R
-
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
Yeah. Pretty silly isn't it? I had a good chuckle at this particular part:
"Opponents say no, media giants could swallow up stations and control the news. If this were 1935, that’d be a pretty good argument. Media was a lot different back then. Most towns across America had a radio station or two, maybe a couple of newspapers, but not much more. Today the world’s a much different place. There are hundreds of cable channels, thousands of radio stations and too many internet sites to even count. A media monopoly is simply impossible in today’s world."
Pfft. Still possible in a single market as far as I can tell and certainly that's how it looks in the way things have been conducted between Fox and 8. How is Fox nowadays not a shallow redress of 8's newscast?
I recall the meeting when they canned us from Fox and told us that they were doing this to basically try and skirt around monopoly laws. At least that's how I understood it. I was a bit upset at the time.
"Opponents say no, media giants could swallow up stations and control the news. If this were 1935, that’d be a pretty good argument. Media was a lot different back then. Most towns across America had a radio station or two, maybe a couple of newspapers, but not much more. Today the world’s a much different place. There are hundreds of cable channels, thousands of radio stations and too many internet sites to even count. A media monopoly is simply impossible in today’s world."
Pfft. Still possible in a single market as far as I can tell and certainly that's how it looks in the way things have been conducted between Fox and 8. How is Fox nowadays not a shallow redress of 8's newscast?
I recall the meeting when they canned us from Fox and told us that they were doing this to basically try and skirt around monopoly laws. At least that's how I understood it. I was a bit upset at the time.
M
Mark_Giardina
Guest
rocktv said:
I am still laughing my ass off over this! Who ever came up with this idea must have either been smoking pot, or never watched Channel 8 News.
;D
Please. I have great sympathy for all local stations that at least produce local programming, but let's get real. Media consolidation does absolutely nothing for the viewer - it simply fattens the bottom line of the corporations that trade in stations like they are cash cows all while finding new ways to cut expenses, often on local news operations.
And while it is true we live in a universe of hundreds of cable channels, the vast majority of them are owned or controlled by a tiny handful of corporate owners, who are merging with one another all the time. And considering the ever diminishing amount of true localism on today's commercial radio, television, and cable channels, allowing these clowns to consolidate even further threatens the very diversity of the airwaves and the voices that are a requirement of an informed democracy.
Spare us the complete and utter BS propaganda campaign. If anything, we need LESS consolidation and a breakup, particularly in radio, of the huge conglomerates which already control the airwaves.
If radio and TV stations were in as much peril as these lobbyists pretend, then there would be no buyers when they go up for sale, and considering the tens of millions many stations fetch, to suggest otherwise is laugh out loud funny.
And while it is true we live in a universe of hundreds of cable channels, the vast majority of them are owned or controlled by a tiny handful of corporate owners, who are merging with one another all the time. And considering the ever diminishing amount of true localism on today's commercial radio, television, and cable channels, allowing these clowns to consolidate even further threatens the very diversity of the airwaves and the voices that are a requirement of an informed democracy.
Spare us the complete and utter BS propaganda campaign. If anything, we need LESS consolidation and a breakup, particularly in radio, of the huge conglomerates which already control the airwaves.
If radio and TV stations were in as much peril as these lobbyists pretend, then there would be no buyers when they go up for sale, and considering the tens of millions many stations fetch, to suggest otherwise is laugh out loud funny.
R
rocktv
Guest
I think if anyone crunched the numbers, Channel 8's news department has fewer people now than when it merged with FOX. So much for preserving local jobs, much less creating new ones.
O
odomski
Guest
This campaign is not just a Channel 8 thing. Nexstar is running this campaign. They are against the FCC trying to change ownership rules...where a company only owns one station in a given market. As we know, Nexstar is the King of the Duopolies. In some markets (Wilkes-Barre/Scranton for example), Nexstar will "own" one station, while Mission Broadcasting will "own" another (Nexstar runs Mission Broadcasting). Thus, merging the two stations into one facility and one newsroom.
- Status