Senator Eric Schmitt delivered a masterclass in holding corporate America accountable this week, systematically dismantling Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos’ attempts to downplay his company’s radical political activism while seeking congressional approval for a massive $100 billion Warner Bros. acquisition. The Missouri Republican’s methodical questioning exposed the breathtaking audacity of a streaming giant that spent years weaponizing entertainment for leftist causes, only to now demand senators “rubber-stamp” their path to media monopolization.
The hearing revealed Netflix’s transformation from entertainment company to progressive political machine. Under Sarandos’ leadership, the platform hosted Stacey Abrams campaign rallies, partnered with George Soros-funded organizations, and strategically placed Susan Rice—Biden’s equity czar—on their board while she simultaneously shaped federal racial policy. This isn’t coincidental corporate drift; it’s coordinated ideological capture of America’s premier streaming platform.
When confronted with documented evidence of Netflix’s political activities, Sarandos retreated to the tired corporate playbook of claiming “neutrality” while deflecting responsibility. But Schmitt came prepared with receipts. The senator highlighted how 99% of Netflix employee political donations flow to Democrats, how the company’s content consistently promotes progressive narratives, and how their executive decisions align perfectly with Democratic Party messaging priorities.
This corporate-government revolving door represents everything wrong with today’s administrative state. Rice’s dual role as Netflix board member and federal equity policy architect exemplifies how progressive elites seamlessly move between shaping government policy and corporate strategy, creating an integrated system that bypasses democratic accountability while manipulating public opinion at unprecedented scale.
The proposed Netflix-Warner Bros. merger would concentrate dangerous levels of cultural influence in the hands of a single woke corporation. Combined, these entities would control vast libraries of American entertainment content, from classic Hollywood films to cutting-edge streaming originals. Such consolidation threatens the marketplace of ideas that our constitutional republic depends upon, potentially allowing one ideologically captured company to dictate cultural narratives across multiple platforms.
Schmitt’s strategic approach offers a blueprint for how America First legislators can effectively challenge corporate overreach. Rather than accepting scripted talking points, he demanded substantive answers about specific political activities. This evidence-based confrontation style forces executives to defend their actual record rather than hide behind vague corporate speak about “serving all customers.”
The senator’s questioning also highlighted the broader threat of foreign influence in American media. Netflix’s global operations and international content partnerships raise legitimate national security concerns when combined with their documented willingness to advance specific political agendas. Should a company with such extensive foreign entanglements control even larger portions of American entertainment?
Constitutional framers understood that concentrated power threatens liberty, whether wielded by government or private entities. The antitrust laws they inspired weren’t designed merely to protect economic competition, but to preserve the diverse voices and viewpoints essential to democratic governance. When media companies become vehicles for coordinated political messaging while seeking monopolistic market control, they threaten both economic freedom and constitutional discourse.
Patriots should take encouragement from Schmitt’s principled stand. His approach demonstrates how conservative senators can use existing oversight powers to expose woke corporate hypocrisy while protecting American consumers from ideological manipulation. By demanding transparency about political activities before approving major mergers, legislators can begin dismantling the left’s cultural monopolies.
The Netflix hearing signals a broader awakening among America First conservatives who recognize that media consolidation isn’t merely an economic issue—it’s a sovereignty concern. When foreign-influenced corporations gain monopolistic control over American cultural content, they acquire unprecedented power to shape public opinion and political outcomes.
Moving forward, other senators should follow Schmitt’s lead in demanding rigorous scrutiny of corporate political activities before rubber-stamping mega-mergers. This framework—combining antitrust enforcement with exposure of woke overreach—offers a proven path toward protecting American consumers while preserving the diverse marketplace of ideas our constitutional republic requires. Corporate America’s days of consequence-free political activism may finally be ending.
