Paramount Accuses Netflix of Merger Sabotage

Paramount’s Chief Legal Officer Makan Delrahim has accused Netflix of engaging in sabotage against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and other parties to block the merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD). In a letter reported by Politico on June 5, Delrahim described Netflix’s actions as a “panicked reaction” and a “scorched-earth tactic to poison regulators and other stakeholders.” Netflix’s spokesperson dismissed the accusation as “absurd.”

Origin: Union Concerns

The controversy surfaced as Paramount, following its 2025 merger with Skydance Media, advances integration with WBD. The merger requires approval from the DOJ’s Antitrust Division, and Paramount claims Netflix is spreading opposition to hinder that approval. Delrahim himself formerly headed the Antitrust Division.

The trigger was a March letter from the International Brotherhood of Teamsters to the DOJ. Representing 1.3 million members, the Teamsters warned the merger threatens film and television production workers. According to the group’s statement, they sought to block the merger or, at minimum, impose strong safeguards to protect domestic production and employment.

Paramount Argues for Job Growth

In response, Delrahim argued the merger would not reduce jobs but actually expand Paramount’s content production. Since merging with Skydance, Paramount has purchased or renewed 20 shows and plans to nearly double its theatrical releases compared to 2025. Additionally, CEO David Ellison has committed to releasing over 30 feature films annually post-merger, each in theaters for at least 45 days.

Delrahim claimed the merger would create opportunities for not only writers and directors but also a wide range of roles including actors, drivers, location scouts, casting directors, caterers, mechanics, and animal trainers. “More movies and series produced means more call sheets, location days, transportation, casting, and catering jobs,” he stated.

Possible Contradictions in Financial Data

However, notable is a January SEC filing by Paramount indicating that post-merger content spending would decrease by less than 10%. The filing stated the reduction would not come from the “film and television studio” segment. A potential contradiction exists between Delrahim’s optimistic employment outlook and the corporate filing figures.

Netflix’s Immediate Denial

A Netflix spokesperson briefly commented, “This accusation is absurd.” It remains unclear if the company will offer a detailed rebuttal. If the Paramount-WBD merger proceeds, it would create a media conglomerate rivaling Disney and Netflix in scale. For Netflix, this would mean a powerful competitor emerging, making its concerns natural. However, the truth of any alleged regulatory influence is a separate matter.

Approval of this merger hinges on the DOJ’s assessment of its impact on competition. Past large-scale media mergers, such as AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner and Disney’s acquisition of 21st Century Fox, faced rigorous scrutiny. In this case, the focus is on how Paramount’s claims about Netflix’s actions might affect the review process.

Editorial View

In the short term, this accusation could further delay the merger review. Whether the DOJ investigates Netflix’s actions is uncertain, but the clash between the two companies will inevitably cast a shadow over the review’s fairness. Additionally, the Teamsters’ opposition drawing attention as a labor issue could add political pressure on merger approval.

From a long-term perspective, if the merger is approved, streaming market oligopoly would deepen. A three-power structure of Netflix, Disney, and the new Paramount-WBD would significantly alter competition in content acquisition and distribution costs. Conversely, if denied, Paramount would be forced into an independent strategy, highlighting management challenges as a mid-sized media company.

The editorial board sees Netflix’s intervention in a competitor’s merger as raising new issues in antitrust enforcement. Where is the line between legitimate lobbying and unfair influence that distorts competition? Especially in an era where indirect information manipulation and public opinion steering increasingly affect regulatory decisions, this boundary is becoming more blurred. This case could serve as a touchstone for defining that standard.

References

• Ars Technica - Netflix trying to “poison regulators” about WBD merger, Paramount lawyer claims — Published June 9, 2026