Ken Paxton Pretends To Care About Consumers, Sues Netflix To ‘Protect The Children’
from the hollow-performative-populism dept
Flimsy and corrupt authoritarian populism is dedicated to pretending that the oligarchs and autocrats really care about the people. One way Trumpism has done this is by pretending they actually care about reining in corporate power. That’s included an elaborate, multi-year performance about how MAGA Republicans were going to curb abuses by “big tech” and bring back meaningful antitrust reform.
As we’ve warned and witnessed repeatedly, that’s always a lie. The Trump administration has relentlessly dedicated his second administration to devastating whatever was left of regulatory autonomy, consumer protection, and antitrust reform. If MAGA is taking aim at a company it’s almost always either to harass them for doing something Trump doesn’t like, or to help benefit a billionaire ally.
Texas AG Ken Paxton is no exception. Every so often Ken likes to take a break from fueling dangerous conspiracy theories and harassing trans people to pretend he’s being tough on corporate power. Ken’s latest gambit is a new lawsuit against against Netflix for… monetizing streaming advertising viewer data and creating “addicted” users:
“Netflix’s years-long bait-and-switch has led the company right to where it promised never to be: addicting children and families to its platform, mining those users for data, and then converting that data into lucrative intelligence for global advertising juggernauts.”
Granted Netflix is not unique here. In a country too corrupt to pass meaningful privacy laws (because MAGA Republicans just like Ken routinely work to kill them), nearly every company you interact with on a daily basis now monetizes your every movement and online choices, “anonymizes” it (a meaningless term), sells access to dodgy international data brokers, then repeatedly lies about it.
They do this because Republicans, corporate lobbyists, and many “centrist” Democrats have, quite unsubtly, worked tirelessly to dismantle corporate oversight and regulatory autonomy. Most companies have been eager to take advantage, including Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, who, like countless other CEOs, used to at least pay empty lip service to never tracking or monetizing consumer data.
Paxton’s lawsuit insists Netflix has built a vast surveillance economy that includes peoples’ kids viewing habits, violating Texas consumer protection law:
“Netflix built this surveillance machinery to scrutinize how users and their children behave—what they click, how long they linger, what they avoid, when they pause, what draws them in, what they replay or skip, where they are, what devices they use, what other devices are in their home, what other apps they interact with, and much more. Each action is a data point revealing something about the user. This is not simply about deciding what show to queue up next.It is about learning who the users and their children are.”
Again: almost every single company you interact with does this now. Many in ways that are far worse than Netflix (see: the entire unregulated data broker economy). Paxton knows this. So why single out Netflix? And why now?
Well, Netflix has been a recent thorn in the side of Trump-allied billionaire Larry Ellison’s efforts to acquire Warner Brothers, CNN, and HBO. Starting earlier this year, Trumpland made Netflix public enemy number one, pushing a pretty broad misinformation campaign targeting the company. Missouri Senator Josh Hawley went before Congress to accuse them of “pushing trans ideology.” More recently, Paramount has been trying to blame Netflix for all the negative criticism of their giant, terrible Warner Bros merger.
These sorts of lawsuits take a while to build momentum, so I suspect Paxton’s inquiry began during the mad conspiratorial heat of MAGA’s Netflix breakdown earlier this year, and is only culminating now. And I suspect Paxton will be eager to share any juicy and harmful tidbits found during trial prep to help frame the company (which in reality has been pretty amicable toward Republicans and trans bashing comedians) as a useful “woke” culture war prop.
That’s not to say Netflix doesn’t do anything wrong and isn’t (like every tech company) abysmal on surveillance and privacy, but it is to say that authoritarians don’t actually care about the public interest. And they certainly don’t actually care about mass commercialized surveillance, given they’ve played a starring role in cementing it and eliminating all accountability for it.
The American public’s broad and growing hatred of corporations and the extraction class has long been a fertile recruitment playground for autocratic zealots like Trump and Paxton, who love to put on adorable little stage plays where they pretend to be “reining in corporate power” and “embracing meaningful antitrust reform.” But it’s uniformly a performance always driven by ulterior motives.
If guys like Trump and Paxton actually cared about consumer privacy, they’d openly and loudly support a national privacy law that holds all companies (and executives, personally) accountable for privacy and security failures when it comes to consumer data. If they cared about consumer privacy, they’d relentlessly target data brokers that sell oceans of consumer data to any nitwit with a nickel (including foreign intelligence). They’d fund and staff U.S. regulators tasked with policing privacy abuses.
They don’t do that because that might impact them and their friends financially, and disrupt the U.S. government’s ability to spy on Americans without a warrant. So instead you get these highly selective and flimsy populist performances that single out administration “enemies” for failing to adequately bend the knee, while tricking rubes into thinking they’re being tough on corporate power.
Filed Under: ken paxton, privacy, regulations, state law, streaming, surveillance, texas, video
Companies: netflix


Comments on “Ken Paxton Pretends To Care About Consumers, Sues Netflix To ‘Protect The Children’”
I trust Ken Paxton to protect kids about as much as I trust the Catholic Church to protect kids.
Re:
Now there…don’t be so hard on Ken Paxton. He just wants to keep the kids alive and healthy so that they can be slaughtered in the next mass school shooting (while yet another pack of cowards calling themselves a police department stand around waiting for the screaming to stop).
Re: Re:
Or to “Save” the kids, for another Epstein. (Though it occurs to me, it could be for both)
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
The netflix merger would have had more market share. The Paramount merger IS the anti-trust position. You don’t care, you just want to scream about Republicans.
“Regulatory Autonomy” isn’t a thing. Everything, literally EVERYTHING in the Executive branch reports to the President.
Re:
No. No, it is not. The antitrust position would be, at a bare minimum, to not let any merger with Warner Bros. happen at all.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Then they go out of business.
That’s just the retarded commie position.
Mergers are not, like, a privilege granted by government, dumbass.
Re: Re: Re:
Is either Warner Bros. or Paramount in serious danger of going out of business altogether without this merger?
You know, it’s kind of funny: If communism and socialism and whatnot never works, why are you still so fucking afraid of it?
They kind of are, though.
Re: Re: Re:2
I mean, Zohran Mamdani is our mayor and so far, we seem to be the only jurisdiction in the US where people feel great about their public officials (or at least one of them. 😉) Zohran’s not perfect, but I want more of his socialism since it’s doing us so much good in the few months it’s been active!
Re: Re: Re:
The 1930s are calling, please read a history book you ignorant fuck.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Which history book, The Reader’s Digest Book of Ancient Egypt, Where’s Wally in the Aztec Empire? Uncle Joseph’s Guide to Purges for Children?
“…please read a history book…” is a genuinly moronic statement to make without listing at least one title. Dipshit!
Re: Re: Re:3
Honestly, it’s probably easier to just say what not to read. Like you should stop using Mein Kampf as a personal life manual.
Try some Howard Zinn instead.
Re:
So to be clear on your position, you believe Trump is immune from prosecution for executive acts while in office and he is in complete control of every part of the executive branch and can make partisan, selfish decisions directing the branch, correct?
So that means you can’t bitch about your conspiracy theories about the Biden administration doing anything against Trump because Biden had immunity and was in total selfish control of the executive branch. Nothing you (often falsely) claim Biden did was illegal if your arguments in favor of Trump are true.
I eagerly await the pretzel logic you offer in response, though I’m guessing it’ll be more of the “nuh uh!” variety with no citations as usual.
Netflix just needs to do a documentary on Trump, the most handsome, strongest, manly man in the universe.
I got to say though, screw netflix. They have finally fully enshitified and you can no longer actually browse their collection, only recommendations or direct search.
Oh, That's Good News
So glad the embezzling philanderer is trying to think of the children.
(Gods, I hate this state so much.)
Thanks Captain Obvious.
I reckon he’s doing it an attempt at extortion, “You slip me brown envelopes of “donations” and I’ll suddenly be nice to you.”
If Paxton goes after Sense8 I’m going to kick his ass, Hank-Hill-style.