AT&T says it's happy to offer some modest concessions to get its $86 billion acquisition of Time Warner approved by regulators, but refuses to sell any assets to make the deal happen. AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson in New York this week stated that Turner Broadcasting, owner of CNN, is promising that it won't black out content during retransmission disagreements as one possible concession. Of course promising to stop annoying consumers with ever-increasing programming blackouts caused by intra-industry bickering isn't much of a promise, since it should be basic common courtesy as a business practice.

AT&T didn't give any other indications of what other concessions it would be willing to offer, but merger conditions in this sector tend to be theatrical in nature.

Traditionally, companies offer up fairly tepid voluntary concessions they know would likely be accomplished with or without the help of the merger. Regulators then often over-state the value of these modest concessions for political benefit. But more often than not these concessions and conditions are less than meaningless, and AT&T has a long, proud history of tap dancing around them. Regulators have just as long of a history letting them get away with it.

The DOJ in this case recently sued to block the merger, claiming the vertical integration of the deal would harm consumers. But many critics have suggested the Trump DOJ, whose other arm is busy gutting media consolidation rules and consumer protections like net neutrality has another motivation: they're blocking the deal because of Trump's disdain for CNN, and because Trump ally Rupert Murdoch opposes AT&T building a bigger competitor to his News Corporation empire.

Consumer groups opposed to the deal seem to believe the ends justifies the means. They oppose the deal because they believe AT&T will use its greater size and leverage to make life more difficult than ever on smaller competitors, whether that comes in the form of making content licensing expensive to obtain, or by using its market power and usage caps to hamstring competitors now that net neutrality rules are going the way of the dodo.

AT&T lawyers meanwhile have been busy trying to dig up dirt indicating that the Trump administration's DOJ is motivated by something other than an uncharacteristic concern for consumer welfare. At the same time, AT&T lawyers are arguing in court that the deal should be approved because the government allowed Comcast to buy NBC Universal in 2011. They also continue to claim that the deal will be a massive boon for the company's customers.

"Simply put, no competitor will be eliminated by this merger," AT&T said in a court filing this week (pdf). "This transaction is therefore a classic vertical deal, combining Time Warner's video content with AT&T's video distribution platforms so that the merged company can compete more effectively against market-leading cable incumbents and insurgent tech giants."

The first hearing in the AT&T DOJ case will be held December 7, just 14 days before the FCC is scheduled to vote to kill net neutrality protections at AT&T's behest.