Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Is censorship winning?
    People walk into the entrance of the Huntington Beach Public Library at daytime.
    The Huntington Beach library.

    Topline:

    The book battles that have beleaguered Huntington Beach’s public libraries and divided residents are far from over — despite a special election last month in which voters rebuked the city council’s conservative agenda for the public library system.

    The backstory: Voters last month overturned the city’s plans to install a board of unelected residents to decide which children’s books are appropriate for the public library system. But the book battles that have divided this historically conservative beach town are far from over.

    Censorship concerns: Library advocates see indications that the threat of censorship is still very much alive, including:

    • Conservative activists filing formal requests for library book reviews, effectively taking books off the shelf, potentially for months;
    • The continued exile — to an isolated shelf in the city’s main library — of some books about puberty and sexuality that used to be available in the children’s section; and
    • The city’s still-existing resolution that restricts minors’ access to books deemed to have “sexual content.”

    What’s next? Much of this will likely be discussed in an Orange County courthouse next month, when Judge Lindsey Martinez will hold a hearing in a lawsuit that seeks to overturn the sexual content resolution. The lawsuit argues that the resolution violates California’s newly-enacted Freedom to Read Act. Huntington Beach has argued that it’s exempt from the state law because it’s a charter city.

    Listen 0:45
    The Huntington Beach library still has a censorship issue

    Last year, the virtual book club at the Huntington Beach Public Library voted to read and discuss the humorous novel The Guncle during its May 2025 meeting. The book, published in 2021, is about a gay former sit-com star who suddenly finds himself the primary caretaker of his niece and nephew.

    Then, just a month before the book club meeting, library staff were told to remove the book from the club’s discussion calendar, according to several sources. An LAist review of the book club’s calendar and library newsletters confirm the switch.

    Some library supporters suspect the book was removed because it has a gay protagonist. It’s one of several indications, they say, of what’s sometimes called “soft” or “quiet” censorship.

    “Any time that you restrict access or create an impediment to access, it's a form of soft censorship,” said Sam Helmick, president of the American Library Association.

    The Guncle incident is also an indication that the book battles that have divided this historically conservative beach town are far from over — despite a special election last month in which voters rebuked the City Council’s conservative agenda for the public library system. The continued controversies over Huntington Beach’s libraries has put the city at the forefront of the so-called culture war battles taking place across the country.

    “In reality, there's a lot of things going on still, even since the election, that we're concerned about,” said Carol Daus, a volunteer and former board member of the group Friends of the Huntington Beach Public Library, “certain areas that, again, could be involving book censorship.” These include:

    • Conservative activists filing formal requests for library book reviews, effectively taking books off the shelf, potentially for months.
    • The continued exile — to an isolated shelf in the city’s main library — of some books about puberty and sexuality that used to be available in the children’s section.
    • The city’s still-existing resolution that restricts minors’ access to books deemed to have “sexual content,” a term that is debated.

    How to reach me

    If you have a tip, you can reach me on Signal. My username is @jillrep.79.

    • For instructions on getting started with Signal, see the app's support page. Once you're on, you can type my username in the search bar after starting a new chat.
    • And if you're comfortable just reaching out by email I'm at jreplogle@scpr.org

    Daus told LAist she asked a city official with library oversight about the removal of The Guncle from the virtual book club list earlier this year and was told it was necessary “to lower the temperature” ahead of the special election. One of two measures on the ballot asked voters if they wanted to repeal a board of residents with the power to decide which children’s books are appropriate for the library.

    Corbin Carson, a city spokesperson, said staffers could not comment on the decision to remove the novel from the club’s reading list or otherwise comment for this story because of a pending lawsuit from several Huntington Beach residents and civil rights organizations, including the ACLU. A hearing in the case is scheduled for Aug. 22.

    What happened after the special election?

    In the June special election, a solid majority of Huntington Beach voters rejected the city’s efforts to exert greater control over the content and management of the libraries. Just over 58% voted to repeal the library review board. And an even greater margin, nearly 61%, voted to restrict the city’s ability to privatize the libraries.

    The proudly all-MAGA City Council quietly accepted the results of the election at its meeting earlier this month. “The people have spoken,” Councilman Chad Williams, who campaigned against the ballot measures, said in a phone interview. He said the point of the book review committee was to give the community more say over which books are selected for the library.

    But as of Friday morning, more than a month after the election, the city’s website had yet to be updated to fully reflect the election results. The review board is still listed on the city’s website as one of the official advisory bodies, and it has yet to be removed from the city’s municipal code, as called for in the ballot measure.

    Plus, the library’s website still links to a collection development policy — guidelines to help librarians select and maintain library materials — that cites the powers of the repealed “Community Parent/Guardian Review Board” and contradicts the new selection policy adopted by voters in the special election. Although, as of last week, the website now notes that pursuant to the results of the election, the city is “reviewing the Collection Development Policy.”

    “ I think it's just a matter of time,” Williams said. “It's all going to be codified.”

    Two women stand in a library aisle in front of shelves of books. One visible title reads "Own Your Period."
    Librarians at the Huntington Beach Central Library review books in the children's section on Feb. 7, 2024.
    (
    Jill Replogle
    /
    LAist
    )

    What's in the restricted books section?

    The City Council’s establishment of the book review committee, by way of a resolution passed in 2023, was just one part of its efforts to restrict access for minors to certain library materials. The resolution also states: “No city library or other city facility shall allow children ready access to books and other materials that contain any content of a sexual nature.” The question of what that means is very much alive.

    The issue will be discussed when Judge Lindsey Martinez hears oral arguments in the lawsuit that seeks to overturn the sexual content resolution. The plaintiffs argue the resolution violates California’s Freedom to Read Act. The law, which went into effect in January, was squarely aimed at Huntington Beach. The city argues that it’s not subject to the law because it’s a charter city, which gives it more independence from the state.

    Currently, the central library maintains a shelf labeled “Youth Restricted Books Section” for books that librarians have moved out of the children’s section under an evolving set of criteria intended to comply with the sexual content restrictions. The mostly empty shelf sits between an art gallery and a study area. Minors are not allowed to check out the books without a parent’s consent.

    The library posted its most recent list of books restricted to that shelf in December 2024. The list has seven titles, including It’s So Amazing! A Book about Eggs, Sperm, Birth, Babies, and Families, first published in 1999, and It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health, first published in 1994.

    A recent visit by LAist found just two books on the restricted shelf, It’s Perfectly Normal and The Care and Keeping of You, a book published by the American Girl doll company. The latter is not on the library’s list of books with restricted access under the youth sexual content resolution, raising questions as to how and why it was on the restricted shelf.

    Why challenged books are unavailable books

    Other books considered inappropriate by some City Council members and conservative activists have been completely removed from shelves while librarians review them. The review policy, which has existed for years, allows library patrons to lodge complaints about books and ask that they be recatalogued or removed altogether.

    Until recently, librarians had only received official complaints about a handful of books. But in recent years, dozens of complaints have been lodged, including from City Councilmember Gracey Van Der Mark and Carla Strickland, president of the group Huntington Beach Republican Women and the wife of Tony Strickland, a state senator and former mayor. Van Der Mark and Carla Strickland did not respond to repeated requests from LAist for interviews for this story.

    In a social media post following the special election, the Huntington Beach Republican Women vowed to “never give up this fight to keep our children safe from sexualized content, both in our HB libraries and schools.” The group wrote that its members had challenged more than 40 books that “have no business being in our taxpayer funded libraries.”

    The challenges alarmed library advocates, who filed a public records request for related documents, which they shared with LAist. Some of the challenged books are frequent targets by conservative activists across the country, including the young adult books This One Summer and Flamer, both coming-of-age books with LGBTQ protagonists.

    Other challenges to books catalogued as children’s books included:

    • Making a Baby, billed as answering the classic question “Where did I come from?” 
    • Pride Puppy! an ABC book in which a family’s dog gets lost at a Pride parade.
    • The Big Bath House, a picture book about Japanese bath house culture.
    • The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish, written by Lil Miss Hot Mess, the founder of Drag Queen Story Hour. 

    On the library complaint form about The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish, the complainant, whose name was redacted, wrote that the book's “content is gender confusing.” The complainant also wrote that the book had “sexually explicit” content. LAist reviewed the children’s picture book and found no sex, kissing or nudity.

    The person who filed a complaint about The Big Bath House wrote that the content included “sexual and obscene themes.” The complaint included drawings from the book depicting naked women at a communal bath with penciled pubic hair and sketched outlines of breasts.

    Another of the complaints was about an adult book, Call Me By Your Name, about a love affair between two men. Adult books catalogued as such are not subject to the city’s sexual content restrictions for minors.

    At least one copy of each challenged book, including Call Me by Your Name, is currently unavailable for check out at the central library while the books undergo evaluation. Those evaluations could take up to a year, according to the library’s collection development policy.

    “ We see that as making books inaccessible to readers who want to read them,” said Daus, from Friends of the Huntington Beach Public Library.

    Khloe Rios-Wyatt, chief executive of the group Alianza Translatinx, one of the groups suing the city over the sexual content restrictions, told LAist the actions of city leaders and their allies are “a direct attack on LGBTQ people's ability to access library resources that are self-affirming.”

    The unexpected reach of censorship

    Proponents of Huntington Beach’s book restriction efforts have said their goal is to protect children from age-inappropriate sexual content. When asked whether those efforts constitute censorship, Williams, a City Council member, said, “ I think that we all believe in censorship to some degree. And I guess the question is, where's that threshold?”

    Williams cited the book Let’s Talk About It: The Teen's Guide to Sex, Relationships, and Being a Human as one of the books he thinks should not be available to minors without parental permission. The book, which the library catalogues as young adult nonfiction, contains a discussion about pornography and advice on how to explore it ethically, including that you should pay for it.

    “ I think that [voters] weren't aware that that's one of the things that they were voting on,” Williams said. He said if his critics feel like restricting access to a book “that instructs its readers, minors, to go and watch porn and pay for porn, if they think that that's censorship … I guess that's on them. I guess that's on each individual community member.”

    Ada Palmer, a University of Chicago professor who studies the history of censorship, said the goals and effects of censorship go well beyond the obvious target. “What they're going for is the chilling effect, side effect of censorship,” she said.

    For example, “if you have a big, scary, public ceremonial book burning of Harry Potter books … a nearby school librarian will be more conservative with what she orders for the school library. A young writer will be more conservative with what she puts in her book if she wants to get published, right? It makes other people self-censor,” Palmer said.

    Another potential effect in Huntington Beach: Nearly a dozen librarians and other library staff members have left their jobs since the book controversies started. One librarian was let go days after the June special election, despite being promoted in January.

    “Everybody who I know who left, left because of the City Council and the resolution,” said Melissa Ronning, the former principal librarian and one of the first to announce her resignation. (She did so at the public podium during a contentious City Council meeting about the library.)

    A local lawsuit, a national debate

    Versions of Huntington Beach’s book battles are taking place across the country. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a group of Maryland parents who sought to excuse their children from class during discussions of books featuring LGBTQ+ themes and characters, citing religious beliefs. One of the much-discussed books throughout the case was Pride Puppy!

    There’s evidence that conservative national leaders want to elevate Huntington Beach’s library debate to a bigger platform. Last week, a nonprofit law firm co-founded by Stephen Miller, a top White House aide to President Donald Trump, signed on to defend Huntington Beach against the lawsuit that seeks to block the city’s library book restrictions. It’s a high-profile ally for a city that has emerged as a conservative darling in the so-called culture wars.

    Helmick, from the American Library Association, said librarians have a duty to provide a wide variety of material for all sectors of the population. “It is the responsibility of credentialed library staff to offer a wide and robust collection of information for the community to pursue,” Helmick said, and to let people “make their own determinations” about what books to read or not read.

    Otherwise, Helmick said, “I am afraid we will have a generation that is afraid to think and afraid to reason on their own.”

  • Feds seized 15 around SoFi this weekend
    A green soccer pitch sits empty as some people begin to fill the stadium seats.
    A view of L.A. Stadium before the FIFA World Cup match between USA and Paraguay begins.

    Topline:

    The FBI seized about 15 drones flying near SoFi Stadium and L.A. Memorial Coliseum on Friday and Saturday for violating temporary flight restrictions.

    Why it matters: "No Drone Zones" have been put in place by the Federal Aviation Administration on match days at World Cup stadiums and venues hosting official fan festivals.

    The restrictions: Drones are prohibited at SoFi within a three-nautical-mile radius and up to 3,000 feet above ground level. They are also banned at the Coliseum for the official fan festival within a one-nautical-mile radius and up to 1,000 feet above ground level.

    The FBI seized about 15 drones near SoFi Stadium and L.A. Memorial Coliseum on Friday and Saturday for violating temporary flight restrictions, Amir Ehsaei, special agent in charge of counterterrorism and crisis response at the FBI's Los Angeles Field Office, told LAist. Multiple operators were cited.

    Stadiums hosting World Cup games and official fan festival venues are designated as "No Drone Zones" by the Federal Aviation Administration on match days.

    “We have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to drones violating the temporary flight restrictions," Ehsaei said.

    He said drone detection teams are deployed at all SoFi games. "We will be out at other places depending on the nature — the size, the scope — [and] different intelligence that we'll get based on  threat assessments."

    Drones are prohibited at SoFi within a three-nautical-mile radius and up to 3,000 feet above ground level. They are also banned at the Coliseum for the official fan festival within a one-nautical-mile radius and up to 1,000 feet above ground level.

    Violators could face fines of up to $100,000 and federal criminal charges.

  • Sponsored message
  • Residents debate local impact
    a woman in a sweatshirt and jeans walks along a platform next to a train that says "E EAST LA"
    A woman exits the train at the Metro E Line Indiana station in East L.A. on April 15, 2025.

    Topline:

    Residents in East LA are weighing the promise of a new Metro E Line extension with concerns over construction disruptions, small-business impacts and whether more outreach is needed about the project.

    What is the project: The 4.7-mile extension of the Metro E Line would connect East Los Angeles to Montebello with four new stations. The project would relocate the existing Atlantic and Pomona station underground, and include a mix of underground, aerial and street-level track transit.

    Read on ... for more about the pros and cons locals see for the extension.

    Residents in East LA are weighing the promise of a new Metro E Line extension with concerns over construction disruptions, small-business impacts and whether more outreach is needed about the project.

    The 4.7-mile extension of the Metro E Line would connect East Los Angeles to Montebello with four new stations. The project would relocate the existing Atlantic and Pomona station underground and include a mix of underground, aerial and street-level track transit.

    The $7.9 billion project is expected to open for service between 2035 and 2037, according to Metro.

    Construction will begin in 2029 and last approximately eight to 10 years, pending full funding approval. It’s part of a wider plan to connect the E Line to the city of Whittier, though officials say the work will be built in two phases due to funding constraints.

    While officials say the project is intended to reduce traffic congestion and ease pressure on local roads, residents at a recent community meeting focused more on the immediate impact and communication.

    Concerns over construction and local impact

    “Thirty days for comment on a complex issue like this is ridiculous. … We need better outreach,” said East LA resident Clara Solis about a 30-day public comment period ending June 26.

    Solis and others also raised concerns about how construction could affect traffic and disrupt local commerce, pointing to past transit projects.

    “How is this going to impact the businesses? When the Gold Line went through, a lot of our businesses really suffered economically. We want to see a presentation on that. You should have a presentation just on how it’s going to impact the businesses,” Solis added.

    a series of interconnected dots and lines with city names and station names
    A map shows the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project will extend the E Line nearly nine miles east from East Los Angeles to the City of Whittier. ()
    (
    Courtesy Metro
    )

    Calls for broader outreach

    East LA resident Kristie Hernandez said community outreach for the project should also extend to people who do not necessarily live within the immediate 200-foot project radius.

    “We need to understand that folks who don’t necessarily live within that close proximity also frequent that area when they drive,” said Hernandez.

    Hernandez advocated for a 90-day public comment window and also called for presentations on underground infrastructure, especially in the wake of the East LA pipeline that was punctured during construction work in late May.

    “We do not want that to happen again,” she said.

    A promise for greater mobility

    Lucia Martinez spoke favorably about the extension plans, considering that she relies on buses to get around East LA to do her shopping. She said she looks forward to using the Metro to travel to the Citadel as well as to the hospital in Pasadena.

    “As an older woman who became aware of this project, I think it is amazing because I am someone who does not drive,” she said.

    LA Documenter Rafael Cazzorla contributed reporting for this story. LA Documenters trains and pays LA residents to take notes at local government meetings around Los Angeles. You can find meeting notes and audio at losangeles.documenters.org

  • Scientist celebrate FDA approval
    one hand with two bracelets around the wrist reaches up to apply sunscreen to another hand against a blue sky background
    A sunscreen ingredient used in Europe and Asia that blocks UVA and UVB rays has been approved for use in the U.S.

    Topline:

    For the first time in nearly three decades, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new chemical UV filter for use in sunscreens sold in the U.S. And that has many dermatologists cheering.

    Why it matters: The new ingredient is called bemotrizinol, and it has several advantages over the chemical sunscreen ingredients previously available in the U.S., says Dr. Heather Rogers, a dermatologist in Seattle and a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology.

    The backstory: In the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as over-the-counter drugs rather than cosmetics, as they're classified in Europe. That means ingredients need to undergo rigorous testing for safety and efficacy before they can be approved for use in the U.S.

    Read on ... for four key things to know about this coming change.

    For the first time in nearly three decades, the Food and Drug Administration approved a new chemical UV filter for use in sunscreens sold in the U.S. And that has many dermatologists cheering.

    "This is a very big deal," says Dr. Heather Rogers, a dermatologist in Seattle and a fellow of the American Academy of Dermatology.

    The new ingredient is called bemotrizinol, and it has several advantages over the chemical sunscreen ingredients previously available in the U.S., Rogers says.

    "It hits like really every box for us that we have been waiting for as dermatologists and consumers," Rogers says.

    Here's what you need to know about this new ingredient and how it could lead to better sunscreens sold stateside.

    1. It blocks both UVA and UVB rays

    Rogers says in general, you want to use sunscreens that are broad spectrum, meaning they protect against both UVA rays — the longer wavelengths that cause premature aging and wrinkles — and UVB rays, which lead to sunburns. Both types of UV rays can cause skin cancer.

    She says the sunscreens currently sold in the U.S. do an excellent job of protecting against UVB rays, but the chemical UV filters available in sunscreens in the U.S. until now aren't as good at blocking out UVA rays.

    In general, chemical sunscreens sold in the U.S. rely on an ingredient called avobenzone to block out UVA rays, says Kelly Dobos, a cosmetic chemist who teaches at the University of Cincinnati.

    But avobenzone by itself isn't photo stable, meaning its protection can start to break down rapidly when exposed to sunlight. And as avobenzone breaks down, it can release molecules that lead to skin irritation, says Alexa Friedman, a senior scientist with the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, or EWG.

    By contrast, bemotrizinol offers protection against both UVA and UVB rays all on its own, and it is photo stable, so it breaks down more slowly, offering better protection, Rogers says.

    "So if you go a little longer than two hours to reapply your sunscreen, there will be more protection left," Rogers says. However, she says you should still reapply sunscreen every two hours.

    2. It's long been used in other countries 

    Bemotrizinol has been widely used in European and Asian sunscreens for decades. But it has taken 20 years for the FDA to approve its use in this country.

    That's because in the U.S., sunscreens are regulated as over-the-counter drugs rather than cosmetics, as they're classified in Europe. That means ingredients need to undergo rigorous testing for safety and efficacy before they can be approved for use in the U.S.

    "It's really expensive and time consuming," Dobos says. The European company DSM-Firmenich spent at least $18 million over more than two decades in its push to gain FDA approval for bemotrizinol.

    3. It has a well-documented safety profile

    However, all that testing means bemotrizinol has more safety data to back it up than any other chemical sunscreen ingredient currently approved in the U.S., says Friedman of EWG.

    "This ingredient is exciting because we have that data to support its safety," Friedman says.

    Friedman says animal testing showed bemotrizinol doesn't lead to concerns like reproductive harm, while clinical testing on humans found that it does not irritate the skin, even after repeated application over time, "which is hopefully how people are using sunscreens."

    And because bemotrizinol's molecules are larger, it's not readily absorbed by the skin and into the bloodstream, she says.

    That's important, because studies have shown that some of the other chemical sunscreen UV filters sold in the U.S. can be absorbed in the bloodstream, prompting calls for more safety data and leading to a backlash against sunscreen on social media fueled by misinformation. Rogers says that trend is concerning because skin cancer is the most common form of cancer.

    "We just need to have sunscreen that people will use, that they'll trust," Rogers says. "And this ingredient is going to allow that to happen. And that is very exciting."

    And bemotrizinol is also considered to be non-irritating, Friedman says. That should be welcome news to people who've been put off by chemical sunscreens in the past.

    4. It could lead to sunscreens that look better on you

    Until now, Rogers says, the only sunscreen ingredient available in the U.S. that offered the aforementioned advantages of bemotrizinol — photo stable, non-irritating, minimally absorbed into the skin and with good broad spectrum protection against both UVA and UVB rays — was zinc oxide.

    Both zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are mineral UV filters. Both chemical sunscreens and mineral sunscreens work by absorbing UV rays from the sun. Mineral sunscreens also reflect some UV rays. The bigger difference is that mineral sunscreens sit on the surface of the skin, while chemical sunscreens get absorbed into the skin, Rogers says.

    The downside of mineral sunscreens is that they can leave an unattractive white cast on the skin — think of lifeguards with white paste on their noses. "Particularly if you're a person of color, zinc is going to make you look pale, white or ashy, which really makes it hard to use on a regular basis," Rogers says.

    Bemotrizinol, on the other hand, is transparent on the skin, and because it protects against both UVA and UVB rays on its own, it doesn't have to be mixed with as many other chemical filters and stabilizers to achieve broad spectrum protection, Dobos adds. She says that should lead to more aesthetically pleasing, less greasy sunscreen formulations in the near future.

    "I think it's a real win for public health," Dobos says. "If we can make a sunscreen that consumers like to use and want to use and apply in the proper amounts, I think that's something that's really going to be a win for consumers."

    DSM-Firmenich has exclusive rights to market bemotrizinol in the U.S. for 18 months. It will be sold under the brand name Parsol Shield. The company says the first sunscreen products containing the ingredient should start hitting American store shelves around September.

  • DOJ approves Warner acquisition, CA pushes back

    Topline:

    The Justice Department yesterday approved Paramount's proposed $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

    How we got here: The decision came after the DOJ concluded its antitrust investigation into the pending merger. The department said in a statement that it found that the deal posed no threat to competition or consumers of film, broadcast television or streaming.

    What's next: The decision clears the way for a merger of two rival Hollywood studio titans: Paramount, the owner of CBS, including CBS News, will swallow the much larger Warner, which includes HBO and CNN. But several states, including California, have raised antitrust concerns. The European Union is investigating as well.

    The Justice Department on Friday approved Paramount's proposed $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

    After concluding its antitrust investigation into the pending merger, the department said in a statement that it found that the deal posed no threat to competition or consumers of film, broadcast television or streaming.

    The decision clears the way for a merger of two rival Hollywood studio titans: Paramount, the owner of CBS, including CBS News, will swallow the much larger Warner, which includes HBO and CNN.

    The DOJ''s Antitrust Division concluded that a union of two studio giants isn't anti-competitive because the streaming market has expanded the competition for conventional Hollywood studios, which includes Netflix, Apple and Amazon, as well as smaller streamers. The Justice Department's view is that, for the same reason, consumers won't lose out because there are plenty of other places to get entertainment.

    Several states, including California, have raised antitrust concerns. The European Union is investigating as well.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who has been investigating the deal for antitrust violations, said in a post on social media following the Justice Department's approval: "The merger of Warner Bros and Paramount is not a done deal and remains under investigation by my office."

    In a statement following the decision, Paramount described the deal as "pro-competitive," and would result in "a stronger company better positioned to compete against dominant technology platforms in an industry increasingly defined by intense competition for audiences, talent, technology, and investment."

    The company said it planned to complete the merger as soon as possible, "delivering its benefits to consumers, creators, and the entertainment industry as a whole."

    The consolidation will put media mogul David Ellison — son of Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison — at the helm of Warner Bros. studio as well as its cable and streaming properties, including CNN and HBO. The Ellison family took over Paramount and CBS last summer.

    In the months leading up to the regulatory approval, critics in Hollywood feared the deal would consolidate an already concentrated media landscape and lead to fewer jobs and less creative content.

    In April, thousands of directors, actors, writers and other industry talent — including Kristen Stewart, Pedro Pascal and Javier Bardem — signed an open letter opposing the merger.

    The elder Ellison is also a financial backer and adviser to President Trump on artificial intelligence. Critics of recent changes at CBS under the Ellisons' control are concerned that, as they say has happened with CBS News, the acquisition would make CNN more friendly to Trump.

    NPR's Carrie Johnson and Mandalit del Barco contributed to this story.
    Copyright 2026 NPR