PARAMOUNT’S SWOOP FOR WARNER BROS POSES DILEMMA FOR HARRY POTTER STARS
When a Harry Potter pop-up experience opened in Saudi Arabia to much fanfare last winter, it was hailed as the “first of its kind in the kingdom”.
Visitors to the 25,000 sq-metre attraction were promised an immersive experience that featured reconstructions of iconic locations in the film series, including Hogwarts’ Great Hall, Diagon Alley and even a Quidditch pitch.
If the pop-up represented Saudi Arabia’s first foray into Harry Potter mania, it could soon be diving much deeper into the wizarding world. The Gulf state is lining up alongside Abu Dhabi and Qatar to bankroll Paramount’s $108bn (£80bn) hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros, the Hollywood studio behind the famous film franchise.
The prospect of Middle Eastern states swooping on beloved cultural assets is already raising eyebrows in Washington amid concerns about the region’s efforts to cleanse its reputation around the world. Closer to home, however, the countries’ hardline stance on issues such as LGBTQ rights threatens to pose a dilemma for Harry Potter’s politically vocal cast.
Saudi Arabia’s backing of the Warner Bros bid comes through its Public Investment Fund, which is chaired by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Together with the Qatar Investment Authority and Abu Dhabi’s L’imad Holding Company, the Gulf states are stumping up $24bn – or almost 60pc of the equity in Paramount’s bid.
Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law who has close ties to the Middle East, is also providing funding.
Empire-building
It is not the first incursion of Middle Eastern sovereign wealth into high-profile media and entertainment businesses.
RedBird IMI, the UAE-backed fund that was blocked from taking control of The Telegraph, last year bought All3Media, the production giant behind The Traitors and Race Across the World, in a £1.2bn deal. It also explored a swoop for ITV Studios, the broadcaster’s production arm that makes hits such as Love Island and I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here.
For critics of the Gulf nations, this empire-building has one primary goal: whitewashing the region’s questionable track record on human rights through ownership of high-profile cultural assets.
“Saudi Arabia’s PIF bid for Paramount is the latest demonstration of the fund’s expanding economic reach abroad,” says Nadyeen Abdulaziz at ALQST, a non-profit focused on human rights in Saudi Arabia.
“Such investments, particularly in the media sector, can bolster Riyadh’s global public relations efforts, helping amplify state narratives and potentially temper criticism of the kingdom’s human rights record.”
Radha Stirling, founder of campaign group Detained in Dubai, brands Gulf investment in media and entertainment a “public relations cover-up”.
“Foreign investment into our businesses, universities, news media, cinema and culture is always of grave concern, whether it’s indirect or direct and especially where it has the ability to influence our views,” she says.
Felix Jakens, head of campaigns at Amnesty International UK, says: “When governments with troubling human rights records gain influence over global entertainment or news outlets, the risk of soft-power whitewashing is impossible to ignore.
“These glossy projects risk distracting the world from the grave abuses still taking place inside the kingdom.”
In Washington, politicians are belatedly starting to take note.
In a letter to the company’s board and to Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, Democratic representatives Sam Liccardo and Ayanna Pressley this week wrote: “These investors, by virtue of their financial position or contractual rights, could obtain influence – direct or indirect – over business decisions that bear upon editorial independence, content moderation, distribution priorities or the stewardship of Americans’ private data.
“Even absent overt control, such influence can present a national security threat when foreign, state-linked entities have strategic interests inconsistent with those of the United States.”
Fresh moral dilemma
For those behind some of Warner Bros’ most high-profile properties – not least Harry Potter – allegations of cultural whitewashing pose a problem.
In 2018, JK Rowling was among more than 100 artists and writers to sign a letter to the UN calling for an investigation into the death of Jamal Khashoggi, the US journalist who was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Turkey.
A spokesman for Rowling declined to comment on her position on the Warner Bros takeover. But it is the former child stars of the franchise whose opposition – or lack of it – will be most closely watched.
Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint have all made public declarations in support of transgender rights while speaking out against the Harry Potter author, who has become one of the most prominent gender-critical voices over the last five years.
Rowling, who initially did not respond to the actors’ criticisms, rounded on them in September, branding Watson “ignorant” and accusing her of “trashing women’s rights”.
The row has been thrust back into the spotlight after casting announcements were made for the upcoming Harry Potter television series, which is being produced by Warner Bros and its subsidiary HBO.
Actors including Nick Frost, who was cast as Hagrid in the series, came under fire from trans activists. Frost distanced himself from Rowling’s views but insisted: “She’s allowed her opinion and I’m allowed mine.”
A separate Amazon audiobook adaptation of the books also sparked calls for a boycott, with actors including Michelle Gomez, who will voice Professor McGonagall, being forced to express support for trans rights in the face of baying online crowds.
So how will the Harry Potter stars react to their franchise being bought out by Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar, three countries accused of human rights abuses and in which homosexuality is illegal and in some cases punishable by death?
Watson, Radcliffe and Grint, who were contacted for comment, are yet to make any public statement on human rights abuses in the Middle East, though Watson has been a vocal supporter of Palestine.
Other cast members, however, have already shown they have no qualms with taking Gulf money. James and Oliver Phelps, the twin actors who played Fred and George Weasley, made a splashy appearance at the Middle East Film & Comic Con in Abu Dhabi last year.
In reality, opposition from Harry Potter’s former child stars is likely to have little bearing on Warner Bros, a Hollywood behemoth whose fate will ultimately be decided by Trump.
Nevertheless, having spoken out vocally against JK Rowling in the acrimonious trans debate, the franchise’s politically active stars could be facing a fresh moral dilemma.
2025-12-11T16:05:43Z