• 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

Exclusive: Sinclair approaches Tribune Media about possible deal - sources

http://www.times-standard.com/gener...es-loophole-that-allows-sinclair-station-buys

Update Jared Huffman a member of Congress attempts to end the loophole that Sinclair uses to obtain TV stations.

In response to media broadcast giant Sinclair Broadcast Group’s plans to acquire four Eureka TV stations and another 50 across the nation, California Congressman Jared Huffman introduced a bill Thursday that he said would close a federal “loophole” in order to prevent monopolies in local media.

Huffman and Democratic North Carolina Congressman David Price’s bill would end a federal policy that allows companies such as Sinclair Broadcast Group to acquire more stations before exceeding the federal cap on broadcast station ownership.

Under federal law, a single company is not allowed to own broadcast stations that reach more than 39 percent of television-viewing households in the country.

Sinclair is set to acquire 56 more stations — including four Eureka TV stations — in two separate deals, which would bring the company’s reach to 72 percent of all U.S. households, according to Sinclair.

Despite this being higher than the 39 percent cap, the deal will be allowed to proceed because the Federal Communications Commission voted 2-1 in April to reinstate what is known as the “ultra-high frequency” discount, or UHF discount.

The discount, first implemented in the 1980s before being repealed in August 2016, allows stations broadcasting UHF channels to count only half of the households they reach in their market when determining whether they comply with the ownership cap.

“In Eureka, California alone, the FCC’s recent decision to reinstate the discredited and antiquated UHF discount means that a single right-wing media owner, Sinclair Broadcast Group, will control a majority of the news that my constituents in Eureka see on television, no matter which news broadcast they choose to watch,” Huffman (D-San Rafael) said in a statement Thursday. “This is not the Soviet Union: Americans deserve a meaningful choice in their local news, and our Local and Independent Television Protection Act would ensure that every American has access to a variety of local news sources that report on the local – and national – issues they care most about.”

The Times-Standard contacted Sinclair for comment, but did not receive a response by Thursday afternoon.

Based in Maryland, Sinclair Broadcast Group has drawn criticism for its conservative leanings in the lead up to the 2016 presidential election.

Access Humboldt Executive Director Sean McLaughlin said he shares Huffman’s concerns.

“When an absentee owner controls so much of your media marketplace, what happens to the local community having its own voice?” McLaughlin said.

Sinclair acquired 14 more stations in June as part a $240 million deal with Bonten Media Group. Four Eureka-based stations — the ABC affiliate KAEF, FOX affiliate station KBVU, CW Television Network affiliate KECA-LD and Univision affiliate KEUV-LP — were acquired as part of deal.
 
http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/106009/news-rivals-wrong-in-attacking-sinclair/format/print

Update

Poor Sinclair. Its proposed $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune is being attacked even before petitions to deny are due at the FCC. Several entities have asked the FCC to postpone the Aug. 7 deadline for petitions and subsequent pleadings, charging that the transfer application is lacking on details and public interest justification.

I suppose that this is just good lawyering. If you are against something, you use every legal means possible to stall or derail it.

The scrappy American Cable Association of small operators and Dish Network head the pack of preemptive protesters and that's to be expected. They hate the idea of a broadcaster like Sinclair gaining muscle mass and squeezing them harder for retransmission consent fees.

But what is surprising is the piling on by a couple of conservative news organizations — Newsmax and One America News (OAN) — that apparently believe that they are going to be outflanked by outsized Sinclair in the race to be the next Fox News Channel.

Newsmax, headed by journalist and Trump loyalist Christopher Ruddy, has a lively website that mostly aggregates news (some from dubious sources) for the conservative reader and a low-budget TV channel that is mostly a platform for rightwing pundits. It relies on a hodgepodge of outlets — OTT, broadcast subchannels, cable and satellite.

OAN is another FNC wannabe. Founded in 2013 by Robert Herring and his son Charles, it is mostly live news, albeit from the conservative perspective. As a news service, it fills a vacuum created when CNN became talky and Headline News turned into whatever the heck it is today.

Newsmax and OAN have some cause to be alarmed. Sinclair's David Smith talked about launching a cable news channel when he bought WJLA Washington and the other Allbritton stations in 2014.

Those plans never materialized. And this week in an interview in Variety, Sinclair CEO Chris Ripley confirmed that a cable news network is off the table. "Our strength is local news,” he said. “The market for national cable news is very well served.”

But if its deal with Tribune goes through, Sinclair won't need a cable network. It will have a national broadcasting platform that it could use to become the alternative conservative news brand.

As you have read here and elsewhere, it has already started down that road, pumping the conservative commentary of Mark Hyman and Boris Epshtyen and nationally produced features with a conservative slant in and around its local newscasts.

There has also been speculation that Sinclair might hire Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity — a move that could catapult them past Fox News, let alone Newsmax and OAN. I read those reports with much skepticism. Among other things, it would take millions of dollars a year to land just one of those two. To say the least, paying big for talent is not David Smith's style.

Newsmax and OAN are not the first businesses to use government regulatory processes to try to stymie competition. It's commonly done and one of the reasons to be wary of all regulations. They are subject to abuse.

ACA and Dish can throw around the words "public interest" all they want, but everybody knows that their only interest in the Sinclair-Tribune matter is stunting Sinclair's growth in every which way they can for their own private interest.

But there is something contemptible when companies driven by an anti-government, anti-regulation ideology like Newsmax and OAN do it. The word hypocritical comes to mind.

In making its case, Newsmax even tries to put a conservative gloss on its objections by suggesting that the national TV ownership cap that limits Sinclair's growth was conjured up by the Reagan administration "to protect the public against the concentration of media power that could endanger press freedom and media diversity."
 
http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/106067/tribune-sells-most-of-its-careerbuilder-stake

Tribune sells Career Builder

Tribune Media Co. said Monday afternoon that it has sold the majority of its ownership stake in CareerBuilder, as Tegna completed the sale of CareerBuilder to an investor group led by investment funds managed by affiliates of Apollo Global Management and the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board. As a participant in the sale, Tribune Media will receive approximately $158 million in cash and will retain an approximate 7% ownership stake in CareerBuilder on a fully-diluted basis.
 
NBC owns a majority stake in ION, I believe and ION lacks a national cable channel. I doubt Sinclair would pursue it nor do I think that NBC would be interested in selling.
 
NBC owns a majority stake in ION, I believe and ION lacks a national cable channel. I doubt Sinclair would pursue it nor do I think that NBC would be interested in selling.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...s-with-ion-media-to-operate-local-tv-stations

Well apparently Fox is in talks with Ion to have its Fox Affiliates to go to ions Subchannels though. Note this affects Sinclair stations that happen to have a Fox Affiliation like WBFF, KTXL, KSWB and KCPQ these stations could lose their Fox affiliation if Sinclairs deal with Tribune is finalized.
 
I wonder if that means the Tribune Fox affiliates will get "Howard Strik'd" without ever being in Howard Stirk, by losing their affiliation, even Sinclair's first station, WBFF-TV 45. I wonder if this means that the unthinkable will happen.

A Big 4 network in a large market (in this case, Pittsburgh and Baltimore on a subchannel, which is traditionally senseless, as it takes the news and reason to watch the station away.

Baltimore and Pittsburgh, might unfortunately have this, because in Baltimore's case, Sinclair owns every station that isn't any of the Big 4 (minus Fox), and in Pittsburgh, the CW affiliate is an O&O (so WPCW wont become Fox), but there may be the chance that there's WPCB-TV, but since they are religious, they might decline to affiliate with Fox.

Either that, or this may potentially become a "reboot" of the big 1994 affiliation switch, where Fox, as a result of this dispute has to negotiate with the other networks to switch affiliations in Sinclair markets. Who knows?
 
Last edited:
I wonder if that means the Tribune Fox affiliates will get "Howard Strik'd" without ever being in Howard Stirk, by losing their affiliation, even Sinclair's first station, WBFF-TV 45. I wonder if this means that the unthinkable will happen.

A Big 4 network in a large market (in this case, Pittsburgh and Baltimore on a subchannel, which is traditionally senseless, as it takes the news and reason to watch the station away.

Baltimore and Pittsburgh, might unfortunately have this, because in Baltimore's case, Sinclair owns every station that isn't any of the Big 4 (minus Fox), and in Pittsburgh, the CW affiliate is an O&O (so WPCW wont become Fox), but there may be the chance that there's WPCB-TV, but since they are religious, they might decline to affiliate with Fox.

Either that, or this may potentially become a "reboot" of the big 1994 affiliation switch, where Fox, as a result of this dispute has to negotiate with the other networks to switch affiliations in Sinclair markets. Who knows?

For Sacramento KSPX an Ion affiliate might Flip to Fox if Sinclair/Tribune owned KTXL lose the Fox Affiliation in the Valley.

I say the Sinclair Network could form and make mark Hyman or Boris Epsteyn a 1 hour primetime show. I say this because Sinclair keeps doing a PR ploy about having a network that can go after Fox News for months now. Bill O'Reilly name keep coming into play too in the Sinclair deal.
 
I say the Sinclair Network could form and make mark Hyman or Boris Epsteyn a 1 hour primetime show. I say this because Sinclair keeps doing a PR ploy about having a network that can go after Fox News for months now. Bill O'Reilly name keep coming into play too in the Sinclair deal.

Then they'll discover the difference between having entertainment shows and having conservative talk shows. Based on the cable ratings, they could lose more than half of their viewers by doing this. The highest rated show on Fox News, would compare to the lowest rated prime time show on broadcast TV. The biggest loss for these stations would be the NFL. Imagine having a choice between some guy named Boris lecturing you about politics or watching football. Most folks choose football.
 
There is no basis in their opposition. The Sinclair stations all have strong local news operations. The only exception is must-run commentary segments.

The "must run" commentary segments are a big part of their argument. They want local newscast decisions to be made locally.
 
The "must run" commentary segments are a big part of their argument. They want local newscast decisions to be made locally.

It's not their place to make that call. There is no law requiring local decision-making, so they are not breaking any law.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom