Rusty Muck

36 minutes ago, Breaking News said:

Competition slips up?  Has WSB lost it ratings share?  NO! It still #1 and still commands a 50% audience, because "Cox" doesn't officially own the station. WSB going to do what WSB does and that to stay on top!

WSB is owned by a New York private equity firm (to call it a "hometown company" is extremely generous bordering on Truthiness, Cox Media ceased being "an Atlanta company" when the Cox family sold out due the Theranos scandal), which doesn't care about investing into it and ultimately wants to sell it to the highest bidder. Private equity is the worst type of ownership because they want to make back their money, everything else be damned.

The only thing WSB has going for it is Rusted Dial Syndrome.

32 minutes ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

2) Wouldn’t it make more sense for CBS to just sell their standalone CW affiliates to another company? What CBS is doing in Detroit is difficult enough; do they really want the burden of launching news in Seattle, Tampa, and Atlanta when they already have affiliates doing it for them? Besides, Nexstar might be interested in owning three standalone affiliates in top-20 markets.

Who’d buy them? Nexstar is grossly over the cap that, even if they tried to play the Mission route, it wouldn’t exactly work like they would want it to. The charade of selling WPIX to Scripps was set up in a way that Mission could buy them, this OTOH would be grossly flagrant and highly visible (as opposed to Mission shadow buying a station for Nexstar to create a duop in the middle of nowhere in market #179). Plus this is no longer an environment receptive to M&As as the Federal Reserve keeps hiking the prime interest rate.

If anything, CBS can use KSTW and WTOG to force Apollo to sell them KIRO and Tegna to sell them WTSP.

20 minutes ago, T.L. Hughes said:

Paramount still owns 12.5% of The CW, so they still have a limited interest in the network. It’s not responsible for the day-to-day management of the network, since Nexstar acquired 75% of the equity previously held by Paramount and WBD, but CBSNS could negotiate to keep the CW affiliation on WUPA and its other CW stations once their contracts come up. (Further to that point, CBSNS still has a few affiliates of MyNetworkTV, which is owned by Fox, in its portfolio.)

Once the deal closes, WUPA is no longer a CW O&O, regardless of how much a stake they might still have in the CW for now. The network could sign to remain on stations like WKBD and WPCW (or even KBHK) but does Paramount have much of any real desire to be involved with the network beyond the 2024–25 season?

Plus WSBK and WBFS disaffiliated from MyTV a few weeks ago and now function as indies.

5 hours ago, TVNewsLover said:

 

 

 

You all do realize CBS has owned WUPA since 1994, right? If they wanted to move the affiliation, they would’ve done so a while ago. A lot of major market CBS affiliates are in 3rd or 4th place, you don’t see CBS trying to move affiliations there, do you? Also, Gray owns other CBS affiliates, I don’t thing CBS is looking to piss off Gray. What NBC did in Boston is completely different, as they did not own a station there prior.

CBS sold WUPA to Viacom the First in 1994 after it was no longer needed. The station became a UPN O&O, then a CW O&O under CBS Corp. control.

Now that CBS is giving up their ownership stake in the CW, they have zero incentive to have WUPA be an affiliate of a network they will have no stake or involvement in and every incentive to take the affiliation in-house.

1 hour ago, Geoffrey said:

Not exactly the launch of a new look in Minneapolis.

Looks more like a transitional phase upon which the "WCCO" name is slowly retired in favor of "CBS News Minnesota". I dare say even the name "The 4 on WCCO" is transitional.

KCNC may be getting the "CBS News NOW" graphics next week out of necessity alone. It's not like that station is stuck with running on the 2016 look when they rebrand.

9 hours ago, newsteam13 said:

 

RIP Eyewitness News (even CBS3 Eyewitness News) - the format which the founding station KYW gave birth to. 

Technically the first EWN station was what is now WKYC and they dropped it in 1965 when the FCC ordered the asset swap reversal between NBC and Westinghouse.

I know common interpretation has KYW “moving” back to Philadelphia but that was borne out of Westinghouse wanting to erase any connection to NBC ownership of 3 and 1060 as soon as possible. By stark contrast, NBC tried to play off the “KY” name with WKYC and acknowledged Westinghouse’s prior ownership in Cleveland.

And WWJ-TV has gone all-in as "CBS Detroit" (h/t @DetroitTVNews)

58 minutes ago, CircleSeven said:

CMG's HQ is based out of Atlanta, despite being owned by a private equity that's based out of New York.

That’s the point. One company is controlled by private equity. The other is not.

They still have the offices but Cox ceased being a “local company” with the Apollo buyout, it merely became the equivalent of a subsidiary.

2 hours ago, Briella said:

That's wild, they must loan it out to other stations. WWL (which is a Tegna CBS affiliate) has used eyewitness news for decades.

KYW in Cleveland (now WKYC) was the first station to use the EWN name in 1959, so Westinghouse had the first-use service mark. To keep it active, they might bury it in KYW station promos not unlike what WAGA has done for decades under Fox ownership. (“Be an Eyewitness to News on CBS News Philadelphia!”)

1 hour ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

On the contrary, I think this new branding is exactly what Hilton Howell meant by “firing CBS.” It fits with the overall strategy of giving the station its own identity, which it’s never really been able to find all these years. It’s not like they’re planning on dumping the affiliation or anything.

Channel 46 doesn’t need to have “46” in their branding, either, and why would they? They could easily brand outside of news as “WANF CBS”, “ANF CBS” or … hear me out … “WANF”.

6 minutes ago, Greggo said:

I like how they say they’re the hometown station owned by a company based in Atlanta. Guess they forgot about WSB

It’s intentional and I love it. Cox ceased being a local company when Apollo bought them out (blame the Cox family losing hundreds of millions on Theranos).

18 minutes ago, Samantha said:

There's a rumble in them there Rockies...

 

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/cbs-news-colorado-announces-new-community-journalism-initiative

 

KCNC CBS News Colorado is:

 

* Shifting to the community journalism model (as is being implemented in Detroit and hinted at in New York)

* Adding a 9am and a 4pm news hour

* Starting September 12

itshappening.gif

12 hours ago, Tyler said:

Here me out:

 

”CBS.”

Or “CBS (name of city/region)”. The way CBS is pushing this across the chain, I expect them to push the non-owned affiliates to go in the same direction, either as “CBS” or “CBS (city/region)”.

It’s something that I’ve debated @channel2 on in the discord as she values the brand integrity of the affiliates and the legacy brands of the O&Os, which I totally get. At the same time, harmonization is not new, from the time ABC had their O&Os all adopt the same Circle 7 in 1962, to when NBC pushed the same news sets throughout their chain in the 1970s to when CBS had their affiliates use Rockwell as their CG typeface in the 1980s.

The only difference here is the presumed excising of the channel number and retiring of call letters as brands in favor of a unified approach. It’s revolutionary in US broadcasting but is so commonplace elsewhere. Moreover, CBS has a clear and obvious brand issue with KDKA, WBZ, KPIX, WCCO and to a lesser extent KYW as stations that have to share a branding with their onetime radio sisters. It’s in theory not bad unless the radio station gets bad publicity a la Wendy Bell flaming out at KDKA 1020 and KDKA-TV has to issue statements that they had nothing to do with Wendy’s employment. It’s an awkward licensing agreement between Audacy, iHeart and Beasley Les Moonves made that never should have happened (but at the same time everyone would be grousing at KDKA 1020, the fabled “first radio station”, being forced to change their call sign. Look at the awkwardness of KOMO 1000 being forced to rename itself KNWN).

Moreover, CBS going with a unified “CBS” branding solves issues with brand awareness that have dogged the network since 1994, especially in Detroit. It’s also why I see them pushing the renaming before “CBS News Detroit” launches, to help get the marketing campaign underway and help to better promote the news service. It also helps the O&O chain’s laggards—WFOR, KTVT, WBBM and WCBS—a chance to start anew, they literally have nothing to lose. The chain’s successful stations—WCCO, KCNC, WJZ, KDKA and to an extent WBZ—will handle it in a transitional way, but the viewers will adapt. I highly doubt anyone in Pittsburgh proper is going to be no longer watching KDKA simply because they no longer call themselves “KDKA-TV 2”.

Thus, I expect the network to pressure the major chains—Gray, Nexstar, Cox, Sinclair, Tegna** and Scripps—to adopt these branding conventions on their CBS affiliates wholesale, which will set up an interesting confrontation between the groups and the network that @Weetershas been predicting on the discord for awhile. (“Why should we have to brand our stations as ‘CBS’ and act like the network owns us when we can fall back on NewsNation, the CW and Antenna?”)

** Fate of said company still TBD.

37 minutes ago, mrschimpf said:

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. 

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

4 minutes ago, channel2 said:

 

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?

Well, the inverse of BBS completely taking over CTV comes to mind right away.

22 hours ago, The Frog said:

While the acquisition isn't formally closed yet, Nexstar is immediately assuming corporate oversight of The CW.

There's one thing that glares significantly over this sale, beyond this totally cringe-inducing passage from COO Tom Carter:

Quote

“As you’d expect from Nexstar, our first goal is to improve the profitability of The CW and more fully realize its potential as a broad-reach entertainment provider and marketing solutions platform,” said Nexstar President-COO Tom Carter.

“In the near term, Nexstar can leverage its infrastructure to reduce costs in areas such as corporate overhead, digital infrastructure, advertising sales and content and programming acquisition at The CW. While reducing costs is one path to improving profitability, there is significant opportunity for value creation by focusing on building the broadcast audience and driving new revenue,” said Carter.

As the nation’s largest station group owner, Carter said Nexstar will have a different approach than other network owners — and the previous CW ownership — in not focusing on programming “capable of crossing over to an SVOD service.”

@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.

3 hours ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

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).

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

15 hours ago, NowBergen said:

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.  

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.

26 minutes ago, David Salter JR said:

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

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

6 minutes ago, David Salter JR said:

what programming strategy will Nexstar pursue for the CW? news? unscripted shows? something else?

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.

4 minutes ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

It depends on the market. They aren’t going to yank it off a station like WISH, for example, when they have both the CBS/Fox affiliates in Indianapolis. Same goes for WCCB. I don’t think anyone was suggesting that Nexstar would/should replace every established network affiliation with a network like the CW. Any suggestion of such a thing would be asinine.

 

In the case of stations like WGN and KRON, however, it would make some sense. First, it’s not like they’ll be alienating CBS when CBS/Warner are selling the majority of the network over to Nexstar anyway. The CW is a non-core asset for them. Second, it’s true that WGN gave up the CW “for their own self-interests,” but those interests had to do with local sports broadcasting rights that had to be moved to other stations to accommodate CW programming. As I previously mentioned, WGN no longer has local sports rights, and the CW would give WGN two hours of programming that their company (Nexstar) owns. Finally, in KRON’s case, why would Nexstar spend on a MyNet affiliation when they’ll now have their own network to program? It’s the same reason why NewsNation is dumping reruns for their own talk shows.

 

Of course, there’s no guarantee Nexstar will want to switch all of its independent/MyNet stations over to the CW, and it’s highly unlikely they would do it right away. This is pure speculation. That said, it’s not a far-fetched possibility.

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.

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"

52 minutes ago, TheRob said:

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.

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.

@Georgie56posted this in the Discord but KCNC recently updated their Twitter profile, without a single 4 in sight.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what will happen next.

5 minutes ago, NowBergen said:

That's an approach for the court of public opinion.  What they are providing the FCC in response to questions is probably far more detailed.  if not, they have real bad lawyers and advisors.

Easy money on Standard General’s legal counsel being that bad.

Soo simply thought he could buy Tegna out of sheer hatred for Dave Lougee, and the details didn’t matter.

8 minutes ago, NowBergen said:

If my memory is right, a few weeks back both Soo Kim and Deborah McDermott have made statements in response to the some of the criticism.  Including investing in news product, not cutting as well as clarifying Apollo's limited role as a funder and not involved in any part of the operation.  I'm sure they have had to file and answer directly to the FCC much of this in more detail that may not yet be public.

Their public statements have been this mix of playing the victim card and tepid deflections (“It’s not true! Proof? Bro. Trust me!”), it’s stunning how unprofessional Soo and Deb have been throughout this process.

I’m employing Occam’s Razor for this analysis, and with the level of opposition, FCC scrutiny and Standard General in amateur hour mode, this deal needs to set up an appointment with Dr. Kevorkian.

4 hours ago, nycnewsjunkie said:

Again, this (very long) post isn’t to say that you’re wrong and that CBS isn’t thinking along the lines of 100% brand unification; it’s only to say that there is evidence that CBS still wants some regional emphasis at their more successful stations. It’s certainly true that the CBS O&Os are generally last-place stations that have been run into the ground by David Friend, Peter Dunn, etc, and that their more successful stations are in comparatively smaller markets. However, when you have stations like WJZ, WCCO, KDKA, and WBZ that have built their success around their local identity, there’s no good reason for CBS to throw those babies out with the bathwater. I could be wrong, but I think management realizes that.

Again, the problem is that KDKA, KYW, WBZ and WCCO have to share those call letter brands with unrelated radio stations. Most people really wouldn’t care if the call letter brands were retired. They aren’t nerds like us and get easily confused between the two.

If that wasn’t the case (and CBS had forced the radio stations to change their calls en masse in 2017, as what Sinclair made Lotus do when they bought KOMO radio) then a case could be made for keeping the call sign brands in the TV group.