Ted Sarandos, Netflix co-CEO and chief content officer, has publicly dismissed Donald Trump’s social media demand for Netflix to fire board member Susan Rice. Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s “Today” program, Sarandos characterized the streamer’s bid for Warner Bros. Discovery as a purely business matter, stating, “He likes to do a lot of things on social media. This is a business deal. It’s not a political deal.” He further elaborated that the deal is subject to oversight by the Department of Justice in the U.S. and regulators across Europe and globally, not political intervention.

Trump’s demand followed a post by MAGA influencer Laura Loomer, urging him to obstruct the Netflix-Warner deal and calling for Rice’s immediate termination, labeling her as “racist Trump deranged.” Susan Rice, a former diplomat in the Obama administration, currently serves on the Netflix board. Sarandos’s comments were made in London following his attendance at the BAFTA Film Awards, and prior to an announcement of a new donation by Netflix to the National Film and Television School. Netflix currently boasts approximately 320 million subscribers worldwide, with nearly 20 million residing in the U.K.

The discussion comes at a critical juncture for the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery. Netflix initiated an $83 billion bid for the company’s streaming assets on December 5. Just three days later, Paramount, under the leadership of David Ellison, launched a hostile counter-bid of $108 billion for the entire company. Despite this, the Warner Bros. Discovery board has consistently expressed a preference for Netflix's offer, granting Paramount a deadline to present its definitive best and final bid.

Sarandos articulately defended Netflix's proposal, asserting, “Our deal is growth.” He highlighted Netflix’s substantial investment of $6 billion in original programming within the U.K. since 2020, which has led to the creation of 50,000 jobs in the region. He distinguished Netflix’s approach as a “vertical merger,” emphasizing that Netflix aims to acquire assets it currently lacks, such as a movie studio and a distribution entity, thereby expanding the market rather than diminishing it.

Conversely, Sarandos criticized Paramount’s bid as embodying “the classic horizontal media mergers that are always bad for consumers, always bad for creators.” He warned that if Paramount’s bid were successful, the number of major Hollywood studios would shrink from five to four. He also pointed out Paramount’s commitment to an immediate $6 billion in cuts post-acquisition, with an additional $16 billion required for deleveraging, leading him to conclude that “this industry will be much smaller under that ownership than it would be under Netflix ownership.”

Addressing the role of sovereign wealth funds, particularly concerning the Paramount consortium which previously included Jared Kushner, Sarandos expressed reservations about foreign governments holding financial stakes in news networks. He stated, “I think it’s a bad idea, typically,” noting that some of the involved Gulf states are “not very big on the First Amendment.” He found it “very odd” to suggest these entities would not exert editorial influence over news outlets like CNN and CBS, given the significant level of investment involved.

Sarandos also responded to filmmaker James Cameron, who had cautioned the Senate antitrust subcommittee that a Netflix acquisition would be “disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business.” Sarandos dismissed Cameron’s intervention as “disingenuous,” recounting a meeting on December 20 where they discussed Netflix’s commitment to a 45-day theatrical exclusivity window for Warner Bros. films. He highlighted that Netflix members watch an average of seven movies monthly, significantly more than the average American’s two cinema visits per year, arguing that “if more people see movies, the better, deeper, richer relationship they have with movies.”

On the topic of British television, Sarandos refuted claims that Netflix suppresses local productions, citing that out of 59 ongoing productions in the U.K., only around 17 are non-British projects. He unhesitatingly stated he “would have made it in a heartbeat” if asked about ITV’s “Mr. Bates vs the Post Office,” expressing surprise that it is used as an example against Netflix. He also voiced skepticism regarding a parliamentary proposal for major streamers to contribute 5% of their U.K. subscriber revenue to a cultural fund for British drama, advocating that “incentive works much better than obligation” and that such obligations could undermine economic gains from existing production incentives.

Sarandos identified YouTube as a formidable competitive force, noting its share of nearly 9% of all television viewing time in the U.K., with 55% of that viewing now occurring on TV sets. He described this as a “zero sum game,” where time spent on one app means not watching traditional broadcast or other streaming services. He found it counterproductive for studios and broadcasters to continue supplying YouTube with free programming while the platform expands at their expense. Finally, he described podcasts as a natural evolution of late-night chat shows, highlighting their lower production costs, specialized audiences, and contribution to a more diversified entertainment landscape.