I know licensing agreements happen all the time, but a few years ago on 60 Minutes there was a piece almost glamorizing Game of Thrones (something Paramount does not own.) While it may seem like a different question, but also media critics (sometimes from the right) accuse media companies in being "in it together." Is there much autonomy among different media companies?
-
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
How inter-connected are competing network owners? (Disney, WBD, NBCU, Paramount, ect.)
- Thread starter tall_guy1
- Start date
It's likely similar many other corporation and business executives - They are competitors and are probably careful to not share too much about what's going on within their individual companies or give away any insider knowledge or "show their hands", but they likely play in the same circles, know many of the same people and attend the same cocktail parties and social events at times, and know each other socially. With people in lower management or those "climbing the ladder" jumping from one company to the other without non-competes or NDAs and the various networks doing lots of business with the same companies, that's likely how a lot of information and "insider knowledge" gets shared.
Some of this is that streaming/cable/conventional outlets sometimes have a broadcast contract rights but not ownership rights part. The ownership part belongs to another party.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Its like the show the Connors they have broadcasts contracts with CW and ABC but the networks don't have the ownership part. The one that has the ownership part is Carsey-Werner productions.
Another Example are Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune various parties have the broadcast rights contract but not the ownership part. The ownership part belongs to Sony Pictures.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
The Conners - Wikipedia
The Carsey-Werner Company - Wikipedia
Its like the show the Connors they have broadcasts contracts with CW and ABC but the networks don't have the ownership part. The one that has the ownership part is Carsey-Werner productions.
Another Example are Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune various parties have the broadcast rights contract but not the ownership part. The ownership part belongs to Sony Pictures.
Jeopardy! - Wikipedia
Sony Pictures - Wikipedia
That particular segment was five years ago, before Viacom and CBS even merged. At the time, the only cable networks that were part of CBS Corporation were CBS Sports Network and Showtime and neither was registering very high on the pop culture scale.
Contrary to some old farts' opinion, pop culture is a reasonable topic for a news program.
I would argue that the major media companies today are more vertically integrated and less dependent on each other than they ever have been.
This, of course, is one of the issues associations like the NAB have to deal with which is avoiding any taint of collusion. You can not get so close to a competitor that it can seem that shared information is used to reduce apparent competition. That's why different station's engineers go to lunch together and talk about how to deal with equipment issues on gear they share, while managers are generally very careful to not give the appearance of "scheming" to reduce competition, set rates and so on.
And of course, a division of CBS handles syndication while major station groups like the ABC O&Os are among the “buyers.” So even apart from direct ownership of a show, you have business units of companies working together in various specific permutations. Of course there are others, it just happens to be a fun example of multiple large entities doing straightforward business deals.Some of this is that streaming/cable/conventional outlets sometimes have a broadcast contract rights but not ownership rights part. The ownership part belongs to another party.
Another Example are Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune various parties have the broadcast rights contract but not the ownership part. The ownership part belongs to Sony Pictures.
Jeopardy! - Wikipedia
Sony Pictures - Wikipedia
Yes and in very rare cases the TV shows changes owners like most notably the Simpsons when that show came out it was owned by Fox directly given that Fox was the owner of 20th Century. But once Disney bought 20th Century then some of the shows Fox used to have direct ownership to became converted into broadcast contracts. Yes whenever Fox airs the Simpsons then it's a broadcast contract. When Disney+ and Hulu Air the Simpsons it's not just for Broadcast contracts it's also because Disney have the direct ownership to the shows.
They were always together as siblings. CBS formed Viacom, Viacom absorbed CBS. split apart reformed again.
It is also strange CBS would give publicity to the ID show Quiet on the Set, which is a hit piece on their sister station. Emily Longeretta, Variety, discusses the new mini docuseries “Quiet on the Set: The Dark Side of K
Fremantle (company) - Wikipedia
Banijay - Wikipedia
Gotta consider this one Banijay and Fremantle is dependent on broadcast contracts to get clearance in the USA. Banijay and Fremantle don't have their own TV apps for now or at least not advertised.
- Status