is sufficiently committed to ‘nondiscrimination’ as the Trump Administration sees it.”
These mandates—applying to both news and entertainment content—elevate the stakes for internal and external communicators across the media landscape. As Homonoff notes, it’s not CBS opinion programming under scrutiny, but “CBS’s reporting,” a direct challenge to editorial independence that complicates how corporate communicators frame issues, defend journalistic integrity, and navigate controversy.
This echoes a growing trend CommPRO has covered in depth, particularly in articles analyzing the abrupt cancellation of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. The move, which many speculate was politically motivated, represents what Homonoff calls the “personal turbulence” media organizations now face when their content is viewed through ideological filters. “It gets pretty uncomfortable to be the constant butt of jokes from your own employees,” he writes, recalling his own experience managing talent backlash at NBC News.
Communicators at Paramount and beyond must now operate with an expanded risk calculus. “Who will tell truth to power from within Skydance, Paramount and CBS?” Homonoff asks. The answer will determine not just the company’s editorial direction, but its cultural and reputational standing in a fragmented media environment.
There is also the question of brand equity tied to legacy networks—especially those within the former Viacom portfolio. Homonoff suggests that channels like VH1, NickMusic and BET Her may be on the chopping block or headed for spin-off. Communicators managing these properties must prepare for potential repositioning, strategic exits, and audience retention campaigns.
And while Skydance’s vision of a “tech hybrid” studio—bolstered by a $100 million cloud deal with Oracle—might signal innovation, it also raises ethical challenges for communicators around AI, content automation, and media consolidation.
As Homonoff astutely writes, “Operators are standing by.” For communicators, this is not just a matter of managing headlines—it’s about redefining values, defending institutional credibility, and maintaining cohesion in an era where politics, policy, and press freedom are in open conflict.
