Hollywood
Over a thousand Hollywood actors, actresses, executives and skilled artisans signed a letter in opposition to the Paramount deal with Warner Discovery.
Published on April 13 and posted on the website blockthemerger.com, it addresses multiple consolidation issues:
“This transaction would further consolidate an already concentrated media landscape, reducing competition at a moment when our industries—and the audiences we serve—can least afford it. The result will be fewer opportunities for creators, fewer jobs across the production ecosystem, higher costs, and less choice for audiences in the United States and around the world. Alarmingly, this merger would reduce the number of major U.S. film studios to just four.
“Our industry is already under severe strain, in large part due to prior waves of consolidation. We have witnessed a steep decline in the number of films produced and released, alongside a narrowing of the kinds of stories that are financed and distributed. Increasingly, a small number of powerful entities determine what gets made—and on what terms—leaving creators and independent businesses with fewer viable paths to sustain their work.
“Media consolidation has accelerated the disappearance of the mid-budget film, the erosion of independent distribution, the collapse of the international sales market, the elimination of meaningful profit participation, and the weakening of screen credit integrity.”
In the April 13 New York Times, Benjamin Mullin writes that despite this effort he expects the Paramount deal to close:
“Paramount’s deal with Warner Bros. Discovery is expected to close later this year pending approval from shareholders and government regulators. The company has said that it does not expect any significant impediments to closing in the United States and that some countries, like Germany and Slovenia, have already given their approval to proceed.”
Is It All for Naught?
It is good that these professionals have taken the time to create a public awareness campaign in opposition. But as Mullin hints, it may all be for naught.
Why?
Well, the powers that be in this proposal, as with most major acquisitions, are focused just on share price. This benefits shareholders, which benefits investors. Others, like the Hollywood professionals here, are pushed aside. The regulators and judges often feel the same way.
What can be done?
In my opinion, Federal law should be strengthened regarding the definition of trust and monopoly so that it includes the importance of stakeholders as well. In other words, if a majority of the acquired employees are opposed, include this in the Federal definition of monopoly. Provide a vote to find out and weigh it in the decision. You could also include organized customers as well. Employees and customers suffer the most from acquisitions focused mainly on an attractive share price. This needs to be spelled out in law so less wiggle-room for big acquisition-friendly regulators and judges.
