Competition. Independence. Sustainable Creative Work.
Hollywood thrives when many studios compete, when independent creators can reach audiences, and when workers and small businesses across the film ecosystem have fair access to opportunity.
But consolidation among major studios has steadily reduced the number of buyers, narrowed distribution pathways, and concentrated control over financing, greenlights, marketing, and distribution.
A stronger Hollywood is built not through consolidation, but through competition, fair market access, and policies that sustain independent storytelling.
Learn MoreExamining the claims made about consolidation — and what the evidence actually shows.
Paramount argues the combined company will be better positioned to compete with global technology and streaming platforms.
Competition in film markets depends on multiple buyers and distributors, not larger consolidated companies.
Workers and creators consistently report that consolidation reduces the number of buyers for projects and increases take-it-or-leave-it deal terms.
Fewer buyers means less bargaining power for creators and fewer opportunities for independent films to reach audiences.
Paramount promises at least 30 films annually across the combined studios.
Film workers report that consolidation often results in:
Output promises cannot substitute for competitive market structure.
Paramount states it will remain an active buyer of content from independent producers and third-party studios.
Independent producers increasingly face:
As vertical integration increases, studios often prioritize internally produced content, reducing opportunities for independent suppliers.
Paramount promises every film will receive a full theatrical window.
Independent theaters report a shrinking supply of diverse titles and increasing reliance on blockbuster franchises.
Healthy theatrical markets depend on a wide range of studios and distributors producing films, not a small number of consolidated suppliers.
Across the film industry, workers, creators, distributors, and exhibitors describe how consolidation affects their livelihoods and the films audiences are able to see.
A streaming project was halted after a corporate restructuring, leading to layoffs across the production team. Months passed before many workers were able to find new employment.
As commissioning power becomes concentrated among fewer platforms, workers report fewer opportunities when projects are cancelled.
A producer described how mid-sized distributors have disappeared through acquisitions and closures.
Today, independent filmmakers face far fewer buyers, and distribution offers increasingly require surrendering ownership rights.
A television writer reported losing work when a series was cancelled following corporate restructuring.
As consolidation reduces the number of studios commissioning projects, competition for writing jobs intensifies while overall opportunities decline.
A documentary filmmaker described how socially focused projects struggle to secure distribution as studios prioritize franchise-driven content strategies.
Independent documentaries increasingly depend on non-commercial outlets to reach audiences.
A theater operator described declining availability of independent films for theatrical programming.
When studio output becomes more centralized around a smaller number of high-budget titles, independent theaters struggle to maintain diverse programming.
Concentration affects every stage of the film ecosystem.
A healthy ecosystem depends on competition at every stage of this chain.
A stronger Hollywood requires policy frameworks that sustain competitive markets and independent cultural production. These solutions focus on strengthening the entire film ecosystem, not just the largest studios.
Regulators should carefully scrutinize mergers that consolidate control over film production, distribution pipelines, streaming platforms, and advertising markets.
Antitrust enforcement should also address buyer-side market power in creative labor markets.
Streaming platforms increasingly determine which films audiences discover. Policymakers should require transparency in viewership data, licensing agreements, and discoverability algorithms.
Greater transparency ensures independent films are not buried in opaque recommendation systems.
Independent creators should retain fair participation in the long-term value of their work. Policy tools may include protections against excessive rights grabs, stronger collective bargaining frameworks, and enforcement against anti-competitive licensing practices.
Sustainable creative careers depend on fair ownership structures.
Independent distributors and sales agents remain essential to bringing diverse films to audiences. Possible policy supports include tax incentives for independent distribution, federal or state grant programs supporting theatrical circulation, and support for regional film exhibition networks.
The film economy supports thousands of small businesses and freelancers across the country. Public investment can strengthen local ecosystems through regional production incentives, workforce training programs, and grants for community theaters and cultural venues.
A resilient film economy is geographically diverse.
Hollywood has always been strongest when creative talent, independent producers, distributors, and theaters operate in a competitive environment.
Competition—not consolidation—is the foundation of that future.