Reports have emerged that Paramount’s new CEO, David Ellison, is on the cusp of acquiring The Free Press, the independent media outlet founded by Bari Weiss, in a deal valued at over $100 million. According to Puck News, this move would not only provide a substantial payout for Weiss but also position her in a senior editorial role at CBS News, potentially overseeing an overhaul of the network’s operations. This development comes amid Ellison’s recent takeover of Paramount through an $8 billion merger with Skydance, marking one of his first major initiatives.
Weiss, who left The New York Times in 2020 after enduring what she described as bullying from far-left colleagues, has built The Free Press into a platform that often pushes back against dominant narratives in mainstream media. Her outlet has gained attention for its coverage questioning diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, gender ideology, and certain media portrayals of Israel’s conflict with Hamas. This approach has earned her a following among those seeking alternative viewpoints, but it has also drawn sharp criticism from liberal circles, who view her as a divisive force.
The backlash was swift and intense. Media critic Oliver Darcy, in his Status newsletter, expressed deep concern over the implications. “David Ellison vowed not to politicize Paramount—yet his first big move at CBS News is a major bet on Bari Weiss, one of the most polarizing figures in media,” Darcy wrote.
He went on to describe Weiss as “the stridently pro-Israel, proudly anti-‘woke’ culture warrior, [who] has built her brand on polarizing political commentary—supposedly the type of material Ellison signaled to reporters that he wishes to run away from.”
Even harsher rhetoric came from The Nation’s senior editor Jack Mirkinson, who penned a scathing piece titled “Vile Grifters Are Taking Over Establishment Media.” Mirkinson didn’t hold back, stating, “Bari Weiss has been making the world worse for a long time.” He delved into her past, claiming, “Twenty years ago, as a student at Columbia, she led a racist smear campaign against Arab professors who had the audacity to criticize Israel.”
Continuing his critique, he accused her time at The New York Times of being filled with “right-wing bile while posing as a liberal who was just tired of all the extremism and censorship on the left—a tedious bait-and-switch that nevertheless sent her media profile soaring.”
Regarding The Free Press, Mirkinson alleged it has “pushed genocide denial, transphobia, and the freedom to make Nazi salutes.”
Such inflammatory language reveals the depth of ideological opposition Weiss faces; Mirkinson’s portrayal frames her not just as a journalist with differing opinions but as a propagator of hate, a charge that ignores the outlet’s focus on stories often sidelined by legacy media, like investigations into campus antisemitism or critiques of gender-affirming care policies.
Mirkinson further lamented the cultural climate enabling this deal: “If we lived in a less terrible time and place, Weiss would be dismissed as a crank and a bigot, and never heard from again. But we live in the waking nightmare that is the United States in 2025. So instead, Weiss is being rewarded with a prize that even she must think is kind of wild. That prize? CBS News.”
He argued that CBS News, despite its flaws, “isn’t just some hate factory pumping out shoddy propaganda 24/7. But now it’s being shipped over to one of the leading hateful propagandists of our time.” In his conclusion, Mirkinson called for resistance: “I hope that CBS News staffers resist this attempt to destroy their workplace with everything they have. I hope that Weiss’s tenure atop CBS is short and failed. But mostly, I hope that one day we live in a world where people like Weiss are treated with the contempt they deserve and are hurled.”
This vitriol illustrates a pattern where critics on the left equate dissent with bigotry, potentially stifling debate in an industry already accused of echo-chamber dynamics.
Other outlets echoed similar sentiments. HuffPost labeled Weiss the “polarizing editor of The Free Press” and suggested the acquisition “offers a preview of how Ellison, the son of a top Trump ally, intends to shape CBS News moving forward,” implying a conservative tilt despite Ellison’s assurances otherwise.
Salon referred to her as “the polarizing editor and founder of conservative outlet The Free Press” and a “controversial figure.” Inside CBS, the New York Post reported that staffers are “apoplectic” and “not happy AT ALL,” with some bracing for an open revolt over the prospect of Weiss leading an editorial shake-up.
This internal unrest points to deeper tensions within legacy networks, where employees accustomed to a particular worldview may resist voices that introduce balance or scrutiny.
Not all reactions were uniformly negative. From a different angle, former Fox News host Megyn Kelly questioned the wisdom of Weiss joining mainstream media, asking, “Why would you go into mainstream media?” and warning that it could “eat her alive,” drawing parallels to Katie Couric’s experiences.
As negotiations reportedly near completion, this episode exposes fault lines in American journalism. Weiss’s rise from a criticized NYT columnist to a potential CBS power player demonstrates the growing appetite for outlets that prioritize unfiltered reporting over ideological conformity. Whether the deal materializes, the furor surrounding it reveals much about the state of media trust and the challenges of bridging divided audiences.
