Listen to the article
A MAGA Think Tank Targets Netflix’s WBD Acquisition Ahead of Senate Testimony
Ted Sarandos faces a challenging Senate subcommittee appearance Tuesday as a conservative think tank affiliated with the Heritage Foundation aims to derail Netflix’s $83 billion bid for Warner Bros Discovery assets.
The Oversight Project, a spinoff of the Project 2025 authors, has distributed a report titled “Fedflix: Netflix, The Federal Government, and the New Propaganda State” to the White House and key lawmakers. The document characterizes the streaming giant as “holding an outsized role in socially engineering millions of Americans into a predisposition to accept preferred leftwing ideological dogma.”
Without explicitly naming Warner Bros or rival bidder Paramount, the report insists that “relevant federal agencies must scrutinize with extreme intensity any potential Netflix acquisitions” due to potential impacts on “American society and the health of the Constitutional Republic.”
Mike Howell, chief of the Oversight Project and former Heritage Foundation fellow, was more direct in comments to Deadline: “I don’t want Netflix to get bigger at all. I want it to have less influence.” He added, “Our team has been tracking domestic propaganda for some time. This seemed like an opportune moment to raise this issue in the context of Netflix’s ambition plan to build the biggest political and ideology messaging machine in human history.”
The report has reportedly reached Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee chair Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and White House lawyer Sean Hayes, with sources confirming both the Office of White House Counsel and Senate subcommittee staff have been briefed on its findings ahead of Sarandos’ appearance.
“Pay attention to President Trump’s use of monopoly when discussing this deal,” a GOP insider told Deadline. “That’s message the administration’s sending to Sarandos, that’s how they’ll put their feet to the fire.”
The 47-page document, subtitled “The Weaponization of Entertainment for Partisan Propaganda,” targets Netflix’s content library as “leftwing and progressive,” citing shows like “Stranger Things” and documentaries including “Orgasm Inc: The Story of OneTaste,” “Cuties,” and the Obama-produced “American Factory.” It claims “the consistency of this programming suggests there may be intentional coordination with activist organizations and alignment with progressive political objectives.”
The report’s timing is significant as Netflix and Paramount battle over Warner Bros Discovery’s valuable assets. Both sides recognize the political dimensions of the deal, with Trump having close ties to Larry Ellison, father of Paramount owner David Ellison. Oracle founder Larry Ellison has been a key backer of Paramount’s now $108 billion hostile takeover bid for all of WBD.
Though Trump recently met with Sarandos, calling him a “great person,” the former president has expressed concerns about Netflix’s market dominance. At the Washington D.C. premiere of Melania Trump’s documentary last week, Trump told Deadline: “I like both of them very much,” referring to Netflix and Paramount, before adding, “It looks to me like one of them is very much a monopoly if they are able to do this deal.”
Netflix did not respond to requests for comment on the “Fedflix” report, while Paramount declined to comment on whether its Chief Legal Officer Makan Delrahim, who previously served as Assistant Attorney General overseeing the DOJ’s Antitrust Division during Trump’s first term, had received a copy.
The Oversight Project, which became independent from the Heritage Foundation last year, is explicit about its goals for Tuesday’s hearing. Howell suggested Republican committee members should ask Sarandos: “How do you guard against the ideological and partisan composition of your board in terms of influence content?” He also proposed questioning whether “the CCP had any role with the Obamas’ movie ‘American Factory’.”
The document reflects a strategy described by a GOP insider: “Unlike the first term, conservative think tanks are quick to provide the administration with the ammunition they need to execute policy. That, Fox, and social media amplifies it and then the administration reacts. It’s a reflexive loop.”
The outcome of Tuesday’s hearing could significantly impact the future landscape of entertainment media, with political considerations seemingly as important as antitrust concerns in determining whether Netflix will successfully acquire Warner Bros Discovery’s crown jewels.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
I’m curious to see what credible experts and economists have to say about the potential impacts of this merger, both positive and negative. Knee-jerk political opposition is not a sound basis for regulatory action.
It’s concerning to see political groups trying to influence a business transaction based on ideological grounds. I’d encourage looking at the potential economic and consumer impacts rather than partisan talking points.
This seems like a highly politicized issue. While I understand concerns about media influence, I’d want to see objective data and analysis before forming an opinion on the proposed merger. Blocking mergers solely based on political ideology could set a dangerous precedent.
This appears to be a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. I hope the upcoming Senate testimony provides a balanced, fact-based assessment that considers the broader public interest, not just partisan agendas.
I’m curious to learn more about the potential societal impacts of this proposed merger. What specific concerns do the think tank’s report raise? Are there credible studies or experts who have analyzed the issue from multiple angles?
I’m skeptical of efforts to block mergers solely on the basis of perceived political influence. Rigorous, impartial analysis of the potential impacts should guide any regulatory decisions, not partisan attacks.
This seems like a heated political battle rather than a sober assessment of the proposed merger. I hope the Senate hearing focuses on substantive issues and avoids grandstanding or partisan rhetoric.
Well said. Fact-based analysis should drive the decision-making, not political agendas.
This feels like more partisan posturing than a genuine attempt to assess the public interest. I hope the Senate hearing can cut through the noise and provide a balanced, evidence-based evaluation of the proposed merger.