This is a delicate time for a film and TV landscape already suffering from huge production scalebacks. While the industry cheered the recent news about a modest uptick in local production in Los Angeles, a merger of this magnitude could easily wipe out any of those gains simply by scaling back the number of TV and movie productions that happen every year. As Paramount did with its acquisition of Showtime a few years ago and its recent decision to nix various subsidiaries under the company, like MTV Documentary Films, layoffs and streamlining would be inevitable.
But, to say nothing of Hollywood’s competitive streak, there are myriad benefits to having more players on the field than fewer. Already, behind-the-scenes diversity gains, from the director’s chair to executive suites, have diminished in just a few short years. Fewer productions mean fewer opportunities for underrepresented filmmakers and talent to rise in the ranks, or even sustain themselves in a consolidating industry that will become less risk-adverse. On the theatrical side, independent exhibitors through Art House Convergence, International Confederation Of Art House Cinemas, and Network Of Canadian Independent Cinemas have all spoken out against a less competitive film market. The ripple effect of fewer movies to play means fewer growth opportunities for the places that play them—not to mention potentially higher operational costs, further diminishing public access to one of the more affordable popular forms of entertainment.
Though this vote and other recent green lights may make the deal seem inevitable, there’s still time; the Paramount-Warner Bros. deal isn’t expected to close until later this year. While at the federal level, FCC regulation currently seems to be more of a suggestion than a practice, there are new concerns growing over the influx of funding from Saudi Arabia, which would violate FCC rules prohibiting foreign investors from owning more than a quarter of a company with broadcasting licenses. Paramount has applied to have the funds approved regardless, and insists the controlling share would stay in the United States.
But despite this late-rising issue—and assuming almost half the funds for the merger won’t fall through over some kind of war—the likeliest way to block the merger is still in the court system. On April 30, subscribers sued against the merger over antitrust concerns that could lead to a spike in prices, less production, and fewer viewing options. There are also possible suits coming through the state attorneys general—which the California Department Of Justice is already looking into—unions with members in danger of losing their jobs, or European courts that are less amenable to monopolies than those in America. An antitrust lawsuit seems like the final failsafe, something that has the ability to stop the merger before its expected closing date in Q3 and keep Hollywood from becoming a BoJack Horseman punchline.
Keep scrolling for more great stories.