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

President Trump Should Put America’s AI Interests First
A close up of a blue eyeball in the dark
Photo by Luke Jones on Unsplash

President Trump Should Put America’s AI Interests First

In some ways, the second Trump presidency has been as expected–from border security to reducing the size and scope of the federal government.

In other ways, the president has not delivered on a key promise to the MAGA base. Rather than waging a war against Silicon Valley’s influence in American politics, the administration has, by and large, done what Big Tech wants–despite its long history of anti-Trumpism in the most liberal corners of San Francisco. Not only are federal agencies working in sync with Amazon, OpenAI, and Palantir, but the president has carved out key alliances with Mark Zuckerberg, Jensen Huang, and other AI evangelists to promote AI dominance at all costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
medical expenses

"The promise of AI-powered tools—from personalized health monitoring to adaptive educational support—depends on access to quality data," writes Kevin Frazier.

Prapass Pulsub/Getty Images

Your Data, Your Choice: Why Americans Need the Right to Share

Outdated, albeit well-intentioned data privacy laws create the risk that many Americans will miss out on proven ways in which AI can improve their quality of life. Thanks to advances in AI, we possess incredible opportunities to use our personal information to aid the development of new tools that can lead to better health care, education, and economic advancement. Yet, HIPAA (the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act), FERPA (The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), and a smattering of other state and federal laws complicate the ability of Americans to do just that.

The result is a system that claims to protect our privacy interests while actually denying us meaningful control over our data and, by extension, our well-being in the Digital Age.

Keep ReadingShow less
New Cybersecurity Rules for Healthcare? Understanding HHS’s HIPPA Proposal
Getty Images, Kmatta

New Cybersecurity Rules for Healthcare? Understanding HHS’s HIPPA Proposal

Background

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was enacted in 1996 to protect sensitive health information from being disclosed without patients’ consent. Under this act, a patient’s privacy is safeguarded through the enforcement of strict standards on managing, transmitting, and storing health information.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people looking at screens.

A case for optimism, risk-taking, and policy experimentation in the age of AI—and why pessimism threatens technological progress.

Getty Images, Andriy Onufriyenko

In Defense of AI Optimism

Society needs people to take risks. Entrepreneurs who bet on themselves create new jobs. Institutions that gamble with new processes find out best to integrate advances into modern life. Regulators who accept potential backlash by launching policy experiments give us a chance to devise laws that are based on evidence, not fear.

The need for risk taking is all the more important when society is presented with new technologies. When new tech arrives on the scene, defense of the status quo is the easier path--individually, institutionally, and societally. We are all predisposed to think that the calamities, ailments, and flaws we experience today--as bad as they may be--are preferable to the unknowns tied to tomorrow.

Keep ReadingShow less