Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Paramount-WBD Deal: Antitrust, Consumers, and the Future of Media

Opinion

Paramount-WBD Deal: Antitrust, Consumers, and the Future of Media
a remote control sitting in front of a television
Photo by Pinho . on Unsplash

After much speculation, Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) finally announced that the media giant is for sale. Given the company’s reach, there will be government hurdles to clear that, in part, will examine the many effects and implications for consumers. All points to be considered initially by Warner Bros. shareholders and its board.

Among the rumored suitors are Amazon, Netflix, Comcast, and Paramount Skydance—with the last one offering a more realistic, regulation-friendly path forward that also makes sense for a wide array of audiences.


In today’s climate, any major merger faces intense scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Amazon, Netflix, and Comcast each present steep antitrust hurdles. Paramount Skydance, by contrast, offers a smoother path, and reports indicate it has the backing of the Trump administration.

By comparison, acquisitions by the incumbent media giants would only deepen an already troubling concentration of power. Amazon, Netflix, and Comcast together already command vast shares of the streaming and broadband markets. Allowing any of them to absorb WBD would further erode competition and consumer choice.

Among the substantive reasons why the Trump Team appears favorable to Paramount is that a Paramount Skydance–WBD merger would expand competition across streaming, news, and sports. In streaming alone, combining Paramount+ and HBO Max would create a platform with roughly 200 million subscribers—a credible challenger to Amazon Prime Video’s 200 million and Netflix’s 300 million. Bolstering a new, upstart competitor like Paramount Skydance could stabilize pricing, spur competition, and drive new investment in quality programming.

In terms of news programming, uniting CBS and CNN could create a partnership akin to NBC and MSNBC, adding to the media landscape. This combination could appeal to the President and his regulators, with CBS reportedly shifting to bring more ideological diversity to the national media.

The timing is crucial, as a WBD deal would come as major tech players such as Apple, Amazon, and Google/YouTube are continuing to expand their presence in entertainment. Increased consolidation across the industry has drawn heightened regulatory attention. Amazon’s current legal challenges illustrate just how complex that path could be.

Amazon was recently embroiled in a lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 17 state attorneys general accusing the company of using anticompetitive practices to maintain its monopoly—including through Prime Video. A recent $2.5 billion FTC settlement over allegedly deceptive Prime sign-up tactics underscores that scrutiny. A new entertainment mega-merger would seem to be politically untenable.

Netflix’s global dominance poses similar concerns. With more than 300 million subscribers, acquiring WBD would quickly push its market share above 50% — a clear antitrust red flag.

Comcast, meanwhile, already controls broadband distribution and major content assets through NBCUniversal. Regulators are likely to view a WBD acquisition as consolidating too much control, with concerns that the resulting merger would lead to limited access, higher prices, and run counter to basic antitrust principles. Even during its 2011 NBCUniversal merger, Comcast endured a lengthy review and complex consent decree.

Adding to the unlikelihood, President Trump has criticized Comcast and its leadership, calling the company “a disgrace to the integrity of broadcasting” and urging the FCC to investigate NBC for what he described as overwhelming partisan bias.

As Amazon, Netflix, Google/YouTube, and other Big Tech giants continue their entertainment expansions, the question is no longer whether the industry will consolidate, but how and under whose leadership.

Aside from regulatory implications, issues about how viewers will be affected in the ever-growing, vast media landscape should be top of mind. Especially with the media, various segments of the media consumer population.

The potential merger implications are particularly significant for the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. media market. According to Nielsen’s 2025 report, Hispanic viewers account for 56% of total streaming time, compared with 46% for the general population, and nearly one in five Hispanic viewing hours is spent on sports content.

Similarly, African Americans spend approximately 32% more time consuming media than the general population, with nearly 75% paying for more than 3 streaming services, and Asian American consumers spend 15% more time watching live sports than the general population.

A merger combining CBS’s NFL and NCAA rights with WBD’s NBA, MLB, and NHL coverage would deliver more live sports under one roof, offering better access and value for viewers of all backgrounds.

The entertainment industry is at a crossroads. Consolidation can often lead to reduced competition, and consumers have grown wary of paying more for less. In addition to the current regulatory regime, which makes political feasibility a top concern, a Paramount Skydance–WBD merger could also offer a rare combination of consumer benefits and competitive balance.

Mario H. Lopez is the president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a public policy advocacy organization that promotes liberty, opportunity, and prosperity for all.


Read More

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

General view of Galileo Ferraris Ex Nuclear Power Plant on February 3, 2024 in Trino Vercellese, Italy. The former "Galileo Ferraris" thermoelectric power plant was built between 1991 and 1997 and opened in 1998.

Getty Images, Stefano Guidi

Powering the Future: Comparing U.S. Nuclear Energy Growth to French and Chinese Nuclear Successes

With the rise of artificial intelligence and a rapidly growing need for data centers, the U.S. is looking to exponentially increase its domestic energy production. One potential route is through nuclear energy—a form of clean energy that comes from splitting atoms (fission) or joining them together (fusion). Nuclear energy generates energy around the clock, making it one of the most reliable forms of clean energy. However, the U.S. has seen a decrease in nuclear energy production over the past 60 years; despite receiving 64 percent of Americans’ support in 2024, the development of nuclear energy projects has become increasingly expensive and time-consuming. Conversely, nuclear energy has achieved significant success in countries like France and China, who have heavily invested in the technology.

In the U.S., nuclear plants represent less than one percent of power stations. Despite only having 94 of them, American nuclear power plants produce nearly 20 percent of all the country’s electricity. Nuclear reactors generate enough electricity to power over 70 million homes a year, which is equivalent to about 18 percent of the electricity grid. Furthermore, its ability to withstand extreme weather conditions is vital to its longevity in the face of rising climate change-related weather events. However, certain concerns remain regarding the history of nuclear accidents, the multi-billion dollar cost of nuclear power plants, and how long they take to build.

Keep ReadingShow less
A U.S. flag flying before congress. Visual representation of technology, a glitch, artificial intelligence
As AI reshapes jobs and politics, America faces a choice: resist automation or embrace innovation. The path to prosperity lies in AI literacy and adaptability.
Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

Why Should I Be Worried About AI?

For many people, the current anxiety about artificial intelligence feels overblown. They say, “We’ve been here before.” Every generation has its technological scare story. In the early days of automation, factories threatened jobs. Television was supposed to rot our brains. The internet was going to end serious thinking. Kurt Vonnegut’s Player Piano, published in 1952, imagined a world run by machines and technocrats, leaving ordinary humans purposeless and sidelined. We survived all of that.

So when people today warn that AI is different — that it poses risks to democracy, work, truth, our ability to make informed and independent choices — it’s reasonable to ask: Why should I care?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person on their phone, using a type of artificial intelligence.

AI-generated “nudification” is no longer a distant threat—it’s harming students now. As deepfake pornography spreads in schools nationwide, educators are left to confront a growing crisis that outpaces laws, platforms, and parental awareness.

Getty Images, d3sign

How AI Deepfakes in Classrooms Expose a Crisis of Accountability and Civic Trust

While public outrage flares when AI tools like Elon Musk’s Grok generate sexualized images of adults on X—often without consent—schools have been dealing with this harm for years. For school-aged children, AI-generated “nudification” is not a future threat or an abstract tech concern; it is already shaping their daily lives.

Last month, that reality became impossible to ignore in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. A father sued the school district after several middle school boys circulated AI-generated pornographic images of eight female classmates, including his 13-year-old daughter. When the girl confronted one of the boys and punched him on a school bus, she was expelled. The boy who helped create and spread the images faced no formal consequences.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democracies Don’t Collapse in Silence; They Collapse When Truth Is Distorted or Denied
a remote control sitting in front of a television
Photo by Pinho . on Unsplash

Democracies Don’t Collapse in Silence; They Collapse When Truth Is Distorted or Denied

Even with the full protection of the First Amendment, the free press in America is at risk. When a president works tirelessly to silence journalists, the question becomes unavoidable: What truth is he trying to keep the country from seeing? What is he covering up or trying to hide?

Democracies rarely fall in a single moment; they erode through a thousand small silences that go unchallenged. When citizens can no longer see or hear the truth — or when leaders manipulate what the public is allowed to know — the foundation of self‑government begins to crack long before the structure falls. When truth becomes negotiable, democracy becomes vulnerable — not because citizens stop caring, but because they stop receiving the information they need to act.

Keep ReadingShow less