2026 looks ominous for media, from Hollywood to journalism

The worst factor about at the moment’s media surroundings is that — dangerous as it’s — it’s straightforward to think about how issues would possibly worsen in 2026.

Conventional journalism shops buffeted on all sides by misinformation, weak-kneed possession and a hostile White Home will battle to earn again public belief at the same time as the necessity for truthful, correct reporting grows.

Smaller teams of rich businesspeople management bigger swaths of the nation’s data ecosystem, pitting their general company pursuits in opposition to the general public’s need for correct journalism difficult highly effective establishments in society.

And the most important media deal of current years is looming over all the pieces, with ominous penalties for streaming, journalism, the movie trade and customers — regardless of who lastly closes on a purchase order.

The actual wild card right here is the viewers, which has extra energy than it realizes. The autumn and rise of Jimmy Kimmel proved that viewers could make their preferences recognized in ways in which protect free expression, forcing media homeowners to point out some spine.

However the public must get extra concerned in 2026, weighing in with their viewing decisions and their pocketbooks to ensure the choices that deliver probably the most freedom and moral habits are additionally probably the most worthwhile.

This is a take a look at 5 difficult predictions I’ve for media in 2026, a few of which herald considerably robust instances forward for professionals within the enterprise and most of the people.

Regardless of who wins the competition to purchase Warner Bros. Discovery, the general public will be the greatest loser

The biggest media deal lately entails a tug-of-war between Netflix and Paramount over the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery — itself a huge media firm that is residence to one of many trade’s main streamers (HBO Max), considered one of Hollywood’s greatest movie studios (Warner Bros.), TV’s most constant supply of high-quality sequence (HBO) and one of many information trade’s largest manufacturers (CNN).

The WB water tower at Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, California. Netflix and Paramount are in a high-profile tug-of-war over the way forward for Warner Bros. Discovery.

Robyn Beck/AFP through Getty Pictures

cover caption

toggle caption

Robyn Beck/AFP through Getty Pictures

As I write this, Netflix appears poised to win, favored by the board of administrators with its supply of $27.75 per share, or near $83 billion, for the a part of the corporate that features the movie studio, HBO and HBO Max, DC Studios and the Warner Bros. movie library — spinning off cable TV-centered property like CNN and Discovery right into a separate firm. And the board at Warner Bros. Discovery has rejected the most recent bid from Paramount, which valued your complete firm — together with cable property — at $30 per share.

Both means, the general public dangers quite a bit. A Netflix win would mix streaming providers with about 420 million subscriptions between the 2 of them and little indication of how this new firm shall be managed. Will it pull a Disney and permit its new subsidiaries to principally function the way in which they’ve been? Or will it insist on quick theatrical runs for films, hobbling the theater trade; leverage its management of manufacturing to decrease wages for content material creators; and use its management of streaming to lift subscription costs for customers? (Charges for its top-tier service have doubled previously decade, from $12 month-to-month in 2014 to $24.99 monthly now — a rise past the speed of inflation.)

A Paramount win presents completely different issues. Beneath new CEO David Ellison, the corporate has already proven a willingness to curry favor with President Trump, who has said he desires possession of CNN to vary amid its robust reporting and criticism of his administration. Its bid is backed by the private wealth of Ellison’s billionaire father, the tech mogul Larry Ellison, an ally of Trump who additionally leads a gaggle of traders poised to amass the U.S. operations of social media big TikTok — and by wealth funds linked to regimes within the Center East with horrible human rights information.

Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison at a premiere in Might 2025.

Evan Agostini/Invision/AP

cover caption

toggle caption

Evan Agostini/Invision/AP

The federal authorities might handle questions on monopoly and trade dominance by enacting measures to restrict the ability of those mixed firms. However at a time when federal regulatory businesses appear extra involved with weighing how proposed offers will have an effect on the president’s agenda, the general public appears to have few champions left on this course of.

2026 may very well be a do-or-die second for the movie trade, which should discover a higher option to make its case to customers

In 2025, we discovered issues can disintegrate fairly rapidly, after they have been in decline for an extended whereas. It has been tempting for Hollywood guilty most of its issues on streamers like Netflix, accusing the corporate of undercutting theaters by refusing to permit their films to play there for very lengthy.

However the attainable buy of Warner Bros. Discovery’s movie studios by Netflix is simply the most recent speedy fall in a decline that has lasted for years. The movie trade must make a greater argument for getting folks to go to theaters — a launch schedule crammed with creatively lagging blockbusters and niche-appeal Oscar bait movies will not do it, particularly when viewers can watch a lot of this content material on enormous screens from the consolation of their houses.

In some methods, the studios made their very own issues right here. When large media firms began their very own streaming providers, they poured billions of {dollars} into constructing an trade that wanted a lot of unique content material.

A long time in the past, TV sequence like Adolescence, Stranger Issues, Process, Mare of Easttown, Severance and The Studio might need been midlevel movies — high quality unique tales not based mostly on comedian books or sequels or high-profile mental property. However lately, these tasks land on streaming providers, giving folks even fewer causes to go away their houses. (Based on Field Workplace Mojo, of the ten highest-grossing films in 2025, only one — Ryan Coogler’s Sinners — was based mostly on an unique concept not linked to a sequel, comedian ebook or online game.)

The theater enterprise must discover a new argument for getting audiences in its seats, no matter who buys Warner Bros. Discovery.

Susceptible conventional information shops will face vaguely defined overhauls from homeowners with troubling agendas

CBS Information stands as Exhibit A of this phenomenon, with new night anchor Tony Dokoupil sending a message to viewers Jan. 1 saying the press “put an excessive amount of weight within the evaluation of lecturers or elites, and never sufficient on you.”

It is a nervy assertion to make as he turns into the face of a information operation as soon as thought of the gold normal of tv journalism. How particularly did storied packages like 60 Minutes or Face the Nation betray viewers earlier than he got here alongside? His assertion did not say.

However media critics like me fear that nonsensical tradition warfare language like that’s principally a smoke display screen for altering information protection to suit the ideological preferences of recent homeowners at Paramount and CBS Information’ new editor-in-chief, Bari Weiss.

Bari Weiss at an occasion for The Free Press in January 2025.

Leigh Vogel/Getty Pictures for Uber, X and The Free Press

cover caption

toggle caption

Leigh Vogel/Getty Pictures for Uber, X and The Free Press

Weiss confronted an explosive controversy on the finish of 2025 when she pulled a narrative set to air on 60 Minutes a few infamous jail in El Salvador the place the Trump administration was sending migrants. Weiss argued the story wasn’t prepared for air, telling employees in a gathering, “We want to have the ability to get the principals on the report and on digital camera.” A CBS spokesperson mentioned it might air at a later date. The correspondent on the piece, Sharyn Alfonsi, despatched a memo saying the transfer is “not an editorial resolution, it’s a political one.”

CBS Information has by no means had an editor-in-chief earlier than, so why did it create this job for somebody with no expertise in TV information? (Weiss beforehand wrote and edited opinion columns for The New York Instances and is the co-founder of the web outlet The Free Press.) In pushing again on criticism of her resolution to tug the story, Weiss wrote in a memo that she was making an attempt to “win again” the belief of viewers.

However which viewers? How does she know holding a narrative like it will have any impact on belief ranges, which have been falling for all conventional journalism shops for many years? And, given the brand new homeowners’ previous strikes to mollify Trump and conservative critics, how do common viewers know these adjustments aren’t simply extra of the identical?

My concern, as a longtime media critic, is that somebody who has clashed ideologically with conventional information shops is now imposing her political opinions — and the views of her bosses, Paramount’s possession — beneath the guise of addressing journalism points.

It is time for Weiss to current an in depth evaluation of CBS Information’ work — particularly 60 Minutes — to again her implication that shortcomings in its reporting have created this belief downside. As a result of, in any other case, she runs the chance of trying like one other opportunistic govt utilizing turmoil in management to press her personal political agenda.

The Trump administration’s racist language will problem information shops 

For years, many conservatives have criticized fact-based reporting about race and variety from mainstream media shops. They allege “liberal bias” after any try by information organizations to truthfully report on the real-world affect of racism and different types of discrimination.

The Trump administration shares that view, insisting authorities departments, media firms and faculties finish their range, fairness and inclusion packages or endure disastrous penalties. They don’t seem to be bringing change by presenting new proof; they’re merely punishing and pressuring folks into rejecting beforehand accepted notions about how oppression exists in the USA.

White Home Deputy Chief of Workers Stephen Miller this January. The earlier month, Miller appeared on Fox Information decrying what he described as “constant excessive charges of welfare use, excessive charges of prison exercise, [and] constant failures to assimilate” amongst immigrants to the U.S., focusing on Somali Individuals. Miller referred to as for a “moratorium on immigration from Third World nations till we will heal ourselves as a nation.”

Jim Watson/AFP through Getty Pictures

cover caption

toggle caption

Jim Watson/AFP through Getty Pictures

And their phrases are past regarding: The vp of the USA has used language about white satisfaction that some politicians really feel comes too near the language utilized by white supremacists. A senior White Home official talks about immigration in ways in which demonize immigrants and pines for an immigration coverage from the times, a long time previous, when America was a nation strictly segregated by race. The president has admitted {that a} racist remark he as soon as denied making was one thing he truly did say.

However what’s much more disturbing is how little these cases have dented the information cycle, difficult conventional information shops to persistently and consistently report on these actions because the shows of open racism they honestly are.

As an individual of shade in America, I do not wish to see a return to the times when whiteness was thought of a badge of capability or proof of advantage. However that appears to be a disturbing pattern in media and politics which can solely worsen in 2026.

If ideologues wish to have a good-faith dialogue about these points, conventional media shops ought to facilitate that by together with views from all sides of the problems. However they need to additionally resist bad-faith arguments rooted in prejudice, stereotypes and the handy focusing on of marginalized teams.

Public media will discover methods to face by itself, however with a notable loss

It has been heartening to see all of the methods communities, stations and philanthropists have come collectively in an effort to assist public media shops after Congress voted to claw again federal funding in mid-2025.

Foundations like MacArthur and Knight have gathered funds to assist rural stations keep in operation. (The Knight Basis additionally funds professorships throughout the nation, together with the one I maintain at Washington and Lee College.) NPR itself has agreed to scale back charges it prices to some native stations, particularly these hardest hit by the lack of federal funds. And listeners throughout the nation have stepped up with elevated donations serving to their favourite stations climate the adjustments.

Some critics would possibly recommend these efforts present that the system did not want federal funding within the first place. However that overlooks the employees reductions, shrinking sources and cutbacks applied by networks and stations to manage.

I all the time thought federal funding was necessary to public media for a special purpose. In these instances, media platforms are more and more centered on what — or who — pays their payments. Subscribers, advertisers, homeowners — every have their very own outsize affect in numerous methods.

Federal cash for public media ensured that, on some degree, each tax-paying American helped fund work accomplished by NPR, PBS and diverse public media shops. Opponents could have believed public media was biased, however a majority of Individuals supported federal funding for public media. Each American had a vested curiosity within the system, and everybody in public media knew and revered that.

With out federal funding, public media will nonetheless cowl America comprehensively, precisely and pretty. However it would go into 2026 with out that additional little bit of help from the American folks, which is a tragic and pointless loss.

Eric Deggans is critic at giant at NPR and the Knight chair of journalism and media ethics at Washington and Lee College in Virginia.

Warner Bros. Discovery, Warner Bros. Photos, HBO, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Basis, Paramount+ and Walt Disney Photos are all amongst NPR’s monetary supporters.