• 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

WLNE NO LONGER WILL BE CARRYING KINGWORLD SHOWS

Skynet74 --

Um, WLNE is NOT paying its bills. That's the issue that we are discussing here. The electric bill is minor compared to its programming bills. As you know, programming is the lifeblood of a tv station. If they can't pay for programming, they are in pretty deep doo-doo, so to speak!!!

That being said, I too hope that WLNE will continue to exist. They must gain some traction in the market. There is a huge difference between a close #3 amd a station which regularly gets hashmarks for ratings. WLNE is definitely in the hashmarks place. These types of stations are shutting down their newscasts.
 
formeraa said:
Skynet74 --

Um, WLNE is NOT paying its bills. That's the issue that we are discussing here. The electric bill is minor compared to its programming bills. As you know, programming is the lifeblood of a tv station. If they can't pay for programming, they are in pretty deep doo-doo, so to speak!!!

That being said, I too hope that WLNE will continue to exist. They must gain some traction in the market. There is a huge difference between a close #3 amd a station which regularly gets hashmarks for ratings. WLNE is definitely in the hashmarks place. These types of stations are shutting down their newscasts.
Click to expand...


Well if WLNE isn't paying their programming bills, I am going to love to see what kind of puppet shows they will be airing a year from now. Seriously.. they better not pull this same crap with everyone else that they have with CBS. If it keeps up they will become an informercial station. Then what? I really do feel bad for them. It sucks to not have money to pay your bills. I just find it interesting that Global bought the station and appeared to have enough money to sink into improving their news operation. But this whole time it now appears that they were just spending money that they didn't even have.
 
Or, possibly, Global thought that they would see an immediate bump in the ratings. And there's that pesky thing called "the economy", which has tanked during Global's struggles with WLNE.

The key question is: What can WLNE do to attract more viewers???
 
Newsblues is reporting that the partners behind WLNE parent Global Broadcasting have 'split.' And FTVLive reports that an 'all hands' meeting has been called in Providence (the blurb does not specify the station, but reasonable assumptions can be made.) The plot thickens...stay tuned!
 
me thinks turn out the lights the news department is history or it gets outsourced to another station
 
bg02445 said:
In the unlikely event of a complete WLNE shutdown (as in off the air), I wonder where ABC would go?
Click to expand...

I highly doubt that WLNE will suffer a complete shutdown. The station is still quite a valuable piece of electronic real-estate, especially with a new digital signal that is now at par with the rest of the market's stations. ABC still needs a station to call its' own in the Providence market. WNAC (64.1) will stay FOX. WJAR (10.1 and 10.2) is happy with NBC and the Retro Television Network. WLWC (28.1) is still going to be with the CW. And WPRI (12.1) is pleased as punch to be the CBS affiliate for Providence. To put ABC on a sub channel on one of the other three MAJOR network stations would be counterproductive for the main channel stations. I'm sure WLNE will survive whether it be in tandem with another station in another market or if the station is sold to a more suitable owner. Also remember, there are human beings at that station who's financial well-being is hanging in the balance, right now. Let's hope things work out for both them and the station's creditors. I wish them luck.
 
Just a what-if scenario -- what if WLNE just simulcasted WCVB in Boston? And perhaps WCVB could produce a newscast or two per day tailored to the Providence/New Bedford area. Wouldn't that be better than losing WLNE all together?
 
formeraa said:
Just a what-if scenario -- what if WLNE just simulcasted WCVB in Boston? And perhaps WCVB could produce a newscast or two per day tailored to the Providence/New Bedford area. Wouldn't that be better than losing WLNE all together?
Click to expand...

Kind of like a WCSH-WLBZ scenario, where one news team covers two markets, with some local programming?
 
formeraa said:
Just a what-if scenario -- what if WLNE just simulcasted WCVB in Boston? And perhaps WCVB could produce a newscast or two per day tailored to the Providence/New Bedford area. Wouldn't that be better than losing WLNE all together?
Click to expand...

It could be one possible scenario. After all, WCVB (5.1) also has some synergy with WMUR (9.1 in Manchester, NH) with some programming swapped between them. Both those stations maintain their own unique signature programming like "Chronicle" and "New Hampshire Chronicle" among others. Hearst would be a good fit for WLNE either by outright ownership or through an LMA with Global. Keep it local though, with local people in Providence.
 
And when you consider that WLNE is already an ABC affiliate just like WCVB and WMUR, it makes such a deal too good to be true! Hat tip to formeraa! ;)
 
I'm sure that WCVB would be willing to simucast a newscast to WLNE. But at what price? As it stands now WLNE probably wouldn't even be able to afford to pay the station to let them do it.
 
Peter Q. George (K1XRB) said:
formeraa said:
Just a what-if scenario -- what if WLNE just simulcasted WCVB in Boston? And perhaps WCVB could produce a newscast or two per day tailored to the Providence/New Bedford area. Wouldn't that be better than losing WLNE all together?
Click to expand...

It could be one possible scenario. After all, WCVB (5.1) also has some synergy with WMUR (9.1 in Manchester, NH) with some programming swapped between them. Both those stations maintain their own unique signature programming like "Chronicle" and "New Hampshire Chronicle" among others. Hearst would be a good fit for WLNE either by outright ownership or through an LMA with Global. Keep it local though, with local people in Providence.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see this WCVB-WMUR synergy thing mentioned a lot here, but it's mainly for syndicated programming. You guys are constantly overstating this and it leads me to wonder whether a lot of you can actually watch WMUR or if you're just deducing this by looking at the TV listings. Even then, it's not always so. For example take a look at weekend mornings. WCVB and WMUR actually carry GMA at different times to fit their respective local news schedules. Yes, they now share the same Boston-based master control facility; well by that reckoning then WPRI, WTNH and WWLP would be basically the same. And they're not even close.

WMUR has a LOT of local news programming and all of it is produced in Manchester with a NH based news staff. In fact, they're a damn good little news station; nowadays, they're probably one of the best anywhere considering the size of the station. As for Chronicle/NH Chronicle, yes some bits are shared but the hosts are different as are the majority of the features. Basically, they're two different shows which happen to use the same (successful) format.

Honestly, I'd love to put the "WMUR is a satellite of WCVB" crap that I've been reading here for a couple of years to bed right now - because it is totally incorrect.

Besides, if WLNE were to have such an arrangement with WCVB, they'd have to increase their local news budget by about 250% and hire new staff to report news and to produce local interest programming as WMUR does. Not to mention that WLNE isn't owned by Hearst-Argyle like WCVB and WLNE are (as are WMTW and WPTZ). So there would be no reason for such an arrangement to exist anyhow. It's a complete non-starter.

By the way, if WLNE were owned by Hearst-Argyle, they wouldn't be in this predicament in the first place. ::)
 
I don't know how much it costs WLNE to produce a newscast. But if they got rid of News altogether and fired the entire staff, I'm sure they would save a lot of money. So the question is... would they end up better off? They just might be. I know the station wanted to improve their news image, but it's clear that they can't afford to do it. So it might be time for a new approach. Scrap all the newscasts. Replace it all with syndicated programming.

Now comes the interesting part.......

Instead of Newscasts they could just run a scroll on the bottom of the screen with news and weather updates every so often. They could even start doing this during Network programming too. A one minute News ticker every half hour just to let people know what's going on. It just might be crazy enough to work. It would actually make it look like WLNE has more News than other stations because everyone would see that ticker every half hour no matter what show they are watching. People will remember that!

I think it's a good affordable way to stay a news source without needing to maintain an entire News operation. No anchors, no producers, no staff. They could just have one or two college kids monitoring various news sources on a computer and write a minutes worth of headlines about things that are going on. Same thing with weather bulletins. When tickers hit the screen there could be a little sound effect that makes people take note. NBC has chimes. Well ABC6 should have something too that indicates News headlines are now being scrolled. For Special Weather bulletins it could be a clap of Thunder. Then stick a live radar image on the screen. It's just another element to draw attention to the News ticker. Maybe even sponsor the tickers to bring in some additional revenue. Every ticker can include the logo of a company.

Bottom line is that I do believe there is way out of this mess for them. They just need to think outside the box and become creative about it.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom