Discovery CEO Zaslav Gets A Big Fat Raise Despite Being Terrible At His Job

from the fail-upward-to-the-level-of-your-incompetence dept

By now we’ve well established that this particular series of media mergers — which began with AT&T’s doomed acquisition of Time Warner and ended with Time Warner’s subsequent spin off and fusion with Discovery — were some of the dumbest, most pointless “business” exercises ever conceived by man.

The pointless saga burned through hundreds of billions in debt, saw more than 50,000 people lose their jobs, killed off numerous popular brands (like Mad Magazine and HBO), created oceans of animosity among creatives, and resulted in a Max streaming service that’s arguably dumber and of notably lower quality than when the entire expensive gambit began.

And of course, the executives responsible — like Discovery CEO David Zaslav — were punished last year by… receiving a big fat raise:

“David Zaslav, CEO of troubled Warner Bros. Discovery, got a 27% increase in total compensation for 2023.

According to the company’s proxy statement, Zaslav was paid $49.7 million, including $3 million in salary, $23.1 million in stock awards and $22 million in non-equity incentive plans compensation. He received $39.3 million in 2022.”

That’s still lower that previous years’ compensation. Zaslav made a whopping $246 million in 2021 thanks to a hefty $203 million in stock options tacked on to his pay. It’s highly representative of the modern U.S. media sector, where the least competent brunchlords fail upward into positions of power, struggle repeatedly at any sort of competency, then get rewarded for it.

You’ll recall this entire mess started with AT&T’s disastrous $200 billion acquisitions of DirecTV and Time Warner, which resulted in upwards of 50,000 layoffs despite the company nabbing a $42 billion tax cut from the Trump administration. After incompetent AT&T executives failed at their bundled pivot to video advertising, they spun Time Warner off into its own entity.

Shortly thereafter Discovery acquired the remaining assets creating yet another company, and things just kept getting worse. The resulting giant’s often been too cheap to pay residuals, resulting in a lot of popular content getting pulled from its streaming services. More recently executives took heat for backing away from the HBO brand, about the only consistently popular part of the company’s assets.

Most of these decisions may gain short-term tax breaks, stock boosts, or “I’m a savvy dealmaker” participation trophies on executive resumes, but they’ve generally been terrible for debt loads, customer satisfaction, employee happiness, and the longer-term health of the brands.

Kind of amusingly, trade magazines like Broadcasting and Cable don’t think it’s worth noting any of the chaos, product quality issues, or layoffs in their announcement of the news. Neither does The Hollywood Reporter. And Deadline found time to mention that Zaslav is the “poster child of high executive compensation,” but didn’t think any of the Zaslav’s failings were relevant to their story.

It’s nice work if you can get it.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: warner bros. discovery

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Discovery CEO Zaslav Gets A Big Fat Raise Despite Being Terrible At His Job”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
21 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

It’s times like this that I recall a few choice quotes from Nick Hanauer’s article, The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats:

The standard response in the minimum-wage debate, made by Republicans and their business backers and plenty of Democrats as well, is that raising the minimum wage costs jobs. Businesses will have to lay off workers. This argument reflects the orthodox economics that most people had in college. If you took Econ 101, then you literally were taught that if wages go up, employment must go down. The law of supply and demand and all that. That’s why you’ve got John Boehner and other Republicans in Congress insisting that if you price employment higher, you get less of it. Really? Because here’s an odd thing. During the past three decades, compensation for CEOs grew 127 times faster than it did for workers. Since 1950, the CEO-to-worker pay ratio has increased 1,000 percent, and that is not a typo. CEOs used to earn 30 times the median wage; now they rake in 500 times. Yet no company I know of has eliminated its senior managers, or outsourced them to China or automated their jobs. Instead, we now have more CEOs and senior executives than ever before. So, too, for financial services workers and technology workers. These folks earn multiples of the median wage, yet we somehow have more and more of them.

We rich people have been falsely persuaded by our schooling and the affirmation of society, and have convinced ourselves, that we are the main job creators. It’s simply not true. There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power a great economy. I earn about 1,000 times the median American annually, but I don’t buy thousands of times more stuff. My family purchased three cars over the past few years, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and a few shirts a year, just like most American men. I bought two pairs of the fancy wool pants I am wearing as I write, what my partner Mike calls my “manager pants.” I guess I could have bought 1,000 pairs. But why would I? Instead, I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good.

The oldest and most important conflict in human societies is the battle over the concentration of wealth and power. The folks like us at the top have always told those at the bottom that our respective positions are righteous and good for all. Historically, we called that divine right. Today we have trickle-down economics. What nonsense this is. Am I really such a superior person? Do I belong at the center of the moral as well as economic universe? Do you?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“Today we have trickle-down economics. What nonsense this is. Am I really such a superior person? Do I belong at the center of the moral as well as economic universe?”

They really do believe this, even the ones who don’t. Because the alternative would be to accept reality, that not everyone can live the dream. For there to be a rich class, there has to be a poorer worker class doing all the crappy maintenance and logistics jobs that the wealthy wouldn’t be seen doing. The truth is that there isn’t a space for everybody to be at the rich person’s table.

So the narrative has to be turned into an issue of morality. There has to be a narrative of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, that there exists for everyone a threshold of work and effort that you can put in, after which the world will surely be yours if you just keep working, working, working. Never mind that vacancies are limited and competition is fierce, this is the only system that works! Because to believe otherwise would be to realize that you, in fact, don’t control most of the outcome. It would be to realize that success heavily depends on luck. But you can’t tell people that, because then people stop trying. Investing becomes speculating. So you have to keep selling this idea that failure is immoral. CEOs get their golden umbrellas because they deserve it, and you’ll have to work a lifetime before you even come close to being in their shadow.

The trouble with that is that kids nowadays have actually done the one thing that the CEOs are terrified of: they’ve given up.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

So there’s been this MSNBC interview making the rounds on the Internet from Scott Galloway, talking about his new book “Algebra on Wealth”, which is basically him pointing out what Gen Zs and millennials have long since realized: that there’s just no point in trying.

So in America, we’ve decided to try and create this superclass of billionaires, and then if they win the gold medal, we’re going to give them the silver and the bronze. Two biggest tax deductions: capital gains and mortgage interests. Who owns homes and stocks? People my age. Who doesn’t, you know, who makes money from current income? Young people.

So we’ve decided that the wealthiest people in the world should get exceptionally more wealthy. Minimum wage is stuck at 9.25. Stock market is screened up. The average 70-year-old is 72 percent more wealthy than they were 40 years ago. The average person on the edge of 40 is 24 percent less wealthy. We are purposely transferring more wealth from the poor and middle class and the upper class to the super rich, and from young to old.

For the first time in our nation’s history, a 30-year-old man or woman isn’t doing as well as his or her parents were at 30. That is the social compact breaking down. People aged 30 to 34, 60 percent of them in 1990 have one child, now it’s 27 percent. People are opting out of America, they’re not optimistic about it, they’re not having kids. Young people aren’t having sex. They’re not meeting, they’re not mating. The pool of emotionally and economically viable men shrinks every day, which lessens household formation. So we have a real issue: young people are enraged. So it turns every cult, every movement into an opportunistic infection, because frankly they are just. Pissed. Off. They look up, they see wealth – exceptional wealth – across my generation and people in certain industries, and they are really struggling. Purchasing power is going down, and the incumbents create artificial scarcity on campus. We take pride in rejecting 9 percent of our applicants, so the incumbents who already have a degree see their degree go up in value, we get very concerned with housing and traffic once we own housing, housing permits are sequestered from young people, housing prices have gone from 290k to 420k in the last four years. So for a young person, a house, stocks that I don’t own skyrocket in value? Let’s have COVID relief and flush the markets and take assets way up, because a million people dying would be bad, would be tragic – if I got less wealthy. And we are doing it on THEIR credit card.

Young people have every reason to be enraged. And every issue they see: they look up, they see someone doing better than them, and then every day it is speedballed in their face that they are failing. That they are not doing as well as everyone around them. We have lost the script. Our kids are more anxious, they’re more depressed, they’re more obese, they’re more addicted, and we have made a purposeful decision to let this happen by ensuring that the people sitting around this table stay wealthy at the cost of young people.

I’ve been personally looking at it through the lens of an MMORPG. Consider World or Warcraft, or any other highly developed and mature game ecosystem like Magic the Gathering. Why would anyone want to dive in now, when not only is the cost to entry just to survive is so high, but you can expect to be ganged on by more experienced and resource-abundant players whose main advantage is that they got a head start years ago? And if people won’t do this for virtual and game worlds, why would they do it for the real world?

It’s worth asking boomers and business owners. Would you knowingly take a huge risk now? Would you start over again with nothing in this economy, without any of the support systems built up after decades? If you wouldn’t, then why would you demand the same of young people?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

You hit the nail on the head with the MMORPG analogy, I think. In any established ecosystem, you’re always going to be fighting with the early adopters, the people who were there first. And that’s the problem young people are facing now: going against the generation who was there first, making a conscious decision to screw them over to enrich the super wealthy.

For what it’s worth, I took a look at Galloway’s Algebra of Wealth. I wish it was really more than just an old guy saying “step out of your comfort zone”, but that’s about all there is to it. In his defense I don’t see how you can really say much else in this day and age. But it’s not particularly helpful for a new generation struggling to meet life milestones, especially when they can’t afford to take risks that don’t pay off. Why would they, when even the hyper wealthy who have the most resources to burn wouldn’t take those risks?

Ninja says:

Re:

What’s worse, those outrageously high wages are paid for utterly incompetent people like this Discovery case. Like Musk with Twitter (although his money came from labor exploitation in African mines promoted by his dad).

Two abysmally dumb morons that took well known, established brands and shoved into their arses replacing for generic, dumb shit along with destroying what they were supposed to manage. Twitter even had entries in the goddamn Oxford dictionary.

Makes this several orders of magnitude more outrageous.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

What’s scary is the fact that this was written 10 years ago, and dated before the Trump presidency.

Now the pitchforks are coming… just not for the reasons that Nick expected. I wonder how many of those disaffected young people will end up voting Trump just to spite Biden? Because that obviously worked out for them the first time…

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

The funniest shit is that Trump isn’t even subtle about it. He’s openly gloated and celebrated college protesters getting moved off their campsites. He’s made it very clear that given the opportunity, he will fuck them over with no regrets or restraint whatsoever.

If these students still think that Trump’s a preferable option over Biden at this point, it’s safe to say that there is no helping them.

That One Guy (profile) says:

When tomorrow is always someone else's problem...

In a system that places value solely on how much money you’re making today doing whatever it takes to ensure that you’ll always be making more today than you made yesterday, with tomorrow brushed aside as not worth considering sadly it makes perfect sense to reward those at the top for burning a companies’ future to the ground so long as it makes things better for the execs in the short term.

After all, once one company crashes and has been looted until there’s nothing left for those running it there’s always more to jump to for an ‘executive experienced in the field of business and/or management’…

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Nimrod (profile) says:

There’s no valid excuse for that level of compensation. There is literally NOTHING anyone could possibly achieve that would justify it. If this clown had any level of empathy, we’d be reading about his MASSIVE charitable donations. I suspect there are NONE.
At least pro athletes work hard to maintain their elite physicality. CEOs are PARASITES. Their only actual work is in deceiving those foolish enough to employ them.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

saw more than 50,000 people lose their jobs

I don’t think that really fits with the other negative points. Employing useless people costs customers money, in theory, in addition to being bad for the company and its shareholders. So the question should be asked: were these people mostly useless, or was this gutting important parts of the company? And I don’t see any real information about that in the linked story.

As W.B. Discovery has a huge number of holdings in dying businesses, such as television networks, I’m sure some of those lay-offs were justified.

mick says:

Re:

Don’t forget that most shares of most stocks are owned by massive hedge funds run by buddies of these CEOs. So when there’s a “shareholder vote,” the votes being counted are generally the votes of the very wealthy.

Every system related to corporate finance and ownership is designed to make the wealthy more wealthy. The success of the company is secondary, and the well-being of the proletariat, the country, or the world isn’t even on the agenda.

Ninja says:

It would seem that more and more people are waking up to this kind of fuckery promoted by the rich. Too late and way too few yet to make any difference. The Communism boogeyman used to scare people from developing this type of critical thinking was way too successful.

The current capitalism crisis won’t be solved by pushing a few million through the poverty meat mower because there’s another underlying crisis produced by capitalism in full development and that cannot be solved by traditional propaganda and repression means: the environmental crisis.

We are in for a rough ride.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...