• 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

the future of Fox

B

BoscoGoldBear

Guest
With shares of News Corp sliding down faster than you-know-what from a goose, I'm wondering about Fox's future, specifically the NFC, MLB and Daytona half of NASCAR, plus the affiliations of certain "VHF" stations. Yes, I'm fully aware that most of TV is UHF in the digital world (5 is 20, 4 is 30 and 2 is 19 in my home market of Boston), however, going on the theory that perception is reality, given the combined mindset of politicians of one certain political party and the "sore loser" original three networks, this is what I think will happen:

In markets where this has happen (i.e. Atlanta, Washington, Tampa, Phoenix, Cleveland, Green Bay, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Beaumont, Johnstown/Altoona, Birmingham, Mobile, Detroit, Austin, New Orleans and a few others I can't think of), I think that the FCC will strip Fox of their VHFs and hold a bidding contest to see which of the big three networks will get the newly available V's in a market-by-market basis, except in Washington where WTTG will assume channel 26 while WETA/PBS will assume channel 5.

Let's see how close to reality this gets!
 
This will never happen, for many reasons. First, Fox is a successful TV network. Second, even if Newscorp can't pull themselves out of the slump (which they will, since this is just a setback) someone will buy the assets in bulk to have access to one of the big four and all the VHF's you mentioned.

Third, Fox doesn't even own the stations in many markets that you mentioned, so the only thing that would possibly even remotely be affected is affiliation deals.
 
No need to worry, this and reality won't even be on the same continent.

- Trip
 
There are always possibilities......the U.S. hasn't had a good broadcast entity downfall since the collapse of RKO General. (Ironically, one of RKO's former stations is owned by Fox/NewsCorp, WWOR)

I expect, at least, that those who Fox News has pretty much upset over the years will at least try to use this as an excuse to basically challenge Fox/NewsCorp's fitness to hold a broadcast license.
 
News Corp. has a lot of money to blow, I doubt that anything on that scale will ever happen. If News Corp. was desperate for cash, they might sell some of their unnecessary assets.
 
WPPCProductions said:
I think Fox will be ok.Since this News Corp case did not happen here in the states.
Click to expand...

There are some Congressmen already asking for a federal investigation into News Corp's operation in the USA. Should anything like occurred in Britain be found on this side of the pond Mr Murdoch will be in deep doo-doo.
 
landtuna said:
WPPCProductions said:
I think Fox will be ok.Since this News Corp case did not happen here in the states.
Click to expand...

There are some Congressmen already asking for a federal investigation into News Corp's operation in the USA. Should anything like occurred in Britain be found on this side of the pond Mr Murdoch will be in deep doo-doo.
Click to expand...

**In theory** if Mr. Murdoch is found to have been involved in criminal behavior he *could* be found "not qualified to hold broadcast licenses" in the U.S.. It is not necessary for that behavior to have involved federal law, licenses have been lost for serious violation of state laws.

I concur with those who see very little chance this will happen. I see no evidence, or even allegations, at this point that tie Mr. Murdoch himself to any behavior serious enough to risk licenses in the U.S.. "not qualified to be a Commission licensee" is essentially the broadcast death penalty, and is VERY rarely levied. ISTR last time it happened, the owner of the stations was convicted of child sex offenses in state court -- and then lied to the FCC about his continued control. One station intentionally operated on the wrong frequency, with excessive power, and interfered with another station -- and didn't get this penalty. Another station moved its transmitter to an unauthorized location something like 50 miles from where the FCC thought it was -- and didn't get this penalty.

That, and the fact that *any* attempt to sanction Mr. Murdoch would be politically explosive. Trying to yank his broadcast licenses would make the political climate even more polarized than it already is, if that's possible.

Also, look at the consequences of yanking these licenses. In the aforementioned case of the sex offender losing his licenses, it took the Commission *ten years* to select new licensees for the inactivated frequencies. The frequencies are *still* dark. Yank Fox's licenses and millions of Americans would lose a programming option.

I do also concur with those who say there will be challenges (not from the FCC, but from Congress and from outsiders) to Fox's licenses. Just because they don't stand a chance of getting the licenses yanked doesn't mean they won't try.
 
I expect there will be "witch hunts"...but it is mostly political. Fox News and Fox Entertainment are two different entities. I think both are safe despite Rupert's difficulties, and as someone said, he could easily divest them and they would most likely remain strong.
 
In plain and simple English, regardless of what goes on with NewsCorp. If Fox is profitable, there's always someone willing to buy them...should it come to that.

It could be anybody...NBC is owned by a cable company, so why not speculate a phone company? lol

That's what the deal is in Canada with Rogers cable owning the City TV's and Bell Telephone owning CTV.
 
Nothing will happen in the U.S. Heck, News Corp. was even able to buy the Wall Street Journal with little hassle. They aren't gonna lose their TV licenses.

So far, the only negative fallout from the whole NOTW scandal was the Sky deal in the U.K. falling apart. There'll be some knuckle-rapping, but aside from that, business as usual.
 
Simply put: Fox has come a long, long way from April 5, 1987, when their entire lineup consisted of "Married With Children" and "The Tracey Ullman Show", repeated twice over the evening.
 
Logically, I'm with you guys on this one, that Fox will endure.
However, I'm having visions of CBS executives hoping to get
back WAGA, WJBK, WJW, and WITI. :)
 
Yeziknoradio said:
In plain and simple English, regardless of what goes on with NewsCorp. If Fox is profitable, there's always someone willing to buy them...should it come to that.
Click to expand...

While again emphasizing there is essentially zero chance this will happen...

If the FCC finds Fox "not qualified to be a broadcast licensee", they have the power to yank the licenses without giving Fox the opportunity to sell them.
 
All of this is nonsense. There may be a few hearings - basically, opportunities for liberal congressmen to be seen on TV bashing Murdoch, News Corp and FOX....and that will be it. Nothing of substance will happen.

Nothing.
 
Yeziknoradio said:
In plain and simple English, regardless of what goes on with NewsCorp. If Fox is profitable, there's always someone willing to buy them...should it come to that.

It could be anybody...NBC is owned by a cable company, so why not speculate a phone company? lol

That's what the deal is in Canada with Rogers cable owning the City TV's and Bell Telephone owning CTV.
Click to expand...

And Shaw owning Global :)
 
BRNout said:
All of this is nonsense. There may be a few hearings - basically, opportunities for liberal congressmen to be seen on TV bashing Murdoch, News Corp and FOX....and that will be it. Nothing of substance will happen.

Nothing.
Click to expand...

Unless it turns out they hacked or attempted to hack the phones on 9/11 victims. That might be sufficiently repulsive to result in some type of legal action in the United States. Probably not enough to pull licenses or anything, but I could see fines or something.

However, the idea that it will result in an auction of virtual channel numbers, something that has never happened before and would be completely without precedent or rules backing it up, is absurd.

- Trip
 
tripinva said:
BRNout said:
All of this is nonsense. There may be a few hearings - basically, opportunities for liberal congressmen to be seen on TV bashing Murdoch, News Corp and FOX....and that will be it. Nothing of substance will happen.

Nothing.
Click to expand...

Unless it turns out they hacked or attempted to hack the phones on 9/11 victims. That might be sufficiently repulsive to result in some type of legal action in the United States. Probably not enough to pull licenses or anything, but I could see fines or something.

However, the idea that it will result in an auction of virtual channel numbers, something that has never happened before and would be completely without precedent or rules backing it up, is absurd.

- Trip
Click to expand...

Meh, my money is still on nothing happening. A bit of public bluster here and there, a few tough questions for Murdoch from grandstanding politicians and - in the end - nothing will come of it. A slap on the wrist at the most. Nothing of any consequence or notice for the public at large will result.
 
The "good character" rules do not apply to networks regardless of whether network content ends up OTA, broadcast by a licensee.

It's the holder of the license that is under scrutiny by the FCC. Thus, the actual OTA broadcast propeties that Fox owns could very possibly be challenged given recent revelations. I predict that politics aside, those licenses will indeed be challenged. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. You register a peition to deny based on the current licensee's unfit character and if things go your way, voila, you've got a license to print money. Those FOX o & o OTA properties are worth millions. I'll bet savvy investors are already in the planning stages.
 
Its highly unlikely that anything other than political grandstanding happens.

In the highly unlikely scenario, though, that Murdoch is found criminally liable in the United States and not fit to hold broadcast licenses, I think it would be most likely that News Corp divests all their broadcast stations and moves the Fox network to cable, where they don't have to deal with the FCC.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom