So much for the "KCAL News" branding

[K.M. Richards]

All of the newscasts on both KCBS-TV/2 and KCAL-TV/9 have now been rebranded as "CBS LA".

 

[Loverofradio]

All of the newscasts on both KCBS-TV/2 and KCAL-TV/9 have now been rebranded as "CBS LA".

They dumped KCAL News already? I thought it was silly to have another channel take on their sister station’s branding.

 

[K.M. Richards]

They dumped KCAL News already? I thought it was silly to have another channel take on their sister station’s branding.

Yep. Noticed it in my Tivo guide for the newscast listings and tuned in to the 8:00pm edition. The only reference to KCAL-TV now is the legal station identification.

This article says the change happened at the beginning of the week:

CBS duo drops ‘KCAL News’ branding in Los Angeles

CBS has rebranded the local newscasts on its owned stations in Los Angeles. Local news ... Read More

www.newscaststudio.com

Since I just noticed it, I can not confirm that "KCAL 9" is still the on-air branding outside of news.

 

[Loverofradio]

Has CBS 2 ever been a serious ratings player? I never remember hearing CBS 2 ever beating other stations

 

[K.M. Richards]

Has CBS 2 ever been a serious ratings player? I never remember hearing CBS 2 ever beating other stations

I don't pay attention to the television ratings. They aren't even published in the Los Angeles Times anymore.

 

[yeoldeschool]

They aren't even published in the Los Angeles Times anymore.

They say if you have to ask, you can't afford it. I say when it comes to bragging rights, if you have to ask, it's because they can't afford you seeing it.

Here were the multi-consecutive-day averages from early January of this year, from the days immediately prior to the fires beginning (source article provided below):

5 PM

KVEA - 168,305
KABC - 140,820
KTLA - 73,036
KNBC - 70,511
KCBS - 58,165
KTTV - 30,184

6 PM

KVEA - 201,458
KABC - 170,769
KCBS - 78,033
KTLA - 70,027
KNBC - 69,638
KTTV - 31,016

8 PM

KCAL - 111,473

9 PM

KCAL - 104,708

10 PM

KCAL - 85,681
KTLA - 79,863
KTTV - 35,198

11 PM

KVEA - 132,752
KABC - 134,753
KNBC - 66,408
KTLA - 61,707
KCBS - 60,148

For perspective, if the 6 PM news numbers were most closely matched to local L.A. DMA city populations, it would be as though each station were being watched only by:

KVEA - 201,458 - Oxnard - 197,899
KABC - 170,769 - Garden Grove - 170,883
KCBS - 78,033 - Hemet - 78,657
KTLA - 70,027 - Lynwood - 69,772
KNBC - 69,638 - Lynwood - 69,772
KTTV - 31,016 - La Verne - 31,063

620,941 viewers total, which together corresponds most closely to the populations of just Riverside (303,871) and Santa Ana (324,528) combined, whose populations together equal 628,399.

So using the highest rated half hour as the example, the whole of the 16 million viewer Los Angeles DMA no longer watches the local news except for everyone in Riverside and Santa Ana.

Sources:
https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/la...-audiences-double-triple-coverage-1236273532/
https://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=marketcities&market=2

As for myself, I just wish this operation was still going. And Carlos Amezcua, Barbara Beck, Mark Kriski, Sam Rubin, Jim Newman, Jennifer York, Eric Spillman, Michele Ruiz, Gale Anderson, et al in the mornings.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Well, based on those numbers, it appears KABC-TV is not being misleading when they say Eyewitness News is the most watched local English-language newscast.

I concede that the local newscasts are no longer "must see" but that's pretty much the case everywhere. I personally had stopped watching until the Palisades and Eaton fires got my attention, and I got hooked on ABC7 based on the quality of their coverage. They even pulled in reporters from their sister O&Os in San Francisco, Fresno and Houston to beef up their field reporting; the guy they brought in from KTRK/13 (Kevin Ozebek) ended up transferring permanently to L.A. as their primary "7 On Your Side" investigative reporter.

 

[michael hagerty]

Has CBS 2 ever been a serious ratings player? I never remember hearing CBS 2 ever beating other stations

You have to go way, way waaaaayyyy back.

In 1960, 2 hired Jerry Dunphy and in 1961, they expanded what had been a 15-minute local newscast to 45 minutes.



It led into the CBS Evening News with Douglas Edwards (Cronkite's predecessor) for a full hour of news.

2, then KNXT, owned L.A. TV news for the entire decade of the 1960s. And then, in 1970, KNBC got aggressive:

2 panicked in 1975, threw Dunphy overboard and Channel 7 pounced.



KABC’s ratings soared, and 2’s dropped even further.

And when KNBC made a similar mistake with Paul Moyer in 1979, KABC grabbed him too:



Anyway, really---apart from a couple of flare-ups, CBS2 has been in the dumpster for 50-plus years.

 

[ted chittenden]

This thread highlights how long it's been since I ever took notice of TV in Los Angeles. The last time I watched the channel was for children's cartoons in 1972 before we moved to Phoenix in July. And back then KNXT was the only CBS station in Los Angeles as Channel 9 (whose callsign I don't remember now) was an independent.

And that leads to the following question. In television, if you're one of the networks and you already own a TV channel in the third largest market in the country, why would you buy another. I mean that as a network, you only have enough programming for one station in each market and television programming, whether it's entertainment or news, is a lot more expensive to produce than radio programming. And, unless you're talking music videos, programming in a language other than English, or becoming a noncommercial educational or religious broadcaster, there are really no television formats as there are in radio. The only practical reason I can see for CBS owning two affiliates in the same market would be if each affiliate serves a different location, say Los Angeles' coastal areas versus the high desert around Lancaster and Palmdale. However, I thought that all of the Los Angeles TV channels were transmitting from approximately the same location. So my question remains: Why does CBS own two separate television stations in the Los Angeles market.

 

[michael hagerty]

This thread highlights how long it's been since I ever took notice of TV in Los Angeles. The last time I watched the channel was for children's cartoons in 1972 before we moved to Phoenix in July. And back then KNXT was the only CBS station in Los Angeles as Channel 9 (whose callsign I don't remember now) was an independent.

And that leads to the following question. In television, if you're one of the networks and you already own a TV channel in the third largest market in the country, why would you buy another. I mean that as a network, you only have enough programming for one station in each market and television programming, whether it's entertainment or news, is a lot more expensive to produce than radio programming. And, unless you're talking music videos, programming in a language other than English, or becoming a noncommercial educational or religious broadcaster, there are really no television formats as there are in radio. The only practical reason I can see for CBS owning two affiliates in the same market would be if each affiliate serves a different location, say Los Angeles' coastal areas versus the high desert around Lancaster and Palmdale. However, I thought that all of the Los Angeles TV channels were transmitting from approximately the same location. So my question remains: Why does CBS own two separate television stations in the Los Angeles market.

Because things were different 23 years ago when CBS bought KCAL.

 

[michael hagerty]

This thread highlights how long it's been since I ever took notice of TV in Los Angeles. The last time I watched the channel was for children's cartoons in 1972 before we moved to Phoenix in July. And back then KNXT was the only CBS station in Los Angeles as Channel 9 (whose callsign I don't remember now) was an independent.

And that leads to the following question. In television, if you're one of the networks and you already own a TV channel in the third largest market in the country, why would you buy another. I mean that as a network, you only have enough programming for one station in each market and television programming, whether it's entertainment or news, is a lot more expensive to produce than radio programming. And, unless you're talking music videos, programming in a language other than English, or becoming a noncommercial educational or religious broadcaster, there are really no television formats as there are in radio. The only practical reason I can see for CBS owning two affiliates in the same market would be if each affiliate serves a different location, say Los Angeles' coastal areas versus the high desert around Lancaster and Palmdale. However, I thought that all of the Los Angeles TV channels were transmitting from approximately the same location. So my question remains: Why does CBS own two separate television stations in the Los Angeles market.

Now that I have a little more time:

Buying a second station gave CBS additional advertising slots to sell—more than doubling its inventory, because KCAL doesn’t have network ads to clear.

Over time, the stations were able to share staff and facilities, reducing costs. So it’s more than double the gross revenues at considerably less than double the cost.

It was infinitely more attractive math in 2002 than today.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Buying a second station gave CBS additional advertising slots to sell—more than doubling its inventory, because KCAL doesn’t have network ads to clear.

Also, if you compare the schedules, KCAL has live newscasts most of the hours that KCBS doesn't. That maximizes the usefulness of the news department and gives them a lot of inventory (and the agencies love local newscasts in major markets).

BTW, @ted chittenden, Los Angeles is market #2, not #3.

 

[KilowattKat]

When doing programming other than news... channel 9 is branded as 'K--CAL 9'.

No LA television station does more news than KTLA. Almost the entire schedule is devoted to news coverage. Even with my favorite long time anchors mostly gone, KTLA is stilll hands down the best news operation in LA. Another great thing is that many streamers now include live channels of local news from all over the country. The other night I watched a KIRO 7 Seattle newscast, then switched over to a KGO newscast from SF.

 

[yeoldeschool]

Well, based on those numbers, it appears KABC-TV is not being misleading when they say Eyewitness News is the most watched local English-language newscast.

I'm not surprised it's first. In my opinion, KABC has the only L.A. newscast whose production still feels tight, looks properly staffed, and generally comes across as full service. By comparison, the least watched timeslots on some of the other stations now register to me as 0's on a scale of mausoleum to 10.

@michael hagerty - Thanks for the great history of the local L.A. newscasts. I didn't know KCBS had ever been popular -- from my childhood on, it was always the newscast whom everyone I knew gave no notice. The only impact I remember KCBS having on this town was their big investigative series decades ago that birthed all the letter grade health signs still hanging in the windows of every restaurant, liquor store, and gas station Kwik-E-Mart in the county.

 

[PTBoardOp93]

And that leads to the following question. In television, if you're one of the networks and you already own a TV channel in the third largest market in the country, why would you buy another.

Well, CBS owned two networks at the time. CBS, obviously, and UPN. It was speculated at the time of the acquisition that UPN would move from KCOP-TV to KCAL, although it never actually did.

 

[davideduardo]

As a sidebar, it is interesting how dominant the TU station among Spanish language stations.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Well, CBS owned two networks at the time. CBS, obviously, and UPN. It was speculated at the time of the acquisition that UPN would move from KCOP-TV to KCAL, although it never actually did.

And that was because Fox owned both KCOP and the UPN affiliate in New York, WWOR-TV. They made it very clear that if CBS disaffiliated them in L.A., they would drop the affiliation in NYC. With WPIX already affiliated with The WB, UPN would have ended up on a weaker UHF station in market #1.

 

[michael hagerty]

They say if you have to ask, you can't afford it. I say when it comes to bragging rights, if you have to ask, it's because they can't afford you seeing it.

Here were the multi-consecutive-day averages from early January of this year, from the days immediately prior to the fires beginning (source article provided below):

5 PM

KVEA - 168,305
KABC - 140,820
KTLA - 73,036
KNBC - 70,511
KCBS - 58,165
KTTV - 30,184

6 PM

KVEA - 201,458
KABC - 170,769
KCBS - 78,033
KTLA - 70,027
KNBC - 69,638
KTTV - 31,016

8 PM

KCAL - 111,473

9 PM

KCAL - 104,708

10 PM

KCAL - 85,681
KTLA - 79,863
KTTV - 35,198

11 PM

KVEA - 132,752
KABC - 134,753
KNBC - 66,408
KTLA - 61,707
KCBS - 60,148

What's surprising to me (since I stopped following L.A. TV news a while back) is how KNBC has fallen. From 1970, when they decided to get serious, and all the way through the 90s, they seemed willing to spend whatever it took to do no worse than a close second.







In 1992, they broke the bank to bring Paul Moyer (who they'd let escape to KABC 13 years earlier) back. $1.4 million a year.

For KNBC Anchor Paul Moyer, Talk Is Not Cheap

Paul (Pay Me a Fortune and I'll Tell the World I Love Ya) Moyer returned to KNBC-TV Channel 4 Monday after a long absence.

www.latimes.com

But it's a different world.

I'm not saying that the people on camera don't make a difference. I competed with Marc Brown in Reno and Ellen Leyva, who just retired from KABC a few months ago was an intern at KTVK in Phoenix when I was there---and we were smart enough to end that internship by hiring her as a reporter. They're both terrific people and great talents, but we're past the era where a single superstar anchor or two could dominate the market.

But of course, in those days, there were two or three beyond-big-time agents (Ed Hookstratten, Norman Brokaw, Ken Lindner---though I think Ken is still active) whose livelihoods depended on selling these anchors and reporters as can't-live-without-'em superstars.

 

[K.M. Richards]

I'll tell you when channel 2 "jumped the shark" for me.

It was the "news wheel" disaster in the fall of 1986. No one liked it ... not the critics or the viewers. It came and went within a month.

 

[Loverofradio]

I'm not saying that the people on camera don't make a difference.

A lot of tv station don’t feel this way at all anymore and feel they can stick anyone up there and they’re content with that. A large part of the reason why tv changed is because the new hires that have been made across the board have been bad with little training. Now there are people out of college jumping to Top 20 markets