Creators are evolving into entrepreneurs and disrupting the traditional Hollywood model. At CES 2026, executives from Lionsgate, Hello Sunshine, Amazon, Microsoft and T-Mobile made clear that the creator economy is reshaping how entertainment is made, distributed and monetized. For studios, that shift is forcing a rethink of where content lives and how success is measured. For tech companies, creators have become essential partners.

At Lionsgate, executives increasingly weigh whether a project belongs in theaters or platforms like YouTube. “At the end of the day, people always want to see their stuff on the big screen, or on Amazon Prime or on Netflix, or wherever it makes the most sense for them—for their ego,” said Brad Haugen, EVP of digital strategy and growth at Lionsgate and 3Arts, during a Monday (Jan. 5) panel on how creators are redefining Hollywood’s talent pipeline. “But that’s not always the best home for the content.”

Hello Sunshine has taken a slightly different approach by building its business around audience ownership and community. The women-focused media company co-founded by Reese Witherspoon has leaned heavily into digital-first initiatives such as Reese’s Book Club, which has become a powerful engine for turning novels into cultural hits and screen adaptations.

One of its most notable successes was Daisy Jones & the Six, adapted from Taylor Jenkins Reid’s novel into a Prime Video miniseries starring Riley Keough. When it debuted in 2023, it became one of Amazon’s most-watched series.

More recently, Hello Sunshine launched a program aimed at amplifying female-led creators across social platforms. The initiative currently includes about 40 creators, among them authors Laura Dave and Danielle Robey.

“The net-net of it is to change the narrative for women,” said Jennifer Wiener, EVP of brand partnerships and experimental at Hello Sunshine, on the same panel. “You have to be doing it across every platform. We are storytellers, and we want to be telling those stories everywhere.”

That multi-platform mindset plays directly into Amazon’s advantage as a company rooted in technology and media. Rather than forcing creators into a single format, Amazon has built an ecosystem that allows them to scale across audio, video, social and commerce.

On the same panel, Matt Sandler, general manager of creator services at Amazon, pointed to brands like Wondery, Studio126 and Prime Video as engines for creator growth, citing partnerships with LeBron James, Keke Palmer and MrBeast.

“Amazon can serve those customers in a really material way,” Sandler said. “What we’ve done is create this new creator services business to super-serve the content at the center—which is largely digital or social content.”

While media companies are adapting to creator-led models, tech giants are increasingly baking creators directly into their core business strategies. Over the past year, Microsoft has hired more producers, editors and scriptwriters with backgrounds in the creator economy, according to Marcus Frieske, the tech giant’s general manager of social and creative marketing.

“They come from YouTube and Snapchat,” Frieske said during a separate panel Monday on why creators have become brands’ most valuable media channel. “They’re used to, ‘Hey, we’ve got to make a video, and it needs to go live in the next couple of days.’ Having fast-paced individuals who understand that rhythm has been really critical to our success.”

T-Mobile, meanwhile, is leaning into creators as collaborators rather than spokespeople. Kimberley Hand, senior creator manager at the telecom company, said T-Mobile is developing an advisory board made up of creators to shape campaigns and ensure authenticity.

She also highlighted Club Magenta, the brand’s experiential activation that has appeared at music festivals and events such as Lollapalooza. The pop-up features charging stations, lounges, and social spaces—designed not just for fans, but also for creators to document and share their experiences in real-time.

Creator Jazmyn Smith, for example, helped bring the activation to life for her audience. “[Smith] is able to bring it alive in a way that we can’t through our own storytelling,” Hand said. “It fits very naturally into her content and her experience at Lolla.”

On Friday, Warner Bros. Discovery’s board agreed to sell its studio and streaming assets to Netflix in an $82.7 billion deal that many believed would reshape Hollywood. But just a weekend later, the plot shifted: Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison came out swinging with an even larger, all-cash proposal to buy all of WBD’s assets for $108.4 billion (or $30 per share). By going straight to WBD shareholders, the young media executive argued that Paramount would serve as a better home for WBD and help preserve Hollywood’s legacy.

Ellison’s bid notably includes WBD’s TV networks—CNN, TBS, TNT and others—which Netflix did not want. The proposal is reportedly partially backed by Ellison’s father, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, and RedBird Capital Partners, which also financed Skydance Media’s $8 billion acquisition of Paramount Global that closed in August.

In an interview with CNBC’s Squawk Box today (Dec. 8), Ellison called a Netflix acquisition a “horrible deal for Hollywood” and argued that Paramount’s offer would better serve customers and the industry. “As someone who spent the last 15 years of my life producing movies and television shows, this is an industry that I love, this is an existential moment for our business, and we believe that what we are offering is better for Hollywood. It’s better for the customers and it’s pro-competitive,” he said.

Before Paramount entered the fray, much of the weekend chatter centered on what a Netflix takeover might mean for the future of entertainment. Hollywood guilds—including SAG-AFTRA, the WGA and other groups—quickly began exploring ways to block the merger. Many of their concerns stem from fears that further consolidation would lead to job and wage losses, reduced competition and less creative freedom and content diversity. There are also anxieties about the theatrical business, given Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos’s long-held belief that watching movies in theaters is “outdated.”

Several politicians have also raised red flags. Senator Elizabeth Warren called the proposed Netflix–WBD combination a “nightmare” that could result in “higher subscription prices and fewer choices.” President Donald Trump has likewise voiced skepticism about the deal.

Ellison argues that Paramount’s deal would ease antitrust concerns and actually increase competition by pairing Paramount+ with WBD’s HBO Max to better rival Netflix and Disney. A combined Netflix and WBD streaming service would create one of the industry’s largest platforms and almost certainly trigger intense antitrust review. Netflix has more than 300 million subscribers, while WBD’s streaming services have around 128 million. In contrast, Paramount+ has only around 79 million. A merger with Paramount will likely face a smoother regulatory process due to its comparatively smaller scale.

Some analysts speculate that the Ellisons’ close ties to Trump could give Paramount an advantage with regulators. Since making the bid, Ellison has said he has had “great conversations” with the President, though he stressed that he does not “want to speak for the President.”

Meanwhile, despite Trump’s skepticism toward a Netflix–WBD merger due to concerns about market dominance, he referred to Netflix Co-CEO Sarandos as a “fantastic man” and “great person.”

As of Monday afternoon, WBD said it would review Paramount’s offer and issue a decision within 10 days. In a statement, the board emphasized that it “is not modifying its recommendation with respect to the agreement with Netflix.” Because WBD has already signed an agreement, it would owe a $2.8 billion breakup fee if it accepts Paramount’s bid instead. Netflix, for its part, would have to pay a $5.8 billion breakup fee if the transaction collapses or fails to secure regulatory approval.

It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s an orange Marty Supreme blimp. If you’re on social media, chances are you’ve seen Timothée Chalamet and the buzzy rollout for A24’s upcoming Josh Safdie–directed sports drama in which the 29-year-old actor plays a young man chasing fame in the world of competitive ping pong. The film also stars Gwyneth Paltrow, Tyler, The Creator, and Odessa A’zion. Since dropping its first trailer in August, A24 has steadily ramped up the marketing ahead of the film’s Christmas Day release.

Since its founding in 2012, A24 has grown from a niche indie label into a $3.5 billion company, beloved by young cinephiles for its arthouse slate and distinctive merch. At the center of its latest marketing campaign is Chalamet himself, who commands the same Gen Z demographic the studio is targeting. GQ editor Frazier Tharpe recently wrote that Chalamet is “redefining the rollout” and “making the movie-star promo cycle cool by making it weird.” (A24 hasn’t disclosed a specific budget for the Marty Supreme push.)

Chalamet has become a magnet for attention outside of his films as well. During last year’s NBA season, he went viral attending Knicks games, effectively becoming an unofficial team cheerleader during the playoffs as he sat courtside with girlfriend Kylie Jenner, director Spike Lee and a rotating cast of celebrities. His likeness also helped spark the wave of celebrity lookalike contests that swept through major cities, and he even has a dedicated social fan club dubbed “Club Chalamet.”

One of the most viral moments of the campaign came from an 18-minute video in which A24 and Chalamet staged a spoofed Zoom meeting. In it, the actor plays an egomaniac pitching increasingly absurd marketing ideas. The clip has since exploded across TikTok, Instagram Reels and X, with one moment—Chalamet shouting “Schwap!” into the camera—circulating widely.

But not all of it was just satire. A24 backed up the bit with actual orange blimps floating over Los Angeles. Disney pulled a similar stunt earlier this year, skywriting a giant “4” to promote Fantastic Four: The First Steps.

View this post on Instagram

Momentum really accelerated in October at the 63rd New York Film Festival, where Safdie and Chalamet surprised audiences with a screening. Soon after, Chalamet appeared in Times Square to show fans the first 30 minutes of the film, flanked by people in black tracksuits and oversized orange ping-pong-ball masks.

Then came the Marty Supreme jackets, which went viral almost immediately. Chalamet and celebrities like Kid Cudi and Frank Ocean were photographed wearing them in different colorways.

In a GQ piece, global fashion correspondent Samuel Hine wondered whether the Marty Supreme jacket might be “the definitive garment of 2025.” Fans certainly acted like it. During a recent four-hour pop-up in New York’s SoHo, A24 sold the $250 jackets to crowds who waited for hours. Chalamet even stopped by to greet fans and hand out merch.

The jackets aren’t available on A24’s online shop, and it’s unclear if they ever will be. But the frenzy echoes the urgency of Supreme’s in-person drop model—another reminder of how effectively A24 taps into hype culture. (It’s unclear whether the campaign is inspired by Supreme.)

With clever marketing stunts and Chalamet’s box office power (his turn as Bob Dylan in Searchlight’s A Complete Unknown brought in $140.5 million worldwide, and the Dune franchise has earned over $1.14 billion globally), Marty Supreme is expected to strike box-office gold this holiday season. It’s projected to earn between $7 million and $12 million domestically over the opening weekend, in line with previous Christmas releases. Some believe it could even become A24’s highest-grossing title, though others doubt a period sports drama will break out with modern audiences.

A24’s current top performer, Everything Everywhere All at Once, grossed $145 million globally, fueled by word of mouth and its Best Picture win at the 2023 Oscars. Many awards watchers say Chalamet could be a frontrunner for Best Actor next year—momentum that could give Marty Supreme an additional boost.

ESPN Bet will officially shut down on Dec. 1 after a two-year run. In its renewed push into sports wagering, ESPN has struck a multi-year partnership with DraftKings. With the sports betting market growing rapidly, the sudden shuttering of a venture backed by such a well-known brand has raised eyebrows.

ESPN Bet is operated by PENN Entertainment, a casino and entertainment company, through a licensing agreement. The app lets fans place wagers across a wide range of sports and teams, while integrating ESPN’s news, scores and analysis.

Nearly a quarter of Americans (22 percent) have an online sports betting account, with primary users being men ages 18 to 49, according to a Siena Poll survey. The U.S. sports betting industry generated $13.7 billion in revenue last year, up from $11 billion in 2023, according to the American Gaming Association. The nascent industry has continued to gain momentum since the Supreme Court legalized sports betting in 2018. Today, 38 states offer some form of legal sports betting.

What exactly went wrong with ESPN Bet?

Industry experts point to several factors behind ESPN Bet’s collapse. A leading argument is timing: the product simply arrived too late. With DraftKings and FanDuel firmly entrenched at the top of the sports betting market (commanding 44 percent and 34 percent of the market, respectively), breaking the duopoly has become increasingly difficult.

“If ESPN had started in 2018, there’s a better argument it could have won at the end of the day,” Dustin Gouker, a gambling industry consultant, told Observer. “But it would have depended on lots of other variables, including the sports betting product itself, which many would say was subpar with PENN until recently.”

Ross Benes, a senior analyst with eMarketer, said ESPN Bet was “a mess from the start.” 

ESPN Bet is the successor to PENN’s Barstool Sportsbook, launched in 2020 through a partnership between PENN and Barstool Sports and shut down in 2023 after PENN sold the brand back to its founder, Dave Portnoy. “There was the whole Barstool Sports thing and it was unclear where that was going,” Benes told Observer.

“Barstool wasn’t great at converting users in partnership with PENN. ESPN was bigger, but was arguably more ineffective as the top of the marketing funnel for the sportsbook,” Gouker said. ESPN chairman Jimmy Pitaro said the rebranding “drove over 2.9 million new users into the PENN ecosystem.” ESPN Bet reached 1.1 million users during its first week in November 2023. Before the rebrand, Barstool Sportsbook had just more than 72,000 registered users in Pennsylvania, the first state where it launched, in 2023.

ESPN maintains deep relationships with major sports leagues, including the NFL, NBA, MLB and NCAA, through broadcast and media rights agreements. While leagues have increasingly embraced sports betting, that momentum has been complicated by scandals. The NBA is currently under investigation for some of its talent allegedly getting illegally involved in gambling. Benes said it’s likely ESPN and its parent company, The Walt Disney Company, are being cautious, making it easier to outsource sports betting to an established operator like DraftKings. “They don’t want to have something called ESPN Bet while their top partners are being investigated.”

ESPN Bet had been intended to “compete for a podium position in the space,” PENN Entertainment CEO and president Jay Snowden said earlier this month, when announcing the termination of the partnership. Snowden added that PENN plans to rebrand its U.S. sports betting offering to theScore Bet, which currently operates in Canada, and will “refocus” its digital strategy on the company’s growing iCasino business.

Under their initial deal, PENN agreed to pay ESPN $150 million a year for use of the sports network’s name. The partnership had a 10-year term, but included a clause allowing either party to terminate the agreement after the third year if “specific market share performance thresholds were not met.”

Most observers agree the termination hurts PENN more than Disney financially, particularly since ESPN alone generates billions of dollars from sports rights deals. In 2024, Disney reported $91.4 billion in revenue, making a $150 million loss comparatively small.

“When you think about it, $150 million is way less than it costs to produce one Marvel movie,” Benes said.