• 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

CBS 2 and KCAL 9 rebrand as "KCAL News".

Local Tv news probably has another decade. But at some point there will be diminishing returns. By 2033 there may be some holdouts but my prediction is most will get their news from alternative venues. In fact, there may be new access from forms that haven’t even been developed. This is how fast tech is changing. The anchorman in the studio at 5, 6 and 11 is going to be gone by the end of the 20’s.
I think what is now OTA local TV news is trying to set itself up for what comes after broadcast. For KCAL, that probably looks like an app at the bottom of your smart TV screen next to Netflix and HBO Max. Click the icon and get the news.

Whether that works or not remains to be seen. I think the cable companies (in their current form) die first.
 
Last edited:
Whether that works or not remains to be seen. I think the cable companies (in their current form) die first.
The cable companies have a sort of reprieve. With the semi-recession expanding into what appears to be a full one, there is a resurgence of both OTA TV usage and cable because of the high cost of all the streaming apps. OTA is the biggest beneficiary, but basic cable is also seeing significant increases.
 
The cable companies have a sort of reprieve. With the semi-recession expanding into what appears to be a full one, there is a resurgence of both OTA TV usage and cable because of the high cost of all the streaming apps. OTA is the biggest beneficiary, but basic cable is also seeing significant increases.
I think that's temporary, David. I wouldn't stake the future of a local newscast on that still being the case in ten years.
 
let's not forget CBS was desperate for 4 years without football until 1998. Yes it's a marketing driver to promote their shows but the damage is already done in Atlanta, Detroit, and Cleveland. Sure even if Milwaukee if yet to get a footing but this is all about money and marketing thanks to sports.
It wasn’t just about football. It was about Ron Perelman and New World making a cosmically awful groupwide affiliation deal with Fox in May 1994 that short-term damaged those stations (some almost beyond repair) and long-term decimated whatever future the Fox network had.
 
It wasn’t just about football. It was about Ron Perelman and New World making a cosmically awful groupwide affiliation deal with Fox in May 1994 that short-term damaged those stations (some almost beyond repair) and long-term decimated whatever future the Fox network had.
the new world stations didn't carry the old CBS This Morning, also they sometimes bump Letterman when it started in 1993. It's all about the performance of CBS was the reason they move to smaller network like Fox
 
I think that's temporary, David. I wouldn't stake the future of a local newscast on that still being the case in ten years.
When there’s nothing of value on cable (with some channels being outright zombies) and OTA in a position of having to add local news in unrealistic qualities because the syndication market is near death, let alone network primetime becoming a continual advertisement for streamers…
 
The NFL is trying to get to a more lucrative broadcast and/or online position to maximize profits. But this is difficult. Thursday night has lost most of its audience due to no OTA. Bonehead move IMO.
 
The cable companies have a sort of reprieve. With the semi-recession expanding into what appears to be a full one, there is a resurgence of both OTA TV usage and cable because of the high cost of all the streaming apps. OTA is the biggest beneficiary, but basic cable is also seeing significant increases.
Source? The latest data I saw was continued hemorrhaging of cable and satellite subscribers across all packages, to the tune of 1.7 million in Q3 2022.

There's a lot of posts on RD about a resurgence in OTA TV, but few have actual sources. I know David is likely to have a source and I'd like to read it.
 
The casual fan will not pay for premium NFL products. This indeed is the biggest NFL mistake. Most fans just want to see their home team, and if this is a problem for the NFL then their gameplan won’t work.
 
Source? The latest data I saw was continued hemorrhaging of cable and satellite subscribers across all packages, to the tune of 1.7 million in Q3 2022.

There's a lot of posts on RD about a resurgence in OTA TV, but few have actual sources. I know David is likely to have a source and I'd like to read it.
when is the last time that a gen z bought an antenna just to watch PBS Kids or Scripps News.
 
when is the last time that a gen z bought an antenna just to watch PBS Kids or Scripps News.
As I said, the predominant segments of the OTA users are Hispanics, Blacks and low income whites as well as limited income seniors.

Research done by a company serving one of those communities shows that the last 18 months have shown a stagnation or reversal of cord cutting among people faced by inflation and hard choices on family expenditures.

It's not about what is available... it is about what they have enough money to afford.

Also consider that one of the groups that I named does not have as much "critical content" on paid services, so the "return on investment" is much lower.
 
As I said, the predominant segments of the OTA users are Hispanics, Blacks and low income whites as well as limited income seniors.

Research done by a company serving one of those communities shows that the last 18 months have shown a stagnation or reversal of cord cutting among people faced by inflation and hard choices on family expenditures.

It's not about what is available... it is about what they have enough money to afford.

Also consider that one of the groups that I named does not have as much "critical content" on paid services, so the "return on investment" is much lower.
Lemme get this straight, I though the pandemic would put Dish Network or smaller cable providers out of business except for broadband but we ended up with Quibi and CNN+ being the only key casualties but how can the streamers struggle even they benefit the pandemic lockdowns. We seen newer shows cancelled, cheaper ad tiers, venturing into live production (YouTube is no longer just a name for short-form streaming), vertical integration (Amazon's cloud business powers up both Prime Video and Twitch in the same server along with it's rivals), do nothing government (big tech antitrust scrutiny and the repeal of the Paramount Consent decrees), layoffs, domino effects to other industries like newspapers and news sites like Yahoo, Buzzfeed, Vice, Vox, etc. and rumors about Hearst or Graham being the next M&A targets like AMC Networks and Lionsgate.

The answer; Karma then spend too much time on the internet both spending and watching, hypocrisy, Wall Street doesn't care, and consumers are always be the losers whether u have pay tv or not. Sorry for the long rough op-ed.
 
My take:

All things being equal, people who are dumping streaming services because of cost will do so until there's something they want to see on that streaming service---and then they'll re-subscribe.

I think the smart/frugal way is to rotate services quarterly. I don't, but I could save a lot of money if I did.

Take a few minutes and list what shows you're interested in are on which service. Go to the service that has more of what you want to watch, pay them the $10.95 a month and burn through that list. When the well seems a little dry, switch to the one with the second-longest list of shows you wanted to see, or the one that has a new season of a favorite show ("Succession's back on HBO? Time to subscribe again!"). Repeat accordingly.

Nobody's got minimum lengths of subscriptions or cancellation fees, it's month-to-month.

Will some streamers do better than others? Yes. Will some fail or merge with a bigger provider? Of course. This is American capitalism. It's sorta like "Highlander"---"There can be only one, but the Sherman Anti-Trust Act says legally there has to be at least two."
 
Again most NFL fans are rooting for their home team. If they are lucky enough to still live in their home market (as I do) then no problem. If you want to see games from outside your market then you will have to pay. Believe me, many do.

I think this setup is reasonable. The NFL is a commodity and part of their revenue comes from these agreements.
 
the new graphics roll out to the CBS O&O stations local news has reached Dallas and Denver as KCNC CBD 4 Denver is now CBS News Colorado and KTVT CBS 11 in Dallas has rebranded to CBS News Texas.

so far the new CBS O&O news graphics have been rolled out to the follow markets:
Los Angeles (first market to debut them).
San Francisco.
Detroit (part of relaunch of news program).
Dallas/Fort Worth.
Denver.

I'm sure Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Chicago, New York City, Boston, Miami, Baltimore will be rolling it out next.
 
the new graphics roll out to the CBS O&O stations local news has reached Dallas and Denver as KCNC CBD 4 Denver is now CBS News Colorado and KTVT CBS 11 in Dallas has rebranded to CBS News Texas.

so far the new CBS O&O news graphics have been rolled out to the follow markets:
Los Angeles (first market to debut them).
San Francisco.
Detroit (part of relaunch of news program).
Dallas/Fort Worth.
Denver.

I'm sure Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Chicago, New York City, Boston, Miami, Baltimore will be rolling it out next.
You forgot Minneapolis. They are the 14th CBS O&O
They do mention CBS Minnesota but still say WCCO all the time. They rarely say WCCO 4 (but use to)
 
It wasn’t just about football. It was about Ron Perelman and New World making a cosmically awful groupwide affiliation deal with Fox in May 1994 that short-term damaged those stations (some almost beyond repair) and long-term decimated whatever future the Fox network had.
IIRC, Fox bought a 20% stake in New World Communications in 1994, resulting in all of those stations switching to Fox as soon as they were able. The NFL moving the NFC games from CBS to Fox was the biggest push to get that done. Many of those New World stations were in NFC markets, and some had been CBS affiliates (Phoenix, Milwaukee, and Detroit come to mind immediately).
 
IIRC, Fox bought a 20% stake in New World Communications in 1994, resulting in all of those stations switching to Fox as soon as they were able. The NFL moving the NFC games from CBS to Fox was the biggest push to get that done. Many of those New World stations were in NFC markets, and some had been CBS affiliates (Phoenix, Milwaukee, and Detroit come to mind immediately).
It was a titanically awful deal that hurt many of those stations (WJW and KTSP tanked badly and KTBC never recovered) and Fox had to bail out the company two years later.

And honestly, if the NFL wasn’t satisfied with Fox’s affiliate base, they would have never signed the deal in the first place. They only cared about money. I highly doubt the myth that the NFL made Rupert make a deal with someone who bought Marvel Comics and infamously confused Spider-Man with Superman.

The real reason the deal even happened is because Rupert was a robber baron and Ron Perelman was in over his head.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom