Doesn't that imply that Netflix was planning to do the same (for their party)? Or are you saying Netflix is innocent here
but that's not the whole thing being said.
Party X may have been planning on something, but party Y threw a wrench in the middle, causing party X to have to make some response. By implication, party X believes party Y to be throwing a wrench, hence, party X must act. Therefore, party Y also must be planning something that counteracts party X's desires. If it weren't so, party X would not act (as that costs money).
This seems like a variation on the fallacy of the excluded middle.
Make no mistake, it (Netflix) is still a billionaire corp; on the humanity scale, it scores quite low, but not lawn mower low. They're still outside the Ellison event horizon.
What does that mean?