Leaderboard

Forcing any NewsNation product onto the CW is a non-starter and would implode the affiliate base.

The internet is having a field day with the revelation that the average CW (broadcast) viewer is 58 years old. https://deadline.com/2022/08/cw-average-viewer-age-58-nexstar-1235092697/

I also don't see them pushing it on their own stations with active newsrooms. Nexstar O&O, oops Mission's WPIX has several newscasts a day including at 6:30 pm and 10-11 pm.. NewsNation provides no value.

I guess it depends on the specifics of the new programming. I’m not sure affiliates are going to want to air NewsNation, for example, given that they may soon be home to both Chris Cuomo and Bill O’Reilly. If Nexstar is just planning on putting out cheap older-skewing programs and leftovers from Paramount/Warner, I guess it wouldn’t be as big a deal (especially since it’s just 2 hours per night).

Thing is, it was a success…a financial one. A post in the NewsNation thread explained that they’ve saved lots of money by cutting syndicated programming and replacing it with its own, cheaper to produce programming. From Nexstar’s last Annual Report: Don’t get me wrong, nobody’s watching NewsNation, but that’s secondary to the fact that they’re making more money on the network by virtue of 1) paying less for the programming and 2) owning the ad inventory. I don’t like it one bit from a programming standpoint, but I’d expect the same thing for The CW under Nexstar. You mean that you wouldn’t want to see a Guy Fieri special replace the Arrowverse on your station? Blasphemy! /s Seriously though, you can add Hearst to that mix too.

If I’m at Scripps, Sinclair and Gray, I’m taking a good look at exercising whatever sale-related clauses exist in my CW affiliate contracts.

The big question here is if Nexstar maintains the CW+ infrastructure and continues to offer it as a sub/cable network, or begins to wind it down, along with overall caution for the largest affiliate bases like Sinclair and Gray. It's still worth it for now to offer syndicated product that would otherwise go unseen in a market, more than the 18 hours of CW programming.

It seems that is not what Nexstar plans. I'm guessing he wants to use the off network shows on their own stations, limiting viewership and buzz. Good luck. A few things mentioned in the investors conference are a bit concerning. They mentioned the production agreement with Paramount Global and WBD is for a year, and after that will be considered. They mentioned that they plan on moving away from mostly scripted programming. They seem to be following post divestiture Fox's approach with a few scripted shows and several cheap uninteresting unscripted game shows and more. I'm not sure that will bring more eyeballs to the CW. It may backfire. I know it's a turn off for myself and I watch several CW shows. They also positioned the transition from WGN America to NewsNation as a success. Huh? It's not watched by many and I doubt Chris Cuomo is enough to change that (or any other rehab projects they decide to program). In five years, I can see Nexstar in a lot of hurt if none of this is as successful as Sook believes.

The other difference is that UPN and WB existed in an era where smartphones and OTT streaming services didn't exist.

The difference is that UPN and The WB had name-brand shows like Star Trek : Voyager, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Dawson's Creek

Erik Estrada? Does this mean Cool Cat is coming to the CW?

Hour-long superhero shows + CGI × COVID compliance + all those writers trying to keep Riverdale from becoming an ouroboros = This is why you're going to be seeing A LOT more of Eric Estrada and Laura McKenzie on The CW (I'm shocked Associated Television International isn't getting their own 25% piece). Also...Hearst does have leverage with the Litton E/I block, so don't expect them to go gently into that good night either.

I read that the current entertainment president is staying with The CW under new ownership. I don't know how long he would last after all of the programming changes. He is the same guy who kept renewing shows that had horrible ratings, yet had more streaming views and were shows he liked.

Wouldn't CBS be unhappy about that? Much of the reason CBS even bothers with a morning show seems to be for the soft power that comes in having clips from interviews and such circulating. It makes the network look important, like Today and GMA make NBC and ABC look important. What might that do to Nexstar's relationship with CBS?

Rachel Brown and John Gregory are joining Leslie Sykes as weekday morning anchors

There's one thing that glares significantly over this sale, beyond this totally cringe-inducing passage from COO Tom Carter: @sanewsguyasked this on Discord this morning... where's Perry? Arguably the biggest day in the history of the company—and less than two weeks after his tenure as CEO was extended by four years—and he was nowhere to be seen. I can't imagine the CEO of one of the country's largest pure-play television chains going AWOL the day of their highest-profile transaction, let alone a CEO so totally tied in with the company that he's almost universally known as Uncle Perry.

They won't push NewsNation on the affiliates. Why? Because that's not the best use of NewsNation. As I've said a few times on the Discord, the best use for NewsNation to Nexstar is to dump existing affiliations on their owned stations in favor of reformatting NewsNation programming to run OTA. With NBC and ABC moving entertainment programming to their streaming services, it's just a matter of time until companies like Nexstar question why they're paying Comcast, Paramount, and Disney big $$$ for basically a bunch of national news programming and a big nightly ad for Disney+/Peacock/Paramount+, when Nexstar already produces national news programming. "Ohhhhh! But..." you say. Tell me, would anyone actually notice if Nexstar replaced the latest flop that CBS has on in the morning with Mornings in America? The CW fits into that plan by providing general entertainment on their duopoly stations, .2s, or by selling the affiliation off and collecting money from other stations in the market.

I wonder if there will be a name change.

The “10@10” experiment is over, and it’s the return of “The 10 o’clock News” (as opposed to the “News at 10” name I believe they were using before the 10@10)

While the acquisition isn't formally closed yet, Nexstar is immediately assuming corporate oversight of The CW. Nexstar plans to spend $2 billion a year on programming for the network, and will target an older demographic.

Paramount and Warners still hold minority stakes and will continue to supply programming, and unless something drastic happens, the existing streaming deal with Netflix will be unchanged. The biggest change has already happened with the mass cancellation of shows (but that may have more to do with Zaslav at WBD than anything else). If Nexstar was smart they'd keep the network as-is with other production companies producing content for them. If they can stave off the losses and turn something close to a profit, it could work. But the CW has never made money and has always operated as a loss leader and that was even when the younger demo-strategy still WORKED.

It goes back to the cost-benefit analysis. What is to be gained by making WGN or KRON an affiliate of a network that no longer can reach its' target demo due to mere obsolescence? The mere fact your average CW affiliate has a daytime lineup with hours and hours of courtroom schlock, "Trash TV" Maury reruns and Steve Wilkos, spillover newscasts from a senior duop partner and barely anything else is rather telling.

Looks like the CW affiliates owned by Nexstar will be owned by the network itself: KWGN, KTLA, WPIX, and so on.

Yes, this similar graphic has also been used for their current COVID-19 look - which has been used for a few months also.

What is there to be gained from yanking the affiliations off of WCIU, WPSG, KBCW, WCCB or WISH? What is the return on investment for alienating the massive groups that own those stations right off the bat? What benefits stations like KRON, WGN, WPHL, WJZY and WTTV that already have established brands (and in the case of WGN and WTTV, willingly gave up the CW for their own self-interests) to disrupt their programming with CW fare? Just because Nexstar is buying majority control of what is still for all intents and purposes a three-way partnership does not mean they are going to be doing things to it or to the affiliate base "just because they can" The CW targets a demographic that is least likely to watch OTA TV. It might have still worked in 2006 but that's 16 years and 12 models of iPhones ago.

This is quite the paragraph from the Deadline article. The demographic focus of the CW will also change over time, Carter said. Historically, shows like Riverdale, All American, Arrow and Supernatural have focused on viewers in their teens through their 30s. The reality, though, is that the average CW viewer is 58 years old, and Carter said that schism explains why the CW is the lowest-rated broadcast network.

Wouldn’t be surprised if WGN returned to the CW as well. They only went independent to accommodate sports, and considering that sports rights aren’t coming back anytime soon, it makes sense to run CW programs. On the subject of programming, you can bet there will be massive cuts with the “same strict financial standards” and all, but considering that Paramount and Warner/Discovery still hold interest, I can’t imagine them going full-on “NewsNation on Free TV” just yet. I would expect the network to still air some shows produced by Paranount/Warner, but the quality/budget of those shows might be diminished. Besides, the CW is a low priority for them anyway (hence, the sale), and anything that drew an audience is being chopped.

Good for the sellers, squeezing some cash out of that thing. I hope not too many people are emotionally attached to the existing CW programming.

KRIV and KTXH will have "Sherri" at 10:00am and 12:00pm respectively, replacing "Wendy". KTXH also gets "iCrime with Elizabeth Vargas", which time it will air is unknown at this time. And I now know that "Pictionary" will air at 4:00pm on KTXH, effectively replacing one hour of "Family Feud".

I love Cindy on weekends against Pat Battle and Michelle Charlesworth. I dont necessarily think a 9am newscast is the best thing for WCBS, but I think the most sensible option would be to have Cindy do 9 AM and Noon, to relieve some of the hours off of Chris and Mary (working pre 4am to about 1pm). What happens now, Drew Barrymore sliced to a half hour or Hot Bench at 9:30? Elise is more suited for a serious nighttime newscast. John Elliot has the personality of an essentric/lively morning weather person a la Al Roker, Bill Evans, Linda Church, Willard Scott, Ira Joe Fisher, etc.. it was literally nonsensical to remove him from the newscast. What was the reasoning, to follow the mostly female anchor trend in the mornings? CBS has the look, all they need is just some more lively talent and locally authentic newscasts. Fox 5 and Pix 11 are really good at feeling like really local NYC stations.

FOX Weather has started sending me a "FOX Weather Agenda" email each day, teasing the next day's coverage. Maybe I should forward it on to NN.