The Next Viacom Is Well, Paramount: Can David Ellison Build the Next Liberty Media?

When David Ellison finalized the purchase of Paramount, the question everyone asked was whether he could revive one of media’s great old houses, Paramount, fka Viacom. Now, according to The Wall Street Journal, Ellison is setting his sights on one of its crown jewels: MTV. That move is both symbolic and fraught. Reviving MTV is not just about a brand; it’s about whether Paramount itself can reinvent what it means to be a diversified media company in an era dominated by YouTube, TikTok, and the creator economy. Paramount didn’t only suit out the YouTube dance early on, it sued it for $1B in damages.

The Next Viacom Was Always Viacom

Over the years, many new media startups—Defy Media (fka Alloy), Complex, Buzzfeed, Funny or Die—sold themselves as the “next Viacom.” But as I argued years ago, the next Viacom was always Viacom. Even after Philippe Dauman’s lawyerly, defensive tenure, Bob Bakish ushered in what I once called the Empire Strikes Back period: a time when traditional media companies doubled down on their IP instead of chasing shiny new media properties (see Disney and Maker Studios). But since that period, we have seen trends change how media brands are built.

The core of the diversified media model remains the same: one engine falters, another picks up the slack. Nickelodeon, MTV, Comedy Central, BET, Paramount Pictures, and CBS—each has cycled through moments of dominance and decline. The whole has usually proven greater than the sum of its parts. But whether a single brand like MTV can be revived in the 2020s is an open question.

Enter David Ellison

Ellison does not lack ambition. As I wrote in Born on 3rd Base, it’s certainly easy to discredit many heirs who inherit wealth and access, only to struggle to prove their worth. But on the flip side, for someone who really doesn’t have to hustle, I have grown an appreciation for some, especially those who can execute. 

Ironically though, while personally he doesn’t need to risk anything, professionally, he has to. Skydance, for all its impressive track record, was still very one dimensional and far away from consumers. He is extending for Skydance what Paramount itself did with Paramount + (and the merger with Viacom), as those with content morphed with those with audience. 

From Pyramid to Spheres

Anytime a media firm seeks to compete, it faces the reality that for tech platforms, media is a simple differentiation tool and a rounding error with their balance sheets. For once, Ellison is assembling compelling IP backed by not only ambition, but a balance sheet & capacity to build alliances more easily than most.

MTV’s Revival: Nostalgia vs. Structural Change

Trying to revive MTV feels like a test case for whether legacy media can ever regain its edge. MTV once defined cool, reinvented celebrity, and dictated culture. But cable itself has lost its shine to the web, and especially to YouTube.

The question isn’t whether MTV can be “cool” again. It’s whether cable—once the cutting edge—has any path back to relevance. In the 1980s and 1990s, MTV and ESPN turned spartan beginnings into premium brands. Today, YouTube is doing the same on a global scale, redefining what a star, studio, or creator even means. As I noted on YouTube’s 20th anniversary, the platform is now more dominant in video than Google is in search.

If you think of cable in the 1990s as the maturation of a chaotic industry, YouTube in the 2020s is entering its own golden era. The parallels are striking. The challenge for MTV is not whether it can program another TRL or Jersey Shore, but whether it can compete in a world where distribution, talent discovery, and community are owned by platforms like YouTube and TikTok.

Is Media Still Investable?

Ellison’s challenge goes beyond brand rehab. Paramount recently announced 16,000 job cuts and mandated employee return-to-office policies. The industry feels less like a growth story and more like a daytime soap opera. As I asked recently, is media even an investable category anymore? Between cord-cutting, ad market volatility, and the erosion of legacy networks’ influence, the headwinds are severe. 

The geopolitical and political environment doesn’t help. A politicized administration increasingly views media—especially legacy outlets like CBS—as hostile. In that climate, even survival is hard, let alone reinvention. 

The winner will be he or she who can build a modernized version of Liberty Media, an eclectic empire of assets that defies easy categorization but delivers outsized influence. But Paramount is also still Paramount—the Tiffany Network, the most old-school of American broadcasters, burdened with legacy costs and nostalgia – things that could be harvested into goodwill, or drag you down like an anchor.

The Rise of “You”

It’s been nearly 20 years since Time magazine declared “You” the person of the year, celebrating the rise of user-generated content. At the time, skeptics dismissed it as hype. As I reflected, it took 20 years, but ‘You’ finally disrupted traditional media for good. That’s the world Ellison is stepping into: one where the gravitational pull has shifted from corporate-owned brands to creator-driven platforms. Anything is both strength and weakness: his pedigree may have helped, but if he remains too drawn to the glitz and glamor of Hollywood versus the grit of YouTube and Instagram, then this transaction may be Ellison’s proverbial flight of Icarus.

YouTube and TikTok don’t just host content; they enable ecosystems. Stars, studios, distribution, monetization—all built in. For Paramount, competing in this environment requires more than nostalgia; it demands reinvention.

The AI Variable

Where Ellison could surprise is in technology. With his pedigree, he may lean heavily into AI. The risk is obvious: he could charge in like a bull in a china shop, alienating both audiences and creators. The opportunity is equally clear: as I argued in AI Storytelling: A Brave New Canvas, AI can unlock new forms of creativity and storytelling if deployed with care. If Ellison positions Paramount as a bridge between legacy media and the creator class, AI could be a tool rather than a wedge.

The choice is stark. Will he be the aggressive disruptor who breaks what’s left, or the dexterous diplomat who convinces creators that the light at the end of the tunnel is sunshine, not an oncoming train?

Conclusion: The Tiffany Network Meets the YouTube Era

In the end, the “next Viacom” remains Viacom, now Paramount. But the question is whether Ellison can reshape it into something that feels of this era, not the last. Reviving MTV may generate headlines, but the real challenge is turning Paramount into a company that doesn’t just manage decline but builds anew.

The opportunity is there. But the gravitational forces of media have shifted. Paramount’s legacy was built in an era when brands like MTV and CBS defined culture. Today, that power sits with YouTube, TikTok, and the creator economy. Ellison’s gamble is to see if Paramount can bridge the two.

Whether he succeeds will tell us not just about Paramount’s future, but about whether legacy media can still play offense in a game increasingly dominated by platforms that didn’t even exist when MTV first declared, “I want my MTV.”