Does anybody know why WGN America still uses this name, when they distanced themselves to WGN TV in Chicago. They don't carry anymore Chicago programs that are seen on WGN TV, they stopped showing baseball games on the Superstation like Chicago Cubs baseball games, or nay games that they used to show nation wide. And yet I know that they still can, but why do they. They don't show even WGN news, anything relating to WGN TV is gone, but obviously they should no longer call themselves WGN America. I don't know what they should change their name, other then they should they are no longer related in anyway to WGN TV in Chicago. I am assuming that they still make their studios at WGN TV, but really they should move out if they are still, and change their name.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
WGN America
- Thread starter staggmovie
- Start date
Lets wait for the fallout of the Sinclair/Bonten/Tribune deal to finish though and see what Sinclair does to WGN America.
Why should they move out? A lot of broadcasters share facilities. As to the brand - it's well known - why should they change that? TBS formerly branded as "Superstation WTBS" for many years. Then they dropped the "W." Not so easy for WGN America - "GN" would get confused with the Game Show network.
There are a lot of brands that have changed but still use their old name. "Dollar" Rent A Car was named that because they actually had a car or two on the lot that they charged $1 per day for. But that probably ended in 1970. Same with "Motel 6" - but even the first time I stayed there in 1972, it was $8.99 per room.
Well TLC is another example that network was originally The Learning Channel but for the past 15-17 years TLC has been more famous for its reality shows.
But back to this thread the OP is wondering why WGN America keeps its name even though the content is not Chicago based anymore.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...-conservative-media-outlets-article-1.3158226
I say there's plenty of speculation at this point. I've seen and read articles speculating that WGN America could be the new place for Pro-Trump people to go to. This is ever since the Sinclair/Tribune/Bonten deals came into play. There's been lots of speculation that WGN America is going to have Mark Hyman, Bill O'Reilly, Boris Epstyen,and Sean Hannity going to Sinclair though but that has not been confirmed though except that Sinclair has been doing the PR campaigns to get KTLA, WPIX, KTXL and WGN viewers prepared for Sinclair content on those stations.
Note Sacramento previously had a Sinclair station back in 2004 as KOVR 13 but CBS took over KOVR in 2005 though.
WGN = Why Go National?
Because it's a BRAND, with some history, and viewers recognize it. And it stands for "Turner Broadcasting System" - the former owner Ted Turner. When they bought the business, they bought the name. Why should they change it? Brands have meaning to people. Examples:
1. AT&T was purchased by SBC, but they decided to use the AT&T brand. Why? Because "AT&T" was historic and more recognizable, and "SBC" didn't mean that much to people unless they were from the Southwest (originally stood for "Southwestern Bell Corporation").
2. Nation's Bank of Charlotte North Carolina bought Bank of America of San Francisco, fired all the top B of A people, and closed down the SF headquarters, and moved operations to Charlotte. So they are really not B of A, right? But they went with the name "Bank of America" because the brand was more famous, and also because it just sounds better than "Nations Bank."
3. AARP - the American Association of Retired Persons dropped the full name, and now is only known by the acronym "AARP." Why? Because many older Americans are still working, and they didn't want to seem like they represented only retired people. So why not change the name? Again - because AARP is a well-known BRAND.
Understand, now?
I'm not saying some of the reality shows they showed aren't garbage. Some do teach people things.
Cake Boss - teaches people what it's like to own/run a successful family bakery.
Those shows with the "little people" teaches people what it's like to live in the world as a "little person."
And dare I say it? My 600 Pound Life teaches people what their options are if they are that big.
http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/wgn-america-underground-sinclair-tribune-media-1202418701/
The OP is really responding to speculation here.
I agree, if for no other reason than that they voluntarily severed all their ties to Chicago. WGN stands for "World's Greatest Newspaper," coined when this was a Tribune station and referring, of course, to the Chicago Tribune. The name still means something in Chicago, and to those of us who began watching the superstation because it was an extension of Channel 9, but in reality it means nothing to your random national viewer who does not tie the station to the Cubs or Chicago.
The co-ownership is all that still ties WGN America to local WGN, although the superstation actually did carry the Cubs' championship parade in November, presumably as a nod to nationwide Cubs fans who still harbor some ill will at Tribune for making the break from WGN-TV (the bigwigs who actually made that call are no longer with the company, incidentally).
As for the statement "I know that they still can," which I think ties to the opinion that they can still air local shows on the superstation ... unfortunately, I don't think they can because WGN America is now classified as a cable network and not a superstation. Were it the latter, yes, it could still be a simulcast in part. In the past several years, WGN America could have shown a lot more local programming than it did but chose not to.
When it first became a "Superstation," WTBS (then called WTCG, I seem to remember) ran some local Atlanta news, and of course, the Atlanta Braves games, because Ted Turner owned the team.
Corporations evolve, like anything else, but you don't necessarily change your brand
Corporations evolve, like anything else, but you don't necessarily change your brand
Should show local News on both channels.
I agree, and local baseball too. But Tribune obviously doesn't agree.
Instead, they run 2nd rate crime/drama programs throughout the day, with an occasional 2nd rate movie here and there. I find little time spent with WGN America. But if that is the route they choose, there isn't much viewers can do about it, except not watch.
As a poster mentioned above, perhaps Sinclair will sort it out at some point, but I don't hold out much hope.
Last edited:
http://www.adweek.com/tvspy/fox-considering-teaming-up-with-ion-in-attempt-to-thwart-sinclair/192718
Well Im Wondering if KTXL and WBFF will simulcast WGN America? Here's the reason why one Fox is planning to pull the Fox affiliation fron Tribune/Sinclair owned stations for the Fox affiliation Ion Deal. The WGN brand could stay but this time some of WGN's programming would have to go to Sinclair stations that lost their Fox affiliation.
Well Im Wondering if KTXL and WBFF will simulcast WGN America? Here's the reason why one Fox is planning to pull the Fox affiliation fron Tribune/Sinclair owned stations for the Fox affiliation Ion Deal. The WGN brand could stay but this time some of WGN's programming would have to go to Sinclair stations that lost their Fox affiliation.
Why should someone in Montana care about local Chicago news? Makes no sense.
Even more important why would a cable company in some faraway state carry this channel if its main attraction is Chicago local news?
From the ownership side, it's likely WGN would have to pay its talent at a national rate if they aired outside the area.
So there are three good reasons not to.
Yes, you make a good point. However, there are two things to keep in mind here. First, WGN was more successful when they covered local news and baseball nationally than they are today. Second, there are so many viewers from Chicago that have moved to other areas (mostly Florida and Arizona), that their ratings were better.
I don't have a major problem with dropping the local content, I do have a major problem with their current content, which as I said is 2nd rate, and not likely to get any ratings anytime soon. "The Heat of the Night"? Really?
That was then. Today people can watch local news from distant places on the internet. No need for a cable channel. And there's no reason to believe that because it was "successful" then, that it will be successful now doing the same thing.
You could say the same thing about lots of places, like New York, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo. I don't see any of them with national cable channels for snowbirds or retirees. Plus that doesn't answer my question of why cable operators in other non-retirement areas should carry this channel on their system.
This is a NATIONAL channel. It's being sold that way to advertisers. Granted the current programming isn't what it could be. At one time, Tribune saw it potentially as Lifetime or A&E or some other channel with first run original content. Then they went bankrupt. So now the channel has a chance of living up to its intentions. We'll see if Sinclair has any money left over after buying all these TV stations.
Likely, they will not. Also likely, they will introduce a conservative-based national news show, probably based at WGN.
- Status