Listen to the article
Netflix CEO Faces Partisan Grilling at Senate Hearing Over Warner Bros. Acquisition
Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos found himself in the political crosshairs Tuesday as a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the streaming giant’s proposed $83 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. quickly devolved into partisan attacks on the company’s content and alleged political leanings.
Republican senators took turns characterizing Netflix as a left-wing propaganda machine, with Senator Ted Cruz of Texas bluntly declaring that “Netflix has long been a left-wing company.” Cruz questioned how Americans could feel confident that “the combined entity would not simply be a propaganda outlet pushing one particular political view with much greater market power.”
The hearing, ostensibly focused on antitrust concerns surrounding the massive media merger, repeatedly veered into cultural grievances as Republican lawmakers cited what they described as Netflix’s “woke” content lineup.
Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) accused Netflix of promoting “transgender ideology” in children’s programming, while his Missouri colleague Senator Eric Schmitt claimed the platform’s content is “overwhelmingly woke” and criticized the company for “race swapping both historical and real and fictional characters.”
A visibly uncomfortable Sarandos defended the company throughout the hearing, insisting Netflix has “no political agenda of any kind” and offers content that appeals to viewers across the political spectrum. “We have a great deal of programming on Netflix for all left, right and center,” Sarandos told the committee.
The Republican line of questioning appeared to draw heavily from a recent report by the Oversight Project, a spinoff of the conservative Heritage Foundation. The 47-page document characterized Netflix as having “an outsized role in socially engineering millions of Americans into a predisposition to accept preferred leftwing ideological dogma.”
Particularly contentious was an exchange between Sarandos and Senator Schmitt regarding social media posts Netflix made in 2020 following George Floyd’s killing and subsequent nationwide protests. While Sarandos acknowledged such posts were “political” and suggested “I hope that wouldn’t happen again,” he maintained the company had no broader agenda. It’s worth noting that many major media corporations, including Paramount and Warner Bros., made similar statements of support for racial justice at that time.
From across the aisle, Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey shifted focus to potential conflicts of interest surrounding the merger, particularly questioning former President Donald Trump’s purchase of Netflix stock shortly before Warner Bros. accepted the company’s bid.
Sarandos, seemingly regaining composure after the partisan attacks, defended his meeting with Trump, stating it was “wholly proper for the President of the United States to talk to leaders of industry” while insisting the White House meeting was not specifically about the Warner Bros. deal. “I think the President, from my experience, has been nothing but interested in protecting and creating American jobs,” Sarandos added, emphasizing he believed the merger “would stand on its merits.”
While the Senate subcommittee has limited actual power over merger approval, the Department of Justice holds significant regulatory authority in the process. Meanwhile, David Ellison’s Paramount continues pursuing Warner Bros. Discovery in a competing $108 billion hostile takeover bid, ensuring the high-stakes media consolidation battle is far from over.
Senator Booker voiced concern about the merger evaluation process, stating, “I worry about the context in which this merger is going to be evaluated by actors that I do not think are independent.” With Paramount still working to win over Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders and the possibility of an improved offer, the outcome remains uncertain as regulatory scrutiny continues.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
This political grandstanding over Netflix’s content is concerning. Regulators should focus on evaluating the merger’s impact on competition, not ideological grievances.
Agreed. Content concerns should be separate from antitrust considerations. The hearing seems to have strayed from its core purpose.
I’m curious to see how this acquisition would affect the streaming landscape and consumer choice. Hopefully the review process remains objective and fact-based.
That’s a good point. The impact on competition and consumer options should be the priority, not partisan attacks on Netflix’s programming.
The partisan attacks on Netflix’s programming are troubling. Regulators should evaluate this merger based on its economic effects, not ideological grievances.
The senators’ criticisms of Netflix’s ‘woke’ content seem misguided. Streaming platforms should have editorial freedom, within reason, to cater to diverse audiences.
Agreed. As long as Netflix isn’t engaging in illegal or unethical practices, their programming decisions should be left to their own discretion.
This hearing is a prime example of how political agendas can distort the regulatory process. I hope the FTC maintains an impartial, evidence-based approach.
While I understand concerns about media consolidation, the senators’ focus on Netflix’s content is concerning. Antitrust reviews should stay objective and apolitical.
Well said. The hearing seems to have become more about political posturing than a genuine evaluation of the merger’s competitive impacts.
This hearing highlights the political polarization around media companies and their content. I hope regulators can cut through the noise and focus on the merger’s economic implications.