For generations, Star Trek invited Americans to imagine something better. It wasn’t just sci-fi. It was an optimistic vision of the future—one where curiosity mattered more than grievance and where humanity’s flaws were challenges to overcome, not grievances to endlessly litigate. That spirit is hard to find in Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, Paramount’s latest installment, which feels less like a voyage into the unknown and more like a syllabus from a coastal grad seminar.
The show’s first season has drawn heavy criticism for sidelining exploration and wonder in favor of ideological messaging. Where Star Trek once pushed viewers to wrestle with moral dilemmas and big ideas, Starfleet Academy too often settles for lectures on identity, race, and gender. Scenes that should highlight ingenuity or courage instead pause the story to underline the “correct” worldview. Even longtime fans have noticed the shift, arguing that storytelling has been sacrificed to satisfy progressive checklists.
That frustration hasn’t stayed confined to fan forums. Stephen Miller, a top adviser to President Trump, has publicly criticized the show, adding momentum to a broader conservative backlash. On social media, the complaints are consistent: viewers didn’t tune in to be educated or corrected—they tuned in to be entertained.
What’s often missed is that this creative direction reflects a leadership choice. Starfleet Academy was produced under the watch of Paramount CEO David Ellison, whose tenure has coincided with a clear ideological tilt across the company’s major franchises. This approach hasn’t been limited to Star Trek. It’s spread throughout Paramount and Skydance—and now Ellison is attempting a hostile takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery, a move that would place even more of America’s cultural infrastructure under his influence.
That should raise serious red flags.
David Ellison is not a conservative by any reasonable definition. He has described himself as “socially liberal” and, in 2024 alone, donated nearly $1 million to Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Democrat state parties nationwide. The idea that his family represents some kind of quiet ally to the right collapses under basic scrutiny. His father, Larry Ellison, spent millions trying to block Donald Trump’s nomination in 2016 and tens of millions more attempting to do it again in 2024.
Ellison’s content decisions follow the same pattern. He reportedly played a central role in Paramount’s $1.5 billion deal for South Park streaming rights, even as the show leaned into some of the most aggressive anti-Trump satire on television. Trump portrayed in bed with Satan. Trump supporters reduced to punchlines. Ellison defended it all. At the same time, Paramount elevated familiar Trump critics, including Jon Stewart, whose return to The Daily Show came under Ellison’s leadership.
This didn’t happen overnight. For years, Paramount and Skydance openly embraced DEI initiatives, LGBTQ+ mandates, and progressive hiring frameworks. Even after a highly publicized “pivot” meant to ease regulatory scrutiny—scrapping formal DEI programs and bringing in Bari Weiss at CBS News—the content itself barely budged. The ideological direction remained unchanged.
The company has long celebrated a steady drumbeat of “firsts”: the first openly gay relationship centered in a Star Trek series, the first non-binary lead in a major sci-fi franchise, children’s programming that incorporates gender ideology as core instruction. Skydance has been praised by left-leaning outlets for aggressive DEI hiring quotas and partnerships with activist organizations tasked with shaping both stories and staffing. These moves are framed as progress, but they function more as ideological signaling than creative risk-taking.
Paramount’s own reporting leaves little ambiguity. Annual disclosures boast about expanding LGBTQ+ representation across scripted series. Internal Skydance materials celebrate diversity officers reviewing scripts for “inclusive language.” Established franchises—from Star Trek to Scream—now regularly prioritize narratives about systemic oppression and identity politics over the escapism that once made them successful.
President Trump, notably, hasn’t been convinced by Paramount’s recent attempts at repositioning. Despite outreach efforts from CBS News leadership, Trump recently said 60 Minutes has treated him “far worse” under the Ellison regime than ever before. “If they are my friends, I’d hate to see my enemies!” he wrote, brushing aside the corporate charm offensive.
Now the Ellisons are aiming higher. Control of Warner Bros. Discovery would give them influence over CBS, Paramount+, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros. Studios—placing enormous cultural reach in the hands of one family with a clearly defined ideological record. That level of consolidation would give a single worldview unprecedented sway over news, film, television, and streaming.
Conservatives should resist the temptation to be distracted by cosmetic gestures or temporary messaging shifts. The Ellisons’ record is consistent and well documented: progressive content priorities, DEI activism, and massive financial support for Democratic causes. Expanding their control would only accelerate the narrowing of acceptable viewpoints in American media.
If you care about real viewpoint diversity, traditional values, and the ability to enjoy entertainment without being lectured, this is a moment worth taking seriously. Pushing back on the Ellisons’ expanding media empire isn’t about nostalgia or culture-war theatrics—it’s about preserving a media landscape that still leaves room for disagreement, creativity, and genuine escape.
