Netflix Acquisition Deserves Extra Scrutiny -- and for More Than the Usual Reasons

Ken Buck
Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:59:04 -0800
Opinion

In 1923, four immigrant brothers sold the family horse to cobble together enough money to purchase several picture-show theaters, or "nickelodeons." More than a century later, their company — Warner Bros., one of Hollywood's largest and most enduring studios — is up for sale, and with it, real concerns about competition within the media and entertainment industry.

After putting itself on the auction block in October, Warner Bros. Discovery announced last month that it accepted an offer from Netflix, the world's largest subscription streaming video provider.

The news quickly raised red flags from policymakers that it could squeeze out competition in an industry that's already beset by consolidation. President Donald Trump and Sen. Elizabeth Warren don't see eye-to-eye on much, but they could both agree that this deal, in the president's words, "could be a problem."
Updated: Wed Jan 21, 2026

In 1923, four immigrant brothers sold the family horse to cobble together enough money to purchase several picture-show theaters, or "nickelodeons." More than a century later, their company — Warner Bros., one of Hollywood's largest and most enduring studios — is up for sale, and with it, real concerns about competition within the media and entertainment industry.

After putting itself on the auction block in October, Warner Bros. Discovery announced last month that it accepted an offer from Netflix, the world's largest subscription streaming video provider.

The news quickly raised red flags from policymakers that it could squeeze out competition in an industry that's already beset by consolidation. President Donald Trump and Sen. Elizabeth Warren don't see eye-to-eye on much, but they could both agree that this deal, in the president's words, "could be a problem."

Netflix's proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. suggests Big Media is seeking to replicate the Big Tech playbook and may be on the cusp of gaining an anticompetitive advantage that will be equally difficult to undo — and potentially with even greater consequences.

Major, market-changing mergers in any industry deserve antitrust review. When the mergers influence the information Americans receive and how they receive it — the very foundations of a free press and free speech — the level of scrutiny should be even higher. And by every measure, Netflix's acquisition warrants thorough scrutiny.

With more than 300 million subscribers, including over 81 million in the U.S., Netflix is the largest streaming video platform. The addition of Warner Bros.' 128 million HBO Max viewers could push Netflix's subscriber base to well above 400 million — more than twice as many as the next-closest competitor, Amazon Prime.

User engagement paints the same picture. An analysis last year found that users spent more than an hour a day on Netflix, on average, 75% longer than the average time spent on Hulu (36 minutes), the second runner-up. Netflix itself pegs its user engagement even higher, at two hours per user per day in 2024.

In other words, Netflix is the obvious leader in the streaming space, whether by subscriber volume, viewer hours, revenue and profits, or virtually any other metric.

That's not, on its own, a bad thing.

What should give trust-busters pause is Netflix's own actions and the opportunity this deal creates for it to manipulate the content most Americans consume every day.

In many ways, Netflix acts more like a monopoly than the market-dominant player that it is. Since 2014 it has increased prices of its "standard plan" and "premium plan" by more than 225% and 200%, respectively — rate hikes that executives say are necessary to keep its "virtuous cycle going," even as a quarter of Americans in 2024 reported they canceled at least three streaming services over the prior two years, most often because of price.

Again, price increases aren't damning on their own. A platform's market share will inevitably decrease if they raise costs beyond what consumers are willing to pay. But Netflix seems to know — or at least act like — it can raise prices indiscriminately because viewers have few alternatives.

Acquiring Warner Bros.' vast content library — which includes household-name hits from Batman to Harry Potter, and "Game of Thrones" to "Looney Tunes" — would further reinforce its control. Users would effectively have to have a Netflix subscription to access mainstream content.

This same power dynamic presents enormous opportunity for Netflix to censor what users see by amplifying voices that conform to its ideology, while silencing those it disagrees with — if not stopping them from being heard entirely.

And, with a stronger grip on the market, it's conceivable Netflix would use its heft to block smaller competitors from the market — just as Big Tech has successfully done.

Competition is necessary in every industry. It's imperative in media and entertainment. Free speech is predicated on a marketplace that invites a range of views and opinion and allows those to vie for consideration. Netflix's potential acquisition of Warner Bros. presents a real opportunity for it to monopolize the news and information Americans receive, and how they receive it. Regulators need to take a good hard look at how this deal would affect ordinary families — even more than most that come across their desk.