Business
Shield AI’s new CEO says the $5.6B defense tech startup is at an inflection point
Published
4 hours agoon
By
Jace Porter
There are plenty of conventional indicators that signal that a product is turning heads: Weekly active user figures start to soar, products fly off the shelves, there is unsolicited praise.
But for San Diego-based Shield AI, validation has looked a little different. In April of this year, Russian armed forces fired two HESA Shahed 136 missiles into a hangar in Kyiv, where a team of 30 Shield AI employees had been doing research and development just two weeks earlier. The missiles turned the facility into a skeleton of twisted metal and rubble, according to a photo and video footage reviewed by Fortune.
Incredibly, no one was harmed. James Lythgoe, a former U.K. Royal Marine who is now Shield AI’s managing director of Ukrainian operations, had moved the Shield AI employees to a new site, as he had been concerned about the newfound attention that its sprawling nine-foot-tall surveillance drone, the V-BAT, was picking up. “We were advised that the Russians were very aware of a new capability on the battlefield,” Lythgoe says.
On the frontlines in Ukraine, Russian jammers intersect communications and radio signals, leading drones to veer off course or even fall from the sky and crash. Many U.S. drones haven’t been able to perform. But after an eight-month iteration period in 2024, Shield AI’s V-BAT cleared rigorous Ukrainian jamming tests. In 2025 alone, the drones have executed more than 35 missions and identified more than 200 Russian targets in the warzone, according to the company.
The initial success Shield AI has seen with V-BAT in Ukraine and on U.S. shores with the Coast Guard and Marines has helped the startup land a $5.6 billion valuation and positioned it as one of the hottest defense startups of 2025, right behind its higher-valued and more hardware-heavy rival Anduril Industries. Major government contractors, known as the “primes,” have begun to pilot Shield AI’s autonomous aircraft software system, Hivemind, for the experimental aircraft they are building for the U.S. military. Foreign allies and U.S. partners like Romania, Indonesia, and Japan have purchased its surveillance drones.
Shield AI wants to harness this traction and turn it into meaningful financial results. It’s looking to a brand-new autonomous fighter jet it’s building, the X-BAT, to help make it happen.
It’s also looking to a new CEO. In May, the company brought in a new chief executive—Gary Steele—who has a track record of taking tech companies to multi-billion exits. With Shield AI’s cofounder and former CEO, Ryan Tseng, stepping into another leadership position, Steele has plans to grow the company’s revenue 70%-100% each year until it hits $1 billion in annual revenue for the year ending March 2028, up from the approximately $300 million Shield AI notched in the year ending in March 2025.
“I think the number one thing I think about is: How do we scale this?” says Steele, who spoke with Fortune over two interviews, his first since being named Shield AI’s CEO.
Courtesy of Shield AI
It won’t be easy. As part of Shield AI’s strategy, the 1,200-person company will need to convince legacy defense shops that the AI-powered autonomous software Hivemind can do more than power Shield AI’s own drone. A gruesome accident in 2024—in which a U.S. Navy servicemember had the tips of his fingers effectively sliced off during a drill with the V-BAT—put a damper on last year’s revenue, and gave the company a public black eye that its executives are anxious to put behind them. And Steele, who is likable and seemingly adept at navigating internal politics, has walked into a leadership position notoriously difficult in the startup world: a CEO seat at a company where the founders maintain key leadership roles, board seats, and stakes in the business they created.
Shield AI is at an inflection point. Now Steele will have to prove that he’s the one who can take it to the next level.
‘This inflection was happening’
Even before Anduril, there was Shield AI.
Brandon Tseng, a former Navy SEAL, partnered up with his brother after he, Ryan Tseng, had sold a startup to Qualcomm. The two of them, with cofounder Andrew Reiter, wanted to take the autonomy that Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos were promising would transform the auto and e-commerce industries and translate it to the battlefield. This was back in 2015—two years before Anduril started to take shape, and not long before protests erupted within Google over a contract it was renewing with the Department of Defense.
While Palantir had been securing government contracts for years, building military technology was rare among Silicon Valley tech-types at the time, not to mention exceedingly controversial. The Shield AI team turned down an initial $5 million investment because it had been contingent on Shield AI ditching its intended military focus and going commercial—which its founders weren’t willing to do. “It was really, really uncommon, if non-existent, for venture firms to be doing DoD-first companies,” says Peter Levine, a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, who sits on Shield AI’s board.
As the venture capital-backed defense tech industry has matured, however, the Tseng duo have become synonymous with the industry and with the traction the sector has garnered since geopolitical tensions started climbing in 2021. That climb sped up, of course, in 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine and views on the space shifted dramatically.
Shield AI had started with the now-discontinued quadcopter called the “Nova,” which, on first glance, looks like a superbly beef-ed up version of a drone you might buy at Radio Shack. Its innovation was in its tech stack, the AI-powered autonomous software system Shield AI calls “Hivemind,” which ingests data from onboard sensors—things like infrared cameras, radar, signals intelligence, and satellites—to build a model of its environment, then use AI to navigate, plan routes, avoid threats, and execute missions without the need for remote control.

Courtesy of Shield AI
With Hivemind, the quadcopter could go into the most dangerous parts of a building and gather intelligence of potential ambushes or hidden combatants, so soldiers wouldn’t have to walk in blind. The Nova has been used for several missions in the Middle East, inlcuding in October 2023, when Israeli forces used it to explore Hamas’ tunnel network below the Gaza Strip.
The Defense Department’s budget for quadcopters is relatively small, however, according to Ryan Tseng, so Shield AI pivoted in 2021 via its acquisition of the V-BAT, a towering surveillance drone capable of flying up to 18,000 feet and for 13 hours into enemy territory. The drone, which takes off and lands vertically, can fly from a ship or boat without a runway or launch mechanism, which has helped it notch contracts with the U.S. Coast Guard and Marines. But it’s the war in Ukraine that has really put V-BAT on the map.
Like many other U.S. defense startups, Shield AI donated technology and hardware to Ukraine’s military for testing and experimentation—for proof that their drones could stand up in a conflict zone. Many of those companies quickly came to realize that they couldn’t, including Shield AI.
The drones weren’t equipped to operate in areas where combatants could jam their communication signals or GPS, says Nathan Michael, Chief Technology Officer at Shield AI, who says the V-BATs they initially sent to Ukraine didn’t have Hivemind on board. “We had to come back and revisit our strategy,” he says.
It took roughly eight months for Shield AI’s tech team to incorporate Hivemind into the V-BAT. After the update, V-BAT underwent two new rounds of intense testing in summer 2024: a two-day test-run where seven jammers tried to knock it down, as well as a 60-mile test mission, where the V-BAT was used in jammed airspace to spot a Russian surface-to-air missile system and alert the Ukrainians, who hit it with a rocket. Both tests were successful, according to Ukrainian documents reviewed by Fortune, and Shield AI eventually sent over 16 V-BAT drones to Ukraine—most of them purchased by European allies—and they’ve been serving in the field ever since.
“I suspect that this year, more than half of our business is international”
Gary Steele, CEO, Shield AI
One of its most noteworthy missions thus far was in April, when a V-BAT flew some 80 kilometers into Russian-held territory, south of Zaporizhzhia, over two days to identify—then help destroy—two military headquarters and barracks, where Russian pilots and operators were remotely controlling the country’s highly-lethal FPV drone fleet.
New business has been pouring in in the months since, according to Steele. Shield AI started selling its V-BATs to the Netherlands, Ukraine, and Egypt this year. Steele wouldn’t give specifics, but said that Shield has “hundreds of millions” of dollars worth of new contracts in Asia, Europe, and the Middle East alone. And this summer, in late August, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine formally named Shield AI one of its “verified business partners,” allowing it to compete for state procurement contracts and access programs—and making it a true player in the war effort.
“I suspect that this year, more than half of our business is international,” Steele says, noting that he arrived at the company “as this inflection was happening.”
Shield AI is currently manufacturing the V-BATs out of its 107,000‑square‑foot “Batcave” production and engineering facility outside of Dallas, where the company is building 200 aircraft per year, though it just inked a deal with the manufacturer JSW to eventually start producing them in India as well.

Courtesy of DVIDS
Shield AI either sells the V-BAT outright, or, as is the case for nearly all of its contracts with the U.S. military, serves as a contractor operating the V-BATs for the customer, and the orders or contracts range from 4 to 300 aircraft, according to the company. For purchase, each V-BAT costs about $1 million, though the cost can vary depending on how many the customer is purchasing or the tech that is integrated into the system. Shield AI also licenses Hivemind to customers, including Singapore and South Korea, as an autonomy software suite and developer platform. Hivemind made up approximately 30% of the company’s revenue in the 12 months ending in March 2025. While the company says it makes “some revenue” from the early demonstrations and integration work it is doing with primes, including Airbus, RTX, and Northrup Grumman, the future of that business line will largely depend on whether the Department of Defense eventually opts to purchase those products.
‘Every single investor made money’
Steele was almost gliding around the light brown wooden floors of his San Francisco condo when we first met in August. He had left his loafers in his office and was enthusiastically sliding about in his grey slacks and socks, pointing out various paintings that scatter the walls of his second home, a corner apartment with floor-to-ceiling windows on the top floor of a skyrise near the Ferry Building.
“It’s hard to get the colors right,” Steele says as he points to a painting hanging in a guest bathroom. The artist, Doron Langberg, is one of many recent art school graduates that Steele began following on Instagram shortly after they graduated—a habit he picked up after he started collecting art in 2014.
Steele—with his kind smile and knack for an emerging artist—was not the pick one might have expected at the helm of Shield AI, whose drones have helped destroy some $400 million worth of Russian weapons.
Steele’s background is in software, running the companies Splunk and Proofpoint, which focused on data analytics and cybersecurity. Steele founded Proofpoint and says he scaled it to $1.5 billion in revenue before Thoma Bravo purchased it in an all-cash $12.3 billion deal in 2021. At Splunk, Steele came in when it was losing money, then sold it to Cisco two years later for $28 billion in 2024. Cisco kept him on, making him president of the company’s $55 billion go-to-market strategy.
He is confident—maybe even a bit smug—in his track record of returns. “If you look at my history at Proofpoint, literally every single investor made money,” Steele says. “Every single one.” That, he says, is one of the reasons that Shield AI’s board, lined with Silicon Valley investors from Andreessen Horowitz and Point72 Ventures that have backed the company, thought Steele would do well in the CEO seat.
“He has scaled very large companies,” Andreessen Horowitz’s Levine says. “We wanted an emphasis on software, because as we go forward, we intend to make that software available to many other organizations who will use that software on their hardware. And Gary had that background.”
Steele joined the company just as Shield AI had announced its most recent funding round, $240 million at a $5.3 billion valuation. Shortly after the round closed, Shield AI extended the round by raising an additional $300 million, hoisting its valuation to $5.6 billion, Fortune is first to report. In total, the company has raised $1.4 billion in equity and $200 million in debt—taking it from a GPS-denied quadcopter company to one of the most well-funded private defense companies in the U.S. and one of the definitive players working on autonomy in the private markets.
“They’re right there with Anduril,” says Ali Javaheri, an emerging tech analyst at PitchBook. “They have serious venture backing from the big firms. They have serious backing from the Primes. They are winning contracts.”
But Shield AI hasn’t enjoyed the same scale that Anduril has. Anduril said it had notched $1 billion in revenue in 2024. Shield AI, comparatively, hit $300 million at the end of its most recent fiscal year, according to the company. That was a $100 million shortfall of the $400 million it had been aiming for.

Courtesy of Shield AI
Shield AI credits the shortfall to an incident that took place during a test with the U.S. Navy in 2024, which was first reported by Forbes earlier this year. One of its V-BAT drones had tipped over during a test, and a Navy servicemember who rushed to capture it inadvertently grabbed the propeller and severed the tops of three fingers, according to a summary of the subsequent investigation, which was obtained by Fortune via a records request. The Navy’s investigation said that, because of poor signal, it took 45 minutes for anyone to get a hold of emergency services before the servicemember, as well as the pieces of his fingers on ice, could be transported to the hospital, according to witness testimony and findings from the Navy’s investigation. Shield AI says it had a Tactical Combat Casualty Care-qualified employee who provided immediate medical care on site and then initiated immediate ground transport to the nearest medical facility.
The incident was gruesome and publicly embarrassing. While most of the findings of the Navy’s subsequent investigation were redacted, the Navy documents say that Shield AI’s preflight brief packet didn’t have sufficient instructions for emergency procedures, and that Shield AI’s tip-over training did not include practical training exercises, according to the records. The V-BAT—even the drones operational and in the field—was grounded for two weeks as the investigation ensued, and it ended up delaying a series of contracts.
“Many purchasing decisions were delayed as a consequence of that investigation”
Ryan Tseng, Chief Strategy Officer, Shield AI
“Aviation is dangerous. Machines are complicated, and through a Swiss cheese situation, a person lost their fingertips, and it was an unfortunate event,” says Ryan Tseng, who was still CEO at the time of the incident. After the incident, the company added a warning on the duct surrounding the propeller, along with “extensive” hands-on practical exercise requirements. It later rolled out an unassisted launch and landing capability that eliminated the need for a person to be involved at all.
Tseng described the Forbes story about the incident as “sensationalized” and contested the notion that there were any deeper-rooted safety issues at the company, or that the accident had any relation to his decision to step aside. While “many purchasing decisions were delayed as a consequence of that investigation,” Tseng says, “for a long time, it’s been back to normal.”
In interviews, Ryan Tseng and Levine emphasized that it was Tseng’s idea to step into the chief strategy officer role and bring on a new CEO. “He wasn’t pushed out,” Levine insists, adding: “It’s not like he did anything wrong.”
Ryan Tseng says that, as the company hit 1,000 employees, he questioned whether he was the person to take it to 5,000 people. “I’ve told people, and I don’t think they believe me, but I’ve never felt a particular attachment to the CEO role,” Tseng says. Tseng says he first approached the board this past winter, but they encouraged him to stay on. After the funding round closed, he suggested they revisit the conversation.
About seven months into the leadership transition, the Tseng brothers and Steele say they have found a balance and that they talk every day. Ryan Tseng has moved into the strategy role, where he oversees corporate development and M&A. Brandon Tseng, who is based out of Washington, D.C., continues to lead growth and is focused on customers and investor relationships. Steele is focused on running the business, making money, and bringing on new people, having hired four new executives since he joined, including a Chief Legal Officer and Chief Marketing Officer.
“This transition between Ryan and Gary has been the best transition from a founder to a new CEO that I’ve ever seen. And I’ve been around for a while,” Levine says.
When asked about the dynamic between himself and the Tseng brothers, Steele says he was well aware of the importance of their roles, because he was a founder himself. “I understand what that means,” he says, noting that he wouldn’t have joined the company if he didn’t feel like they could work well together. “I needed to feel like we saw the world in a similar way,” he says. For him, he says he was convinced that the Tseng brothers approached the world with the same instincts as him, a “relentless” work ethic, and a “hands-on, problem solver’s mindset.”
The company wouldn’t share what voting power the brothers still have, only that they are “still significant shareholders.” The company said that Shield AI “operates with a mature governance structure and an independent Board. No single individual has the ability to make leadership changes on their own; those decisions rest with the Board as a whole, just like any well-run company.”
What’s coming next
At the end of October, Shield AI unveiled a brand-new product: an autonomous fighter jet with a 2,000-mile nautical range called the X-BAT. Shield AI has been working on the X-BAT for 18 months, designing a massive vertical take off and landing aircraft that wouldn’t need a runway, according to Brandon Tseng. Shield is aiming to have its first test flight sometime next year, and start production in 2029. The X-BAT is intended to compliment the V-BAT, which is proving to be the company’s workhorse—at least for now.
So far, Shield AI is working with eight of the military’s main 25 contractors, according to Ryan Tseng. For starters, it is being incorporated into General Atomics’ MQ-20 unmanned combat aerial vehicle, a Kratos BQM-177A target drone, and an Airbus H145 twin-engine light utility helicopter.

Courtesly of Shield AI
But, importantly, these have been demonstrations, not deployments, with little revenue. Shield AI still has to prove its capabilities to these primes—and eventually to the Defense Department—before they would roll the technology out widely. “The customer has to have confidence to go do this,” Steele says.
One of those early partners is Airbus, which started working with Shield AI in spring 2025 on an Airbus DT25 target drone as well as an autonomous developmental Lakota helicopter that it hopes to deliver to the Marine Corps in the next “couple of years,” according to Carl Forsling, director of business development and strategy at Airbus. “If that’s successful, then that market is going to continue to expand—both with the Lakota and potentially other platforms,” Forsling says.
Steele emphasized that the company wants to position itself across a series of platforms. “While we’ve been very focused on aircraft, because that’s the place we started, there’s tremendous opportunity as we cross domains,” he says.
PitchBook’s Javaheri pointed out that Shield AI is likely to benefit from the Defense Department’s recent decision to hone in its 14 priorities down to six, one of which is “applied artificial intelligence” systems, which would include autonomy. “Aerospace and defense autonomy is the name of the game, and Shield AI is one of the leaders in that,” he says.
On the front lines
While defense tech companies are becoming increasingly prevalent in Silicon Valley—and Washington, D.C.—there is something intrinsically different about a defense company than its enterprise or consumer counterparts, even if the same storied venture capital firms have begun backing all of them.
Shield AI is a case in point. For one, its makeup: 18% of its 1,200 employees are veterans, including Shield AI’s head of communications, Lily Hinz, who served in the Navy. Nearly all of the 30 employees stationed in Kyiv are former Ukrainian soldiers.
“While there are many ways to conduct ourselves, we choose to act in a manner that is moral, good, and of high standards—leaving the world better than we found it, simply because it’s the right thing to do,” Tseng wrote.
“‘Move fast and break things’ is the wrong mantra when ‘things’ are people and escalation paths.”
Garrett Smith, CEO, Reveal Technology
Garrett Smith, an active Marine Officer who is CEO of the tactical edge tech company Reveal Technology, says that, when a product lives in a “life-and-death” environment, it “changes everything.”
Several tech companies that operate in this space have set up teams to wrestle with these topics. Palantir has a “Privacy & Civil Liberties Engineering” team designed to “foster a culture of responsibility” around how their technology is used. Even then, Palantir is extraordinarily controversial among many, particularly because of its contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Risk is very real for Shield AI employees. In contractor-operated deals, as well as in complex, high-risk environments, employees are often stationed for months on the ground (or at sea) where its drones are deployed. In Ukraine, its 30 operators regularly travel between cities to support mission planning, monitor sorties, and troubleshoot in real time to adapt to new threats and feed lessons learned back into the V-BAT.
That level of proximity is all about trust, according to Lythgoe, Shield AI’s head of Ukrainian operations, who says that, if you are going to ask a soldier to trust their life with your technology, you need to be able to prove that you are just as committed to them. That has meant Lythgoe has only been home with his wife back in the U.S. four weeks over the last year, which is “not ideal,” he admits. “That is the job, I believe,” Lythgoe says. “Inherantly, it’s the role of the defense sector to understand problems and to give the war fighter the edge. And to do that, you have to understand the problem, otherwise you’re guessing. And so you really do need to be close to the problem to do that.”
You may like
Business
‘Mother Nature has been dealing a really hard deck’: Western ski resorts struggle with a warm, snowless start to winter
Published
49 minutes agoon
December 21, 2025By
Jace Porter
Ski resorts are struggling to open runs, walk-through ice palaces can’t be built, and the owner of a horse stable hopes that her customers will be satisfied with riding wagons instead of sleighs under majestic Rocky Mountain peaks. It’s just been too warm in the West with not enough snow.
Meanwhile, the Midwest and Northeast have been blanketed by record snow this December, a payday for skiers who usually covet conditions out West.
In the Western mountains where snow is crucial for ski tourism — not to mention water for millions of acres (hectares) of crops and the daily needs of tens of millions of people — much less snow than usual has piled up.
“Mother Nature has been dealing a really hard deck,” said Kevin Cooper, president of the Kirkwood Ski Education Foundation, a ski racing organization at Lake Tahoe on the California-Nevada line.
Only a small percentage of lifts were open and snow depths were well below average at Lake Tahoe resorts, just one example of warm weather causing well-below-average snowpack in almost all of the West.
In Utah, warmth has indefinitely postponed this winter’s Midway Ice Castles, an attraction 45 minutes east of Salt Lake City that requires cold temperatures to freeze water into building-size, palatial features. Temperatures in the area that will host part of the 2034 Winter Olympics have averaged 7-10 degrees (3-5 degrees Celsius) above normal in recent weeks, according to the National Weather Service.
Near Vail, Colorado, Bearcat Stables owner Nicole Godley hopes wagons will be a good-enough substitute for sleighs for rides through mountain scenery.
“It’s the same experience, the same ride, the same horses,” Godley said. “It’s more about, you know, just these giant horses and the Western rustic feel.”
In the Northwest, torrential rain has washed out roads and bridges and flooded homes. Heavy mountain snow finally arrived late this week in Washington state but flood-damaged roads that might not be fixed for months now block access to some ski resorts.
In Oregon, the Upper Deschutes Basin has had the slowest start to snow accumulation in records dating to 1981. Oregon, Idaho and western Colorado had their warmest Novembers on record, with temperatures ranging from 6-8.5 degrees (2-4 degrees Celsius) warmer than average, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Continued warmth could bring yet another year of drought and wildfires to the West. Most of the region except large parts of Colorado and Oregon has seen decent precipitation but as rain instead of snow, pointed out NOAA drought information coordinator Jason Gerlich.
That not only doesn’t help skiers but farmers, ranchers and people from Denver to Los Angeles who rely on snowpack water for their daily existence. Rain runs off all at once at times when it’s not necessarily needed.
“That snowpack is one of our largest reservoirs for water supply across the West,” Gerlich said.
Climate scientists agree that limiting global warming is critical to staving off the snow-to-rain trend.
In the northeastern U.S., meanwhile, below-normal temperatures have meant snow instead of rain. Parts of Vermont have almost triple and Ohio double the snowfall they had this time last year.
Vermont’s Killington Resort and Pico Mountain, had about 100 trails open for “by far the best conditions I have ever seen for this time of year,” said Josh Reed, resort spokesman who has lived in Killington for a decade.
New Hampshire ski areas opening early include Cannon Mountain, with over 50 inches (127 centimeters) to date. In northern Vermont, Elena Veatch, 31, already has cross-country skied more this fall than she has over the past two years.
“I don’t take a good New England winter for granted with our warming climate,” Veatch said.
Out West, it’s still far too early to rule out hope for snow. A single big storm can “turn things around rather quickly,” pointed out Gerlich, the NOAA coordinator.
Lake Tahoe’s snow forecast over Thanksgiving week didn’t pan out but Cooper with the ski racing group is eyeing possibly several feet (1-2 meters) in the long-term forecast.
“That would be so cool!” Cooper said.
___
Janie Har in San Francisco, Michael Casey in Boston and Gene Johnson in Seattle contributed. Gruver reported from Fort Collins, Colorado.
___
The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Business
2025: the year sustainability didn’t die
Published
1 hour agoon
December 21, 2025By
Jace Porter
2025 was an extremely difficult year for corporate sustainability, especially in the U.S.
Core priorities – from cutting carbon emissions and investing in clean tech to building inclusive workforces – were under constant attack, much of it from the government. At one point, the administration even tried to stop the construction of a giant offshore wind farm that was 80% done.
Inside companies, sustainability leaders had to keep their heads down. Their departments saw reduced resources and clout, and a handful were shut down. But the biggest story of the year may be that there is a story: the sustainability work continued. In the U.S., talking a lot less about sustainability (“greenhushing”) became the norm.
Still, many adopted some British philosophy: keep calm and carry on … quietly. But looking only at the U.S. gives a warped picture. While headlines focused on the handful of companies pulling back on sustainability, or on a slowdown in clean tech growth, globally, the story was different. The U.S. is not the world.
Part of what kept sustainability on the corporate agenda was the harsh reality of the world’s greatest challenges getting worse. Inequality grew, especially at the very top, where individuals amassed unfathomable wealth (hundreds of billions of dollars) and some corporate valuations hit unreal heights ($4 trillion to $5 trillion).
Meanwhile, climate impacts escalated; political winds don’t change actual winds. For example, part of Los Angeles burned to the ground (at an estimated cost of up to $250 billion) during unprecedented wildfires, historic heat baked India, Pakistan, and the EU, and devastating floods in Texas killed dozens of children. Scientists told us that climate change is “beyond scientific dispute,” at “tipping points,” and “extremely dangerous” (and that the world will blow past the 1.5C warming target). Insurer Allianz issued an eye-popping report that climate change could “destroy capitalism.”
In addition, the world got less democratic and pulled to the right and generally away from the sustainability agenda, making collective action even harder. This puts more pressure on business. And even facing headwinds, sustainability didn’t die. That’s the top story of the year. Let’s look at that and some other big themes.
Against all odds, sustainability keeps going
Reports of sustainability’s death were loud –Bloomberg Businessweek ran a cover story about it – but greatly exaggerated. Yes, a few high-profile companies scaled back some goals. But as the year wore on, the big consulting companies looked past one-offs and gathered real data.
The results were clear and striking. In an Accenture-UN Global Compact survey, 99 percent of global CEOs said they will maintain or expand sustainability commitments, and nearly 9 in 10 said the business case is stronger today than it was 5 years ago. Yet half admitted that they’re uncomfortable communicating progress – a perfect demonstration of the conundrum they face. Other data told the same story: more than 80% of companies increased sustainability investments over the past year (Deloitte), expect to boost spending next year (CapGemini), or are already capturing economic gains from decarbonization (BCG). The Sustainable Supply Chain at MIT found, in its report “Sustainability Still Matters,” that 85% of companies were maintaining or accelerating sustainable supply chain practices. I’m seeing the same in my work with large companies: the ambition remains, even as the messaging gets muted.
China leads a global acceleration in the clean economy
If you only watched the U.S., you’d think clean tech was slowing. But globally, the transition surged. In recent years, nearly all the growth of electricity in the OECD countries has come from renewable energy. But this year, the transition expanded to the developing economies, with enormous growth in solar in India, Pakistan, Poland, and across Africa. In the first half of 2025, global use of coal and gas was actually flat to down, including in India and China (where total emissions fell as well). Globally, renewables passed coal as the world’s largest source of electricity. In addition, electrified vehicles made up 23% of global new car sales in October, even as U.S. sales dropped after the government removed tax incentives.
Behind most of the clean tech explosion is China, which now controls over 70 percent of global manufacturing capacity in nearly every clean tech category. They’re not just making stuff; they’re installing it very rapidly. In the first half of 2025, China added more solar than the rest of the world combined; in May alone, it installed more solar than the U.S. added in all of 2023 and 2024. More than half of new passenger car sales in China are electrified, and electrification of heavy trucks is accelerating now as well, creating a drag on diesel demand. The tipping point on the clean economy is in the rear-view mirror.
The Anti-ESG movement hits DEI the hardest
While the broader sustainability agenda kept moving, some parts didn’t. Companies rushed to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs after the new administration made clear – with an executive order on day one) – that it didn’t want DEI in the government supply chain. The government even threatened to block mergers over DEI policies. Some big brands – Accenture, Disney, Google, Target, and many others – quickly and publicly distanced themselves from diversity goals. Mentions of “DEI” in Fortune 100 company reports fell an astounding 98%. But some backlash followed: minority customers boycotted Target, and Disney, McDonald’s, and others faced pushback from employees and consumers. Some B2B buyers, like the city of London, shifted their business away from companies that had retreated. A small, brave handful of companies stood their ground. Apple pushed back on anti-DEI shareholder resolutions, and Cisco issued a simple statement, “our commitment to an enterprise rooted in respect and inclusion is appropriate and necessary.”
The banks send mixed messages
The collapse of the Net Zero Banking Alliance – which only required non-binding long-term pledges – didn’t bode well. And yet, the central banks raised the alarm about the risk of climate change to the global economy and the European Central Bank said it would include climate change in asset valuations and risk analyses. Some large banks, such as Crédit Agricole and Deutsche Bank, announced major new commitments (hundreds of billions of dollars) to clean tech financing. Global investment in the clean economy is on track to grow to $2.2 trillion this year (double fossil fuel investment), and Millennials and Gen Zers continue to drive demand for sustainable investment options. As they say, follow the money.
Regulatory requirements are in flux
Reporting mandates have helped keep sustainability on the agenda, but the rules are under heavy debate. The EU’s “Omnibus” process sought to “simplify” the requirements, and the EU Parliament seemed to agree. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) will likely narrow in scope to cover only companies above €450 million ($500M+) in revenue (and 1,750 employees). And the due diligence law CSDDD could apply only to those over €1.5 billion ($1.7B) in revenue (and 5,000 employees). Additional requirements to report on climate risks and plans are partly up in the air, both in the EU and in California. Other legal signals added to the confusion. A German court ruled against Apple’s “CO₂-neutral” watch advertising, highlighting the increased policing of environmental claims. And in the U.S., a group of state attorneys general tried to sue asset managers for “manipulating energy markets” simply by considering climate risk — a sign of how polarized basic fiduciary practices have become.
AI’s impact is shaping up to be good, bad, and ugly
The good: AI is undoubtedly improving efficiency and lowering emissions, from buildings to transportation to procurement. It will unlock new breakthroughs in energy, education, and healthcare and disease prevention. The bad: the rising need for energy, and what that means for grids and carbon emissions, are legitimate issues. But the efficiency of tech always rises and some say the energy crunch is overstated. Also, AI initiatives at companies may actually be failing, or execs have little or no idea if the spending is paying off (just imagine if sustainability initiatives had that track record). The ugly: Social risks seem to be rising, including job destruction (it’s hard to build a thriving world with people underemployed) and the replacement of human relationships with code.
For me, the biggest unknown is what happens now that anyone can create videos that are nearly indistinguishable from reality. It’s not just about mis- or dis-information, but about crossing a new threshold to not knowing what’s real at all. I have many questions. Like, when there’s no fact base, how do we tackle big shared challenges like climate change or inequality?
U.S. business leaders say nothing – or worse
This was not a year of corporate courage. Early in the year, some major law firms capitulated to government demands about how they operate and whom they represent…and agreed to give free services to support the government’s agenda. Law firms helping to undermine the rule of law was not a pretty sight (and many lost employees). Some clients like Microsoft, sent a clear market signal that wanted to hire law firms with stronger principles. And some firms stood firm, as did, importantly, some key universities.
But the larger trend was accommodation. When the U.S. government strong-armed companies like Intel and US Steel to give up ownership stakes, silence reigned. A business sector that has long rallied “government overreach” stayed quiet, even as the government rounded up citizens and legal immigrants or deployed national guard troops into cities. Instead companies either evaded attention (like avoiding the eye of Sauron in LOTR), or openly courted favor by parading through the White House and giving the president golden baubles. There were a few voices pushing back – a couple of op-eds from former CEOs or anonymous current ones calling the government’s actions Marxist or Maoist. But it wasn’t much of a resistance. Each company may believe that silence is the safest strategy, but the collective effect is a weakening of institutions that strengthen democracy and the economy.
What to look for in 2026
Predicting anything these days is laughably hard, but a few topics will likely rise on the sustainability agenda: growing concern about plastics and health; the limits of greenhushing as a strategy; and the repercussions of AI’s attack on reality, especially as the U.S heads into midterm elections. Misinformation and anti-science hogwash will continue to plague us.
This has been a tough year. But the story of sustainability in this era is one of winning and losing. The battle to put sustainability on the agenda was won – which is partly why the backlash has been so intense. And global investment in the clean economy is awe-inspiring and exciting. But our challenges are still growing, and 2026 will bring both devastating weather events (which are now not “record” but normal) and amazing stories of people rising to the occasion. Where we’ll be by early 2027 is anyone’s guess.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
Business
Tom Freston, the beat-poet exec who made MTV cool for 20 years, sees ‘really nothing in it for the consumer’ from Netflix, Warner, or his old company
Published
2 hours agoon
December 21, 2025By
Jace Porter
Tom Freston has never been a typical media executive. Freston began with a countercultural spirit that shaped an adventurous career spanning from co-founding MTV to leading Viacom and Paramount Pictures. After spending 26 years at Paramount—now caught up in the $100 billion bidding for Warner Bros Discovery—he remains a defining figure in the evolution of modern entertainment.
The 80-year-old executive, who sounded remarkably youthful in a phone interview with Fortune, harkened back to the days in the 1960s and ’70s when “freedom was in the air.” The vibe was very different then: “It was like, I don’t want to work for ‘the man,’” he told Fortune, referencing a formative summer when he worked as a bellboy in Lake George in the Adirondack foothills of upstate New York. “I had sort of been on the traditional conveyor belt: go to college, get out, get a job. And then I met all these sort of bohemian characters who — their idea was, you didn’t have a career. You kind of improvise your life. You know, the idea was to kind of maximize experience and do interesting things and take some risks.”
Freston added that he was a big fan of both “beat” and libertarian literature, the former made famous by Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg and the latter by Ayn Rand. They both had common themes, he said: “experience and being an individual were important.” As he writes in his new memoir Unplugged, this improvisational journey took him to Afghanistan and India, a business career that was “wild and fulfilling and for a long time profitable.” But it was also “really hard work” and was “really humbling,” adding that “humility is not a thing you see a lot of in the entertainment business.” He didn’t comment directly on the major figures in the current bidding war for Warner Bros., but the example of David Zaslav moving into famed producer Robert Evans’ Hollywood mansion is a prime example of the neo-mogul mindset.
Freston has long been semi-retired, advising media brands such as Oprah Winfrey and Vice while serving as the chairman of the ONE Campaign, the anti-poverty effort in Africa led by U2’s Bono (a friend, Freston said).
As Freston rolled back the years with Fortune and looked out on a much-changed media landscape, he briefly donned his antitrust hat to analyze the bidding war between Netflix and his old company Paramount for Warner Bros. Discovery and how things got to this point. “No matter which way it goes, there’s really nothing in it for the consumer,” Freston said with a sigh.
How Netflix followed in MTV’s footsteps
Freston observed that the media industry is now dominated by “monolith companies … increasingly run by tech people, where data becomes more important than instinct.” He highlighted A24 and Neon as two companies that remind him of the old, almost artisanal MTV, where refreshing the creative instinct became core to success, because Viacom’s once-dominant basic cable lineup appealed to a transient youth culture. “Our challenge was: how do we continue to innovate for these changing demographics that would pass through us, whether it be on [Nickelodeon] or on MTV or Comedy Central or whatever.”
Just 33 years old when he started leading MTV, Freston pointed out that the original audience was Baby Boomers like himself, which was then replaced by Gen Xers with different sensibilities, and so on. Talent can’t be overlooked, Freston argued, because he wanted a creative and “cutting edge” mentality that would stay hooked up to a youth culture that turned over every five years or less. “I didn’t put a salesperson in charge, which would be a traditional way in the television business. I had a creative person in charge.”
In many cases, MTV was someone’s first job, “and they’d learn some things and leave in a few years, and they’d be replaced with another younger person.” He argued that keeping the employee population young made it easier to reinvent the network periodically. When the end came shortly after the millennial generation’s heyday, exemplified by the Total Request Live program, Freston explained that the same forces afoot in Warner-Netflix-Paramount were leaving MTV exposed to the digital wave.
“We were precluded from using our music video library online,” Freston said, explaining that the same licensing deals that had enabled MTV to dominate youth culture for decades proved its undoing when YouTube disrupted how young people liked to watch music videos. “The real players turned out to be the social networks and it was hard to invent one,” he added. “You had to buy one of the ones that were out there, and the only one that ever really got bought was MySpace, and that kind of disintegrated.” The other social-media networks were able to build “unbelievable franchises because they were able to run at losses for years without Wall Street piling on, which would have happened for any of the legacy media companies.”
Reflecting on his own “missed opportunity” to bridge this gap, Freston recounted Viacom’s attempt to buy Facebook when the platform had only $9 million in revenue. He recalled Mark Zuckerberg’s visit to discuss a potential acquisition: “I remember he had a hoodie on and flip flops. It was February in Times Square. And he was younger than anybody on our young staff.” While Viacom was the first to make a bid for Facebook, Freston believes Zuckerberg was never serious about selling, more that he was “curious about, what’s a youth media company today look like.”
The MTV-Netflix cycle
Netflix and other platforms, of course, achieved massive scale by playing the upstart MTV role. “They were able to run at a profit because they were these new growth businesses. Wall Street turned a blind eye to losses for a long time. They got forgiveness on that score.” He added that they began to “vacuum up IP” without necessarily having deals in place. While Netflix went the more traditional licensing route when Hollywood didn’t see it as a threat, Freston noted that MTV was prevented from fighting YouTube’s viral videos with its own digital music presence, almost like a revenge of the record labels that wrote those terms into the licensing deals.
Freston said he doesn’t think any legacy media company distinguished itself in meeting the digital challenge with full force. “Disney did the best job, I think, which was basically tripling down on their content capabilities in trying to make themselves more invincible and more crucial for the streaming services and for the digital onslaught to build up the biggest array of IP.” He agreed that it was ironic in some senses that Netflix seems to be following that playbook with its pursuit of Warner Bros. He said he sees the same old cycle turning: “The forces for this deal seem to be inexorable. Consolidation seems to be the strategy for the moment.”
Today, Freston said he sees his former empire, MTV, as a cautionary tale of what happens when that emphasis on creativity gets severed. He lamented that leadership has “run it into the ground over the last 15 years” by replacing music-obsessed staff with “traditional kind of Hollywood showmaker type people,” replacing hungry, music-obsessed creatives with a shorter-term mindset. His most symbolic grievance is the removal of the words “Music Television” from the logo—a decision that “drove me crazy.”
Freston said he was grateful for his exciting ride at the helm of Viacom for many years, and grateful for some of the genuine friendships that emerged from his time running MTV. He highlighted Bono specifically, with whom he has worked in a chairman role for ONE and (Red), fighting poverty and AIDS in Africa. He said he knew a bit about Africa and poverty issues from his time working and living in Asia and also traveling in Africa, but he also mentioned good relationships with certain people he clicked with: John Mellencamp, David Bowie (a “fascinating character”) and Jon Bon Jovi.
In his laid-back style, Freston added that he wasn’t sure when he sat down to write that there’d by “any kind of reasonable narrative to my life, which at one point seemed to be all these disparate parts.” He came away thinking that his career had been in pursuit of a couple common objectives: trying to “live and exist off the mainstream, more on the edge of the road,” where things are more interesting and independent.
The “beat-poet” executive said he still believes in the MTV brand, and it could come back with some creativity, maybe by positioning MTV as a human curator to counter “algorithm-type music consumption.” But he knows he isn’t the man to lead it. “It’s really a young person’s business,” Freston said, suggesting the reins should be handed to a 25-year-old who can operate with the same risk-taking humility he learned decades ago on the roads of Asia.
Editor’s note: The author worked for Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.
Waymo Cars Dangerously Halted During San Francisco Power Outage
D.C. Reeves officially files for candidacy for reelection to Pensacola Mayor
‘Mother Nature has been dealing a really hard deck’: Western ski resorts struggle with a warm, snowless start to winter
Trending
-
Politics8 years agoCongress rolls out ‘Better Deal,’ new economic agenda
-
Entertainment8 years agoNew Season 8 Walking Dead trailer flashes forward in time
-
Politics8 years agoPoll: Virginia governor’s race in dead heat
-
Entertainment8 years agoThe final 6 ‘Game of Thrones’ episodes might feel like a full season
-
Entertainment8 years agoMeet Superman’s grandfather in new trailer for Krypton
-
Politics8 years agoIllinois’ financial crisis could bring the state to a halt
-
Business8 years ago6 Stunning new co-working spaces around the globe
-
Tech8 years agoHulu hires Google marketing veteran Kelly Campbell as CMO
