5 ms·

Larry Ellison is ultra-pro Israel if you didn't know. He and others are pushing for Bari Weiss take a key role at CBS to better "defend Israel": https://nypos

Larry Ellison is ultra-pro Israel if you didn't know. He and others are pushing for Bari Weiss take a key role at CBS to better "defend Israel": https://nypost.com/2025/09/19/media/shari-redstone-says-bari-weiss-would-be-good-voice-at-cbs-news/ https://nypost.com/2025/09/19/media/shari-redstone-says-bari... And many people are worried about a similar type of agenda setting at TikTok now: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/will-tiktoks-new-owners-censor-pro-palestine-content.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/will-tiktoks-new-own... Netanyahu, for his part, believes it is super consequential for Ellison to takeover TikTok: https://x.com/TheTNHoller/status/1972326967983923636 https://x.com/TheTNHoller/status/1972326967983923636 (Video) https://jewishinsider.com/2025/09/tiktok-sale-netanyahu-american-influencers-israel-jews/ https://jewishinsider.com/2025/09/tiktok-sale-netanyahu-amer... (Summary) (And if that wasn't enough, Ellison has his eyes set on Warner Brothers next, which includes CNN: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/11/business/media/paramount-warner-bros-discovery-bid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/11/business/media/paramount-... )

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
That’s a study shoehorn… Would his statements be better if he were pro-Gaza or something else?
- amval 1y ago
  Well, yes, it would be better if he didn't amplify propaganda for the country that is committing a genocide and would raise awareness for the victims. Is this not self-evident?
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    The point is this comes down to a foreign policy disagreement that isn’t germane to Ellison’s comments on surveillance. (I can come with a litany of policy disagreements with anyone of Ellison’s stature, some of which I probably feel about strongly.) Read in good faith, it’s overzealous advocacy. In bad faith, which I don’t assume here, it serves to get this discussion flagged off the front page.
    - amval 1y ago
      You don't think that the fact that Ellison is a staunch defender of regimes that disregard the international order in favour of military might is relevant to the fact that is also advocating for building a surveillance state? In case you don't, to me it's painfully clear that these are just different aspects of the move towards more authoritarian forms of government. You CANNOT support a genocide and expect that this will not have an effect on democracy. EDIT: Also note that I am trying to take your comments on good faith, but characterising support for genocide as "a foreign policy disagreement" feels a bit like an understatement.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > it's painfully clear that these are just different aspects of the move towards more authoritarian forms of government Sure. But, like, the evidence for that is the advocacy for a surveillance state. Not his support for a foreign policy project that yes, involves supporting an autocratic government in Israel (fighting, let’s be fair, an autocratic force in Gaza backed by an autocratic state in Iran), but also a whole bunch of other irrelevant things.
        amval 1y ago
        I don't think I understand your point, beyond downplaying the severity of current events.
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        I’m not downplaying the severity of anything. Just its relevance. Someone can be severe and irrelevant, and I think that’s the case here.
        bigyabai 1y ago
        Your language suggests a sort of "explaining away" that is pernicious in certain cultures abroad.
- js8 1y ago
  It would certainly better support his statement that the people are on their best behavior if being monitored. If his statement is true, then the real Larry Ellison (not publicly known one) is worse than a genocide supporter. He basically discredits himself by making that statement.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > It would certainly better support his statement that the people are on their best behavior if being monitored It literally wouldn’t. Whether people behave better when surveilled in independently verifiable. Whether or not bees exist doesn’t revolve around the political beliefs of the person claiming they do.
    - js8 1y ago
      I found it amusing that someone would say something to the effect of "killing people is the furthest I am willing to go, but not further", as if there is any further... Anyway, I agree it is a verifiable fact, but it also can be a personal belief. Does L.E. provide any evidence, or is he stating it authoritatively? In any case, one big piece of evidence we have for the claim is that Israel doesn't allow any foreign journalists in Gaza, and is trying to control Tiktok, in which L.E. seems to be involved. So by pointing that belief out, L.E. indicates he is even a worse guy, because in some cases he disagrees with such independent monitoring.
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > one big piece of evidence we have for the claim is that Israel doesn't allow any foreign journalists in Gaza, and is trying to control Tiktok, in which L.E. seems to be involved This is relevant! Consider how much more interesting the top comment would be if it called out this hypocrisy instead of the same old 'so and so is pro X and herego a bad guy'.
- bhouston 1y ago
  > Would his statements be better if he were pro-Gaza or something else? How about he and CBS News and TikTok be neutral and truth seeking rather than being pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian? I would like news organizations to be truth seeking and I would like social media to not be tinting my view of the world towards what their billionaire owners want. Maybe that is too much?
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > How about he and CBS News and TikTok be neutral and truth seeking rather than being pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian? I agree. But easier said than done. Especially when it comes to something as polarising as Gaza, playing the moderate essentially cedes the debate. (Both sources you mention are supported by ads. Their metric is engagement, not informativeness.)
    - bhouston 1y ago
      > Especially when it comes to something as polarising as Gaza One should expect news sources to report that the main Israeli human rights groups believe it is a genocide, the main international human rights groups believe it is a genocide, UN investigatory panels believe it is a genocide, genocide scholars believe it is a genocide: https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-inter... https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o Those that disagree with this assessment are in a minority. But to you it is just "polarizing." You are denying reality that is in front of you because you want to. And this is resulting in more families being wiped out, people starving to death and for Netanyahu and his coalition that want to "voluntary migrate" the Palestinians away from Gaza for Israeli settlements: https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/24/middleeast/israel-approves-proposal-to-facilitate-emigration-of-palestinians-from-gaza-intl https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/24/middleeast/israel-approves-pr...
- bigyabai 1y ago
  Yeah. His property would be better without Lanai in them, his businesses would be better without him at the helm, and his opinions would indeed be better if he wasn't rationalizing a genocide. Larry Ellison cannot be anthropomorphized. His entire life is one sociopathic, misanthropic soap opera.
- insane_dreamer 1y ago
  Yes, because I have less trust in people who support genocide than those who do not.
andsoitis 1y ago
what does this have to do with the story?
- softwaredoug 1y ago
  Well in part because Israel acts like a police state supported by a lot of Orwellian technology
  - myroon5 1y ago
    Example: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware) https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)
    - kiliancs 1y ago
      If the targets are in other countries, deployed by other countries, I don't think this is a good example.
      - WickyNilliams 1y ago
        Better example? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/25/microsoft-blocks-israels-use-of-its-technology-in-mass-surveillance-of-palestinians https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/25/microsoft-bloc...
- lupusreal 1y ago
  How could Ellison's motivation for creating a surveillance state possibly not be relevant?
  - andsoitis 1y ago
    > How could Ellison's motivation for creating a surveillance state possibly not be relevant? What is his motivation? Why is Israel relevant?
    - 1y ago
DSingularity 1y ago
If anybody even insinuates that Weiss or Ellison have dual loyalty because of this they will be accused of anti-semitism. The hard truth is that weaponizing your money — earned largely from Americans — to aid a foreign country at the expense of America is about as un-American as it gets. Aside from the potentially valid argument that your voice shouldn’t be louder just because you are a billionaire — you are corrupting American foreign policy and American stature in the world to advance the agenda of Israel. That is a betrayal of America.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > anybody even insinuates that Weiss or Ellison have dual loyalty because of this they will be accused of anti-semitism No, they’ll be accused of derailing the conversation. Every pro-Palestinian activist isn’t civically compromised because they have strong views on foreign policy. > you are corrupting American foreign policy and American stature in the world to advance the agenda of Israel. That is a betrayal of America. This is a convoluted and hyperbolic way of expressing foreign-policy disagreement.
  - beardyw 1y ago
    > expressing foreign-policy disagreement Foreign policy is almost universally a quid pro quo. Whilst there may be something for the USA in this it feels very asymmetric unless I am missing something.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > Foreign policy is almost universally a quid pro quo At the state level, often. At the individual level, I don't think so. My pet war is Ukraine. I don't have any personal stake in the war. I just think it's abhorrent and poses a long-term risk to the security interests of places and people I care about. I can construct that into a narrative of fulfilling American geopolitical interests, but that's an exercise I'd be engaging in after I'd come to my view based on, essentially, a moral preference. That preference is real. But it's mine and far from universal. That someone thinks Russia is justified in invading Ukraine is frankly irrelevant to the validity of their statements on other matters. That's where I'm calling bullshit on this connection.
raxxorraxor 1y ago
You took an interesting topic and completely sidelined it with irrelevant info.
- bhouston 1y ago
  It is on topic because Ellison's "best behavior" includes being pro-Israel and it is likely to be implemented on CBS News and TikTok. I think others agree with me based on voting patterns.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

That’s a study shoehorn… Would his statements be better if he were pro-Gaza or something else?

amval 1y ago
Well, yes, it would be better if he didn't amplify propaganda for the country that is committing a genocide and would raise awareness for the victims. Is this not self-evident?
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  The point is this comes down to a foreign policy disagreement that isn’t germane to Ellison’s comments on surveillance. (I can come with a litany of policy disagreements with anyone of Ellison’s stature, some of which I probably feel about strongly.) Read in good faith, it’s overzealous advocacy. In bad faith, which I don’t assume here, it serves to get this discussion flagged off the front page.
  - amval 1y ago
    You don't think that the fact that Ellison is a staunch defender of regimes that disregard the international order in favour of military might is relevant to the fact that is also advocating for building a surveillance state? In case you don't, to me it's painfully clear that these are just different aspects of the move towards more authoritarian forms of government. You CANNOT support a genocide and expect that this will not have an effect on democracy. EDIT: Also note that I am trying to take your comments on good faith, but characterising support for genocide as "a foreign policy disagreement" feels a bit like an understatement.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > it's painfully clear that these are just different aspects of the move towards more authoritarian forms of government Sure. But, like, the evidence for that is the advocacy for a surveillance state. Not his support for a foreign policy project that yes, involves supporting an autocratic government in Israel (fighting, let’s be fair, an autocratic force in Gaza backed by an autocratic state in Iran), but also a whole bunch of other irrelevant things.
      - amval 1y ago
        I don't think I understand your point, beyond downplaying the severity of current events.
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        I’m not downplaying the severity of anything. Just its relevance. Someone can be severe and irrelevant, and I think that’s the case here.
        bigyabai 1y ago
        Your language suggests a sort of "explaining away" that is pernicious in certain cultures abroad.
js8 1y ago
It would certainly better support his statement that the people are on their best behavior if being monitored. If his statement is true, then the real Larry Ellison (not publicly known one) is worse than a genocide supporter. He basically discredits himself by making that statement.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > It would certainly better support his statement that the people are on their best behavior if being monitored It literally wouldn’t. Whether people behave better when surveilled in independently verifiable. Whether or not bees exist doesn’t revolve around the political beliefs of the person claiming they do.
  - js8 1y ago
    I found it amusing that someone would say something to the effect of "killing people is the furthest I am willing to go, but not further", as if there is any further... Anyway, I agree it is a verifiable fact, but it also can be a personal belief. Does L.E. provide any evidence, or is he stating it authoritatively? In any case, one big piece of evidence we have for the claim is that Israel doesn't allow any foreign journalists in Gaza, and is trying to control Tiktok, in which L.E. seems to be involved. So by pointing that belief out, L.E. indicates he is even a worse guy, because in some cases he disagrees with such independent monitoring.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > one big piece of evidence we have for the claim is that Israel doesn't allow any foreign journalists in Gaza, and is trying to control Tiktok, in which L.E. seems to be involved This is relevant! Consider how much more interesting the top comment would be if it called out this hypocrisy instead of the same old 'so and so is pro X and herego a bad guy'.
bhouston 1y ago
> Would his statements be better if he were pro-Gaza or something else? How about he and CBS News and TikTok be neutral and truth seeking rather than being pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian? I would like news organizations to be truth seeking and I would like social media to not be tinting my view of the world towards what their billionaire owners want. Maybe that is too much?
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > How about he and CBS News and TikTok be neutral and truth seeking rather than being pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian? I agree. But easier said than done. Especially when it comes to something as polarising as Gaza, playing the moderate essentially cedes the debate. (Both sources you mention are supported by ads. Their metric is engagement, not informativeness.)
  - bhouston 1y ago
    > Especially when it comes to something as polarising as Gaza One should expect news sources to report that the main Israeli human rights groups believe it is a genocide, the main international human rights groups believe it is a genocide, UN investigatory panels believe it is a genocide, genocide scholars believe it is a genocide: https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-inter... https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o Those that disagree with this assessment are in a minority. But to you it is just "polarizing." You are denying reality that is in front of you because you want to. And this is resulting in more families being wiped out, people starving to death and for Netanyahu and his coalition that want to "voluntary migrate" the Palestinians away from Gaza for Israeli settlements: https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/24/middleeast/israel-approves-proposal-to-facilitate-emigration-of-palestinians-from-gaza-intl https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/24/middleeast/israel-approves-pr...
bigyabai 1y ago
Yeah. His property would be better without Lanai in them, his businesses would be better without him at the helm, and his opinions would indeed be better if he wasn't rationalizing a genocide. Larry Ellison cannot be anthropomorphized. His entire life is one sociopathic, misanthropic soap opera.
insane_dreamer 1y ago
Yes, because I have less trust in people who support genocide than those who do not.

andsoitis 1y ago

what does this have to do with the story?

softwaredoug 1y ago
Well in part because Israel acts like a police state supported by a lot of Orwellian technology
- myroon5 1y ago
  Example: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware) https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(spyware)
  - kiliancs 1y ago
    If the targets are in other countries, deployed by other countries, I don't think this is a good example.
    - WickyNilliams 1y ago
      Better example? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/25/microsoft-blocks-israels-use-of-its-technology-in-mass-surveillance-of-palestinians https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/25/microsoft-bloc...
lupusreal 1y ago
How could Ellison's motivation for creating a surveillance state possibly not be relevant?
- andsoitis 1y ago
  > How could Ellison's motivation for creating a surveillance state possibly not be relevant? What is his motivation? Why is Israel relevant?
  - 1y ago

DSingularity 1y ago

If anybody even insinuates that Weiss or Ellison have dual loyalty because of this they will be accused of anti-semitism. The hard truth is that weaponizing your money — earned largely from Americans — to aid a foreign country at the expense of America is about as un-American as it gets. Aside from the potentially valid argument that your voice shouldn’t be louder just because you are a billionaire — you are corrupting American foreign policy and American stature in the world to advance the agenda of Israel. That is a betrayal of America.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> anybody even insinuates that Weiss or Ellison have dual loyalty because of this they will be accused of anti-semitism No, they’ll be accused of derailing the conversation. Every pro-Palestinian activist isn’t civically compromised because they have strong views on foreign policy. > you are corrupting American foreign policy and American stature in the world to advance the agenda of Israel. That is a betrayal of America. This is a convoluted and hyperbolic way of expressing foreign-policy disagreement.
- beardyw 1y ago
  > expressing foreign-policy disagreement Foreign policy is almost universally a quid pro quo. Whilst there may be something for the USA in this it feels very asymmetric unless I am missing something.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Foreign policy is almost universally a quid pro quo At the state level, often. At the individual level, I don't think so. My pet war is Ukraine. I don't have any personal stake in the war. I just think it's abhorrent and poses a long-term risk to the security interests of places and people I care about. I can construct that into a narrative of fulfilling American geopolitical interests, but that's an exercise I'd be engaging in after I'd come to my view based on, essentially, a moral preference. That preference is real. But it's mine and far from universal. That someone thinks Russia is justified in invading Ukraine is frankly irrelevant to the validity of their statements on other matters. That's where I'm calling bullshit on this connection.

raxxorraxor 1y ago

You took an interesting topic and completely sidelined it with irrelevant info.

bhouston 1y ago
It is on topic because Ellison's "best behavior" includes being pro-Israel and it is likely to be implemented on CBS News and TikTok. I think others agree with me based on voting patterns.