The Netflix-Warner Bros Merger is A Disadvantage, Right?

On Friday, December 5, I was deep in the middle of a study session on what was otherwise an uneventful day. Distracted, I opened Twitter to the headline, “Netflix has announced their acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery for $82.7 billion”. I assumed it was a joke or a new, unfamiliar meme format. Because it couldn’t possibly be true, right? The verified tag glowered smugly like light in the vacuum of space, and in that moment, I knew: Cinema had died at the hands of Netflix.
We live in a world with almost everything media available at our fingertips. Televisions, the primary source of entertainment growing up, have become beautiful sitting room relics. Gone are the days of monthly DSTV subscriptions. All you need is a streaming service to watch what you want. Slowly but surely, we’ve withdrawn from communal cable television shows to watching the occasional movie with family, and then to watching primarily on streaming services like Netflix, Disney+ and Apple TV alone in our rooms; shutting out the company that made movie nights so special. A period of family bonding has been reduced to nought. Theatres that used to be packed with people lining up to see new movies — since you wouldn’t find them available anywhere else — are slowly dying, except for a few moments during the year when standouts are captivating enough to get us in those seats. They echo in silence for the rest of the year.
Founded in 1923 by the four actual Warner brothers, Warner Bros is one of the largest film studios in the world. Just name a random list of TV shows or movies you enjoy, and there will likely be a connection to the studio; Harry Potter, Game of Thrones, DC Superheroes, they all live here, as do The Matrix, The Big Bang Theory and many other beloved shows. This doesn’t even include their various subsidiaries. As one of the oldest film studios still standing, and one with hundreds of classics under its belt, it’s only fair to ask, how did a successful company suddenly need to merge with a major competitor like Netflix?
But first, we must understand what mergers mean. An oversimplified explanation is that when companies aren’t performing well and are pushed to the wall, their competitors buy them up in bidding wars. This helps them survive rapid industry changes. A similar merger took place in 2017, with Walt Disney buying FOX Studios and its huge franchises like X-Men, Fantastic Four, and Star Wars, to better compete in the market. Funnily enough, huge FOX projects have been a thing of the past since the merger, despite the claims of better funding and access to more resources. Warner Bros itself bought up Discovery in 2022, acquiring HBO, MAX, and Discovery+, but unfortunately, this resulted in huge debt for Warner Studios. Having released movies in cinemas alone for the past decade, it was difficult to adapt to the cinema-decentered industry. This led to their vast library of old movies being underutilised in the competition with other streamers.
Netflix, which began in 1977 as a DVD rental service, has changed the entertainment game forever. Their meteoric success is backed in no small part by specials and franchises like Stranger Things and Bridgerton, which have captured global attention. It has made timeless films and some old franchises available at affordable prices, albeit hiked from time to time. For everyday people, Netflix provides a satisfactory service, until you’ve watched all their popular shows and you’re scrolling at 2 AM through loads of shows, but can no longer find any worth watching. And sadly, on the rare occasions that you do find an under-the-radar gem, the last episode comes too fast and too soon, complete with a brutal cliffhanger you urgently need to sate– and then, “Surprise!”, the show’s been cancelled. Scrolling through Netflix’s socials in recent years shows striking similarities, with people either begging for a show’s renewal or angry that their favourite show was cancelled yet again, usually because it didn’t yield the amount of money the studio wanted. The apparent lack of love for the art or the people is blatantly displayed time and time again.
Some have argued that Netflix is pushing a liberal agenda as its shows feature forced diversity and inclusivity. This leads to massive alterations of different plots in an unnatural way to fit these stringent rules. Censoring and making light of social issues also hasn’t helped matters.
The announcement of the merger was met with few positive reactions. Some cried at the thought of their favourite classics and franchises as Netflix material. “The Death of Cinema” echoed across cinephile socials, with many calling for a stop to the monopoly. It doesn’t help that Netflix Originals introduced the concept of taking 4 to 5 years to film a season of 8 or 10 episodes max, as against 22 episodes per season each year. Filler episodes are regarded as trash and have slowly been obliterated. Making matters worse, when asked about these concerns, co-CEO Ted Sarandos said, “We’re in a period of transition. Folks grew up thinking, ‘I want to make movies on a gigantic screen and have strangers watch them [and to have them] play in the theatre for two months, and people cry and sold-out shows … It’s an outdated concept”. To him, the experience of watching a scene unravel for the first time with hundreds of other people, the surprised, united gasp at a plot twist, is an outdated experience. He ignored, among many other things, the success of the Barbenheimer craze back in Summer 2023, which had people dressing up in pink just to go to the cinema to see both movies, and the promotions both movies received, despite having wildly different themes. He evidently doesn’t see the importance of the human experience of companionship and community with his repeated reference to people as just “consumers”. In light of this monopoly, subscribers are also worried that imminent price increases would accompany a larger library.
There are benefits to this, no doubt. People would be able to easily watch great classics again at their fingertips without having to pay for different streaming services. No scrolling for hours on Netflix looking for what to watch, as they’ll have more shows for different tastes. Warner Bros. Discovery would also get the funding it so desperately needs to create more art and explore as much as they want, as far as Netflix allows them to run independently, on a much larger scale than they were previously afforded. Movies that were restricted to select countries would be available everywhere, providing formidable competition to Disney-FOX. Shareholders would benefit even more as Netflix’s profitability skyrockets.
Nevertheless, this comes off as a monopoly, and there are laws against such, as seen in the 1948 Antitrust Case, where it was a legal battle between United States and Paramount Studios, Warner Bros, 20th Century FOX and so on to stop them from monopolising the film industry. It begs the question of independent creators, new actors and how new talent would be scouted as this merged entity would favour profit over actual art and storytelling, thereby lessening creativity. Jobs would be lost to reduce overlapping roles, widening the wealth gap even more. Also, if prices are hiked as a result, more people would resort to piracy, preventing writers and directors from getting paid for their hard work.
Interestingly, this merger might fall through, as Paramount recently outbid Netflix with a $108 billion fee. Seeing as the regulatory approval papers haven’t been signed yet, we could be in for a long legal battle for the love of film and TV. Regardless, if this merger must happen, it’s best as a partnership where Warner-Discovery Studios functions independently. HBO’s bold approach to TV shouldn’t be altered; they should be allowed to continue their existing projects. Prices should be kept moderate. Movies should still be released in theatres and not have a reduced release time before appearing on the streamers. Writers and Directors should be allowed their artistic integrity and the lookout for new talent must always go on. If this merger happens this way, though the lack of serious competition would be present, it would be a win-win for everyone involved.




