Its time to play....." When will broadcast TV Networks go away?!"...

[MediaBoy4Radio]

Whether due to a lack of intelligence, creativity, money, effort, caring....etc etc.....broadcast networks are losing audience and the quality of programing is going in a downhill spiral.......( yes I know there are exceptions)...............

So the question is when will the networks leave broadcast TV and just exist in cable land.

 

[Mark Giardina]

Whether due to a lack of intelligence, creativity, money, effort, caring....etc etc.....broadcast networks are losing audience and the quality of programing is going in a downhill spiral.......( yes I know there are exceptions)...............So the question is when will the networks leave broadcast TV and just exist in cable land.

To answer your question; not in my lifetime.

Even if Couric, Williams, and Gibson retire (or are "reassigned") there will always be someone to replace them. Besides the three networks still have an audience, shrinking as it might well be, and there will always be the need to sell male enhancing and other drugs aimed at older viewers.

As for cable TV News; personally I rather watch 1/2 hour of Charlie Gibson, the BBC, or the News Hour on PBS than the blather on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News.

 

[milton77]

So the question is when will the networks leave broadcast TV and just exist in cable land.

Here is your answer, from NBC's Jeff Zucker: "We are not abandoning the business of broadcast network television. We are not going direct to cable. We are renewing affiliation agreements. And we are going to be in business together for a long, long time.”

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/ar...es_Three_Tiers_of_Affiliate_Relationships.php

 

[KeithE4]

So the question is when will the networks leave broadcast TV and just exist in cable land.

Here is your answer, from NBC's Jeff Zucker: "We are not abandoning the business of broadcast network television. We are not going direct to cable. We are renewing affiliation agreements. And we are going to be in business together for a long, long time.”

But how long will it be before NBC drops its affiliates in the smallest markets? They don't bring in much ad revenue and NBC (and, to a lesser extent, Fox) doesn't really program to "flyover territory" anyway, unlike CBS and ABC. NBC has traditionally (at least since the '80s) been the "Big City Network," or the "Newyork Broadcasting Company." Of course, since NBC is in the tank right now, maybe they need to rethink their strategy. ;D

Markets 101 and up are only about 15% of the population in total, most of that in the rural Midwest and Rocky Mountain states. I'd be surprised if they generate even close to 15% of NBC's revenue, however.

 

[imhomerjay]

But since NBC doesn't own those small market affiliates, finding terms to renew the contracts is still a benefit to their bottom line. Even if the revenue is not nearly as significant, it's still revenue.

 

[stationless listener]

Ooo! This looks to be a fun game! ;D

Well, I guess this would be divided into two questions:

1. Could broadcast television go the way of General Motors? Possible but not likely.

2. Could the big networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC) go the way of General Motors? Not likely now but more likely in twenty years.

Now I'm going to elaborate on the two questions.

1. Being that broadcast still represents the medium that can reach the vast majority of the population of a given country, it would remain a viable medium for companies to provide entertainment and news programs. CBS, ABC, FOX and NBC would be the big names today if not for the broadcast medium. The studios would never have agreed to provide content to the networks if they were not convinced that people would be able to watch them. That was the key moment in which paved way to the explosive growth of the networks from the 1950's through the 1980's. The advent of cable television began to chip away at that audience from the 1980's on but really accelerated this decade. However, cable channels can't be seen unless people are willing to pay for them. The networks still retain that distinct advantage of people being able to watch them without paying a subscription fee. A caveat to this is the must-carry rule that the FCC imposed on the cable companies to mandate access of the channel lineups for the networks, in the name of serving the public good. That may be what is preventing the rate of decline in viewership from being much worse but I doubt it since, with the controversy over some homes being unable to receive some stations after the DTV transition, there are still plenty of people who depend on over-the-air broadcasting for television viewing.

Another factor that has to be considered is the growth of Spanish-language broadcasting, with the rise of not only Univision and Telemundo but niche channels that appeal to certain segments of the Latino demographic. These will continue to grow as the population increases. The questions are by how much and how it would affect the business of television. Many Latinos are still too poor to afford cable or satellite subscriptions so will continue to depend on over-the-air broadcasts for television viewing.

2. This one is much more interesting than the first. It would depend on how the networks ultimately adapt to the new competition and how they'll allocate the resources they still have at their disposal. Right now, it seems that the network are stuck in neutral as to how to proceed, with the proliferation of reality TV programs and duplication of established shows (Law & Order, being the obvious example). Could it be that the studios are failing to provide for new hits more frequently than usual? Or is it that network are more skittish to pay top billing for familiar television actors? There are still some successes but nothing near the mass appeal that shows like M*A*S*H or Happy Days used to enjoy. Maybe the population has become so self-centered that they'll not going to sit down and watch what used to be mainstream shows, like in the old days.

Whatever the case may be, it is now possible to conceive one or several of the networks going out of business or be dramatically changed as to be unrecognizable to people today. That's not even considering the fates of The CW, Ion or MyNetworkTV. I just don't think they have much of a future the way things are going. Maybe one of those three could survive, depending on whether or not there is a valid reason for remaining in business. The real reason why there is such a thing as a CW or an Ion is because of the numerous TV stations around the country without a big-network affiliation that it made possible for a new start-up network to come into being. Even after DuMont went out of business, TV stations still remained operable because television back then was still a growth industry. Today, I don't think we can say that with certainty. It may well be that the little networks like The CW came into being a little late in the business cycle. If this were thirty or even twenty years ago then it would make sense to start it up. I won't be surprised when one or even all three go out of business in the next five years. Another scenario would be a merger between either The CW or MyNetworkTV and Ion. Ion has one valuable bargaining chip and that is stations. As part of that scenario, we could see the emergence of a 3rd major US-based foreign-language network, combining the assets of MyNetworkTV or The CW with Ion. This time it may not be another Spanish-language network but an Asian-focused network. There is the population to sustain it.

The WB and UPN going out of business is a sign of things to come. U.S. broadcast networks were already past their apex when those two were started. It would take another couple of decades but the so-called Big Four will have their turn, one way or another. If I were a betting man, my money would be on FOX being the first one. FOX came late in the broadcast game, long after ABC, CBS and NBC were well-established. There is a question of what happens when Rupert Murdoch finally croaks. News Corp is in the hands of the Murdoch family. Who owns it after he's out of the picture? Is Fox News more valuable to them than the Fox Network? I imagine the studio remains in business but could the network be something they'll sell or discontinue? Then there's the question of the various waivers that the Murdoch family had enjoyed from FCC regulations. Would these go with the Murdochs out of the picture? I think FOX will be the first to go. Second, I'll go with ABC. Disney isn't exactly running that network well. ESPN is still a very valuable property but I doubt ESPN on ABC will last much longer. All the sports are migrating to cable/satellite, anyway. The broadcast medium may not be as valuable to the sports leagues 30 years from now. Even golf and NASCAR will move exclusively to pay TV, sooner or later. So without sports and continued bad programming, Disney may well decide in the near future that broadcast TV no longer makes business sense for them. Number 3 I'll go with NBC. The reason I list them third is because they (or rather General Electric) still owns some valuable properties, like 30 Rock (the location, not the TV show) and Universal Studios. However, if either of them or both are used to leverage the company that's when I'll know that they're in deep trouble. GE could just decide to do away with NBC like they did with NBC Radio, in that case. Then again, GE itself could wind up in the same position as GM. Anything is possible. So the Tiffany Network would become the last broadcast network standing. I can foresee Univision buying CBS a couple of decades from now, as English-language entertainment becomes a minority-focused medium. And thus the end of an era in American history.

I'm going with the year 2027 when all this happens. This is what we may see as the broadcast lineup in that year:

Univision
A 2nd Spanish-language network (buying Telemundo from the remains of NBC)
A 3rd Spanish-language network (with stations from the ruins of FOX, ABC, NBC)

A major Asian network (stations from the ruins of Ion, MyNetworkTV)
A 2nd Asian network (stations from the ruins of FOX, ABC, NBC)

Replacement for The CW - there still will be a network for teens and young adults, funny enough, but it'll look more like LATV than The WB
CBS (owned by Univision)

 

[mescutia]

I figure the CW and MNTV will disappear in the next few years, likely followed (and possibly preceded) by Ion if that network doesn't turn itself around (and drop the 18 hours per day of infomercials).

The shopping networks will likely drop their remaining affiliates in the next few years. Not that there's much to drop...

PBS is here to stay, but individual PBS stations may be a different story. I'll be particularly interested in seeing what happens in the markets that have more than one PBS station (NY, LA, Chicago, Tampa, Boston, etc.).

The Big Four (ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC) won't be going away anytime soon. Maybe in a few decades.

I think the real question is how long will it be before broadcast stations go away.

 

[DToTheJ]

Of course, since NBC is in the tank right now...

It depends on what your definition of "in the tank" is - but I digress... ;D

I would argue that the network newscasts would go away before the networks themselves ever did.

 

[willcail]

Broadcast Networks will stick around until TV as a medium dies out in another 40 50 years. Thats my opinion.

 

[bpatrick]

Of course, since NBC is in the tank right now...

It depends on what your definition of "in the tank" is - but I digress... ;D

I would argue that the network newscasts would go away before the networks themselves ever did.

I think it means NBC is in fourth place, whereas a few years ago it was in first.

Looking at the weekly ratings, it wouldn't surprise me if a Spanish-language network (either Univision or Telemundo) did indeed become the fifth-ranked network, ahead of the CW, Ion, or MyNetwork, sooner than anyone thinks
(maybe a couple or three years from now).

I don't want to get on my soapbox again about a U.S. version of CBC's
"The National"/"The Journal" at 10 PM (I've said in the past that ABC ought
to combine "World News" and "Nightline" into a similar format from 10-11 ET),
but I think it's the way network news has to go. Too many people are still
at work or on their way home at 6:30/5:30 (if you live in a major Central time
zone market like Chicago or Dallas, you know exactly what I'm talking about).

But the reality of all broadcast network television is this: like any other business,
the bottom line is all. And those profit-and-loss statements are going to keep executives from thinking outside the box, something they've conceded to the cable networks (with less need for mass numbers) anyhow.

 

[bg02445]

Univision
A 2nd Spanish-language network (buying Telemundo from the remains of NBC)
A 3rd Spanish-language network (with stations from the ruins of FOX, ABC, NBC)

A major Asian network (stations from the ruins of Ion, MyNetworkTV)
A 2nd Asian network (stations from the ruins of FOX, ABC, NBC)

Replacement for The CW - there still will be a network for teens and young adults, funny enough, but it'll look more like LATV than The WB
CBS (owned by Univision)

Sorry, but there's no way this is happening. First of all, an Asian network would not work. Asian people have very different cultures and languages...ex. Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, etc. There would be no way to create one network for them. And Spanish, there aren't and won't be enough Latinos to warrant 3 major Spanish networks, Telemundo and Univision are enough.

I think it will be pretty much the same. Ion, the CW, and MyNetwork will probably not be around however. NBC, ABC, FOX, and CBS will still be around, and someone will be in last place. These things change, just because NBC is in last right now doesn't mean they fail tomorrow.

 

[mleach]

I too can see Ion, the CW, and MyNetwork being defunct within the next 5 to 10 years ( if not sooner ) but the big four..they will be around for awhile.

The big changes I can see will be on the local station front. I wouldn't be surprised if we would see the merging of some markets while others will totally disappear.
And sadly I can see a number of stations end up going dark in the future too.

 

[LKellerIII]

I too can see Ion, the CW, and MyNetwork being defunct within the next 5 to 10 years ( if not sooner ) but the big four..they will be around for awhile.

The big changes I can see will be on the local station front. I wouldn't be surprised if we would see the merging of some markets while others will totally disappeared
And sadly I can see a number of stations end up going dark in the future too.

I agree with mleach. I can't see much future for independent stations, considering that most of the off-network reruns they air are now duplicated by multiple cable channels. In the past, your local station would be the only place to see popular old sitcoms and dramas, as well as new syndicated programming. Now, if you have cable or satellite, you can see each of these shows a half dozen times a day. Many markets may will see the strong indies survive, while the the trend will continue in which the weaker indies become secondary programming outlets for the stronger indies or network affiliates. Some may even go dark.

I think the "Big 3" networks have a decent future, though they'll continue to lose share, and you may see ABC and CBS making cost-cutting moves similar to the NBC prime-time experiment with Leno...especially if it works and the 10:00 PM audience on NBC doesn't drop off too sharply.

 

[markwooldridge]

Broadcast television will continue on for some time, but I do see some cost cutting going on.

We've seen it in radio... voicetracking, one individual hosting shows on multiple stations.

TV can do it easily by reversing the current network situation. Right now affiliates opt in to network programming. If the big networks provided a 24/7 programming solution, affiliates could do this, so technically they're also network all the time but with local opt outs instead.

Take morning breakfast news TV. CBS/NBC/ABC have some kind of national morning show, but Fox doesn't (yet). Also local stations have significant local morning content too. This can be eliminated with a streamlined morning show with segments for local opt out. A "local newscaster" can pre-record 5 minute news segments for about 6-7 different TV stations, so a state like North Carolina could have the same presenter doing different local news across the whole state, same with the weather. Since it's also networked, lunchtime news could be more regionalized, shared across several stations with local bulletins if needs be within the news (not too unlike the failed Sinclair's NewsCentral experiment). Evening news would be the same way, and the late evening news could be reduced to just a national news show and a 5-10 minute local bulletin. Also being networked, there would be no need for a local programming director, or a programming budget for the station, everything is networked. Those jobs can be eliminated. The real small stations could be simply 100% network fed, thereby eliminating a lot of jobs in those markets. There is the issue of time zones; just have to have an Eastern and Western feeds; somehow the Alaskan and Hawaiian stations will have to work it out just like they do now, except that they could be 100% network in a lot of cases too. Eventually at some point, it may well turn out that the only local content on broadcast TV is the adverts (and maybe the airtime purchased by that church...). The local stations could still do paid programming but then so could the network...

It's gone that way in England and Wales... used to be regional independent stations... but they bought each other out so it's just one station now... all national, local news has cut back and made more regional than local... only real local programming is adverts.

Mark.

 

[Nate Wesley]

The movie studios work to get as much as much [paid] theater screentime as possible. And the recording industry works to get as much airtime on radio, TV, etc. to attract music sales and concert tickets.

I think the Big 4 networks will follow suit: There will be affiliate stations that are CBS/ABC/NBC/Fox dominant, but no-longer CBS/ABC/NBC/Fox exclusive. For the most popular episodic shows, you'll work deals for 'second run' affiliates for the ongoing seasons of CSI: Chicago, Law & Order: Highway Patrol, Desperate Husbands, and Til' Death (referring to how long Fox will be forcing-feeding us this show).

 

[FreddyE1977]

When are half of the channels on your cable going away? No time soon, I'd reckon.

As long as you have a stack of DVD's a couple of decks and an uplink, you're in the network business.
If so many cable networks can make a go of that model with just a tiny in-home penetration, then it
will remain viable to the much large broadcast audience for quite some time.

I just would not expect another "Roots" or "M*A*S*H" anytime soon......

 

[Nate Wesley]

In any event, I think there's a greater chance of people dumping cable than there will be of people adopting it. That doesn't mean that broadcast TV is gonna have some sort of return to renaissance; I just think there will be greater value in both getting content online and terrestrially.

 

[stationless listener]

I too can see Ion, the CW, and MyNetwork being defunct within the next 5 to 10 years ( if not sooner ) but the big four..they will be around for awhile.

The big changes I can see will be on the local station front. I wouldn't be surprised if we would see the merging of some markets while others will totally disappear.
And sadly I can see a number of stations end up going dark in the future too.

This leads to a vexing question: From the potential ruins of MyNetwork, The CW and Ion, does anyone foresee the creation of a fifth major TV network?

I don't know if such a thing is viable in this current climate. Off the top of my head, a major U.S. entertainment company that could form such a network is Time Warner. However, I don't think they'd be interested. Plus, with their experiences with The WB and, now, The CW, they might shy away from any future major OTA ventures. That's not to mention the losses they incurred with AOL.

That would be unfortunate because, with their considerable resources, they could have made a serious go at it. One of the problems with The WB was that they went totally niche. That makes it hard to sustain for the long term. They had a good run with shows like Buffy, the Vampire Slayer and Gilmore Girls. However, once those shows finish their cycle, they needed to keep pushing those hits or the young population becomes uninterested. The CW is basically The WB but with better coverage. People here already have doubts about their survivability. If NBC can have NBC Nightly News and MSNBC, then Time Warner could have a weekday nightly news program while keeping CNN. Why not, then, have the NY1 News crew do the nightly news programs? I don't think having some of their news anchors do a nationally-televised news program would be a problem. Sports programming is another issue. My guess is their thinking is it is better to keep their sports programming exclusively on TNT and TBS than put some games over the air and risk losing money on them. Too bad, because I think that putting a Sunday game-of-the-week on, let's say, WPIX or KTLA, could get potentially more people to watch. But with their history of providing television shows to the other networks, I still think Time Warner would a natural candidate to start a true network.

A couple of things to consider, as well:

Both the Tribune Company and Ion Media are in bankruptcy. If either or both do go out of business, there would be a ton of stations in play, including the "crown jewels" of the Tribune empire like WPIX, KTLA, WGN and WPHL. Those stations are still valuable, IMO. Then throw in many from the Ion group, to fill most of the holes in the rest of the country, toss in a fallen giant like KRON, throw in a bunch from the other station groups and you might something that's interesting. Of course, you still need programming to make it all work.

Which comes to another suggestion of mine: Why not allow foreign television group entry into the U.S. market? Back in the day, Rupert Murdoch had to perform a bunch of shananigans to qualify for U.S. citizenship, allowing him to run the Fox Network without FCC rejection. Today, with the state of the media and Time Warner not seeming to be interested in running a true TV network, perhaps it is time to open up the U.S. OTA market to foreign media groups. Surely, the British television groups regard the U.S. broadcast television market as a big business opportunity, if they would be allowed to operate a U.S. network here.

I do agree that some consolidation has to take place. Perhaps shutting down networks that make little to no sense in terms of corporate mission, like the CW/Ion/MyNetwork and creating a fifth major network out of ashes could do the trick. I still think it is all moot, as to my 2027 prediction I made a page ago back.

 

[Markxxx]

I think the networks aren't going anywhere, but the model will change.

Affiliates are a very inefficent way of doing things. Of course they were set up in the days when the networks were limited to owning only a few stations. It's easy to see how much more efficent it'd be to have a automatic stations across the country on the same channel broadcasting the same information controlled by a central switch.

Then we could have local stations here and there.

Rating don't matter, sales do. UPN was a great example, they had a wonderful niche market in African Americans, but no matter how high the rating or how big of a percentage UPN got, it never translated to sales. The African Americans watched but they didn't buy.

I see this in our local station WCIU-TV in Chicago. We have two low power stations WWME and WMEU (Me-TV and Me-Too) (which are also on WCIU's subchannel). The commericals for the two low powers are usually from advertisers you wouldn't see normally on TV. So WCIU is saying "you CAN afford TV advertising."

The problem is the networks are still competing over the same pie, instead of looking for new ways to bake new pies, so to speak.

The big question is subchannels and how they will play. Starting a TV station is very expensive, using an existing TV's subchannel isn't.

 

[mescutia]

I do agree that some consolidation has to take place. Perhaps shutting down networks that make little to no sense in terms of corporate mission, like the CW/Ion/MyNetwork and creating a fifth major network out of ashes could do the trick.

I think the CW was supposed to be that fifth major network.