Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

Consumer impact and streaming models

• Many commenters “root” for neither buyer: preferred outcome is both bids fail, siloed exclusivity proves unprofitable, and multiple services compete on UX while licensing from a common catalog.
• Others specifically want Netflix to lose, criticizing binge-release culture and fear of a future $25–$50/month “must-have” monopoly.
• Counterpoint: some argue one $25 service with everything could be cheaper than juggling 4+ subscriptions, though others note people often rotate one service at a time.

Ownership, exclusivity, and antitrust ideas

• Strong support from some for separating content production from distribution, likening it to the 1948 forced breakup of studio-owned theaters.
• A Norway-style rule is proposed: producers can run their own platforms but must license content on “reasonable terms” to others.
• Others say content isn’t a natural monopoly like spectrum; mandating licenses for all works is unworkable and “reasonable price” would be hard to define.

Physical media, access, and piracy

• Widespread concern that consolidation, especially under Netflix, accelerates disappearance of Blu-rays and transactional digital purchases, pushing everything into revocable subscriptions.
• Several say they’re done paying and will pirate or rely on older media, books, or 10+ year-old games instead.

Paramount vs. Netflix as stewards

• Netflix is viewed as better-run tech but criticized for algorithmic enshittification and perceived political/cultural “agenda.”
• Paramount+ is slammed for buggy apps, heavy ads, and poor UX, though some like its sports and Star Trek catalog.
• A minority prefers WB content under Paramount, believing studios there “trust directors” more historically, but even they are wary of new ownership.

Deal mechanics and breakup fees

• Thread digs into Warner’s ~$2.8B fee owed to Netflix if it walks away, plus a separate ~$5.8B regulatory termination fee Netflix would owe if blocked.
• Comparisons drawn to grocery mergers where breakup structures crushed local competition; some argue TV isn’t food, but note job losses and canceled projects still matter.

Politics, corruption, and media capture

• Dominant theme: the Paramount bid is seen as deeply political—backed by Ellison money, Jared Kushner’s fund, and aligned with Trump, who has publicly threatened the Netflix deal.
• Many describe this as overt oligarchic corruption: using antitrust power to steer assets to allies, potentially to weaponize CNN and other channels ahead of elections.
• Netflix’s leaders’ Democratic ties are noted, but commenters mostly see its bid as “ordinary” consolidation versus Paramount’s explicitly Trump-aligned play.

Cultural and democratic worries

• Commenters fear further consolidation will narrow mainstream culture, reduce critical or government-opposed works, and increase propaganda-like content.
• Broader disillusionment appears: US checks and balances are seen as eroded, regulatory capture rampant, and the system drifting toward oligarchy or “spoils” politics.