carolinanews4

NBC News Channel is still in Charlotte and still off Billy Graham Parkway. But WCNC and News Channel are in two separate buildings with separate addresses. They are on the same plot of land and are connected via a conduit tray that carries cables between the two structures. I doubt NBC would ever move it to DC or NY because the Charlotte operation is in a right to work state (meaning its a nonunion shop) which allows it to operate cheaper than if it were in NYC. But its long term financial viability could be shaky with Nexstar pulling out. The NBC Nexstar stations aren’t the huge loss, it’s the potential loss of TEGNA stations. If Gray were to also end their contract with News Channel, it isn’t hard to imagine it being shut down.

WCNC’s building was built by The Providence Journal Company. The station moved to its present day home in 1991. ProJo had purchased the station in 1998 and broke ground on two new buildings in 1990. One building for WCNC and the other for the NBC News Channel. The move brought WCNC into Charlotte’s core. Since its inception it had been located in a northwest section of the city. At the time this was a fairly rural area. So the move to Billy Graham Parkway put WCNC on a more equal geographic footing with WBTV, WSOC, and WCCB. WJZY was, and still is, located in the far west side of the county, separated from most the city’s population.

In this article about the NBC News Now expansion with Christine Romans, there is a mention of the news service upcoming move next door to 3A. Within that there’s a nugget that NBC Nightly News will “make use of the same facility.” I do wonder if this is legit reporting or if it is an assumption by the publication as a hook to link to a previously published article. The reason I question it is because Llamas currently pivots from Nightly to Top Story from studio 1A. So why would the NBC News Now studio shuffle impact Llamas and team? But I could also see it being legit, especially if the streamer’s 5-7 and 8-9 hours continue to be based in DC and LA studios. https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/christine-romans-two-hour-show-nbc-news-expands-streaming-1236722408/

Your timeline here is off. Comcast bought controlling interest of NBC in 2011. (A deal announced in 2009 back when media ownership reviews by the government took a long time.) Sam joined The Weather Channel in 2014 and left in 2016. NBC didn’t sell the channel to Allen until 2018. So your assertion that Comcast’s purchase of NBC and subsequent selling of The Weather Channel was in anyway connected to Sam’s departure from The Weather Channel doesn’t seem correct

It isn’t the act of traveling that Peter was referencing; it was being away from his family, especially his young daughters. Once kids move into high school, Friday nights become about hanging out with their friends, not their parents. Peter sees the window of time with his kids closing and has decided to make a career move to keep him DC-based. He said as much on the air. If someone doesn’t like NBC News, that’s fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But let’s not imply an on-air person has an ulterior motive that fits a personal perspective about how NBC reports on the government. It isn’t fair to the person who went on national television to publicly say he is prioritizing his kids.

HA! Now that’s good lawyering. What the heck was Nexstar thinking making a claim in front of a judge that your own SEC filing disputes. Begs the question, which audience were they lying to??

Divestitures won’t happen until Nexstar knows the final outcome of this deal. Why would they sell Nexstar owned stations now if the deal is later blocked on antitrust grounds? That’s like selling your house before you know you are going to get a new house. And they can’t sell Tegna owned stations because they technically don’t own them at the moment. So everything will be status quo until the state of limbo is resolved.

Yes. Well, not their impatience per se but the deal itself might be deemed illegal. But it is equally possible that the deal stands. There’s a process - and not usually a quick one - that has to play out. Anyone who tells you they know how this will end is just guessing.

You are right, Nexstar was not required to wait to close the deal. However, just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. It is irresponsible to shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders to close on a deal when you had a heads up that litigation was coming. (It also exposes the company to lawsuits down the road from shareholders seeking damages should the deal get blocked, either in full or in part.) Just like Nexstar was not required to wait to accommodate pending litigation, the plaintiffs and court are not required to ignore a potentially antitrust violating deal just because Nexstar has a high interest bridge loan. The smart thing for Nexstar would have been to wait. Now they will have to explain what irreversible things they possibly could have done in the short period of time they were in control. Discovery on that may expose they were involved in decisions prior to closing, which is illegal. They will probably also have to answer why they didn’t respond to inquiries by state attorneys general prior to closing and, if those AGs are smart, that path may lead to questions on whether Nexstar had any heads up or coordination with the federal government. In short, could they close when they did? Sure. Should they have closed? Nope.

Coping directly from the article linked above: “A separate restraining order request was made in the state case, and was granted on Friday, with the same conditions imposed on Nexstar and TEGNA.”

So, putting aside my dislike of the actual merger itself for a moment. I am deeply disturbed (unfortunately, not surprised) by the 11-hour rush to consummate a deal that seemingly included government officials approving it before a pending lawsuit, of which all parties were aware. If what the NC AG and the CA AG state is true, the states reached out to Nexstar numerous times without a reply. The KUSI program guide, which included CW programming before government approval was announced, would indicate that Nexstar had knowledge well in advance that the DOJ was dropping its investigation and that the FCC was approving it. It would also indicate that Nexstar was working with Tegna on business matters prior to the official close of the deal. Just that alone is a no-no. Two entities that are separate but intend to merge must maintain a firewall of sorts until the deal is approved. This whole thing appears to be a bizarre coordination by a private company and governmental agencies to do an end run around the judiciary and due process.

In my opinion, it is pretty pathetic "reporting" for NewsNation. My guess is that Savannah's attention and energy are focused on her mother, and not on work. This "report" essentially reads like the opinion or theory of a NewsNation Senior Story Editor. (Not even a reporter) Is it possible that Savannah doesn't return? Sure. But many things are possible. I'm sure many people wondered if Katie Couric would return after the loss of her husband. It is gross for NewsNation to speculate on such things. To me, it is telling that not even Page Six picked up on this. And P6 is the outlet that recently published pictures of Savannah's husband and kids at an airport in Florida, along with descriptions of what the three of them were wearing, as if it were a fashion show. Note to NewsNation: when your gossip is too much for Page Six to cover, you might want to check yourself.

I believe it has to do with the Olympic rings. They probably needed the 12 to make the peacoc rings lockup work. The rings also can't appear anywhere near the ABC logo.

I agree entirely with TVLurker that the lack of consistent talent has hurt CBS News. Constant reimagining, rebranding, and relaunching morning and evening news products has been a disastrous approach. Why CBS blows up and relaunches "a new era" every few years, NBC and ABC make tweaks to evolve their shows. However, I think the 1995 affiliation switch gets overplayed. Indeed, it mattered then and in the immediate years that followed. But CBS primetime was able to ascend to the top of the network pile. Same for daytime. I believe the problem with CBS News is CBS News. The culture was set during Cronkite and never changed. There's no doubt that CBS News has an excellent pedigree. But NBC wasn't exactly asleep at the switch in the early days with Huntly and Brinkly, plus the Today Show. NBC News has continued to evolve as its audience has evolved. Heck, the early days of ABC News were a non-factor on the national stage. It wasn't until Roone Arledge envisioned newscasters as "stars" that they started to gain traction. In the 1980s and 1990s, NBC and ABC invested in their on-air presentation, including sets, music, graphics, etc.. Television is, after all, a visual medium. Meanwhile, the culture of CBS News seems perpetually stuck in the Cronkite days. "We don't need to invest in our on-air presentation because we are CBS. Walter Cronkite worked here, damnit! Our reporting is the star." That worked in the 50s, 60s, and 70s when the picture quality was poor and Americans had two or three choices for news. And when CBS does invest, it doesn't feel like they are being innovative. They seem to deploy technology as a means to cut costs. Take a look at the green screen studios they are installing at their local stations. To me, this is just a way to cut the costs of building physical sets. Other people are using these types of sets, but they are usually employed as a next-level storytelling tool. CBS is putting entire newscasts into a virtual environment, which doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than to say "we are the first to have a virtual studio!" By the way, WCBS was the first to have a virtual studio. See what good it did them. They had it in the late 90s. If you don't remember, look it up. It was over-the-top ugly.

This is the problem I continually have with CBS News and most of the CBS O&O group. They seem to be in a never-ending rebranding mode. From the CBS News morning show to their streaming news product to their local stations, things are constantly changing. And the branding seems unnecessarily convoluted and confusing. Example: CBS News Mornings (the early am newscast) vs CBS Mornings (the 7-9 morning show), and putting KCAL branding on KCBS because people "like" KCAL better. They touted that the KCAL News brand was stronger than KCBS, and now both are gone in favor of CBS LA, or CBS News Los Angeles, or CBS News LA. Whatever the flavor of the moment is. The two products that haven't changed are 60 Minutes and CBS Sunday Morning. They also happen to be the highest-rated news products CBS has. Hmmm. On a local level WCCO's branding and product have remained consistent...until the suits in New York started tinkering with it...and they are also highly rated. Hmmm. Connection? Nah. Keep playing with the names CBS. The public follows the TV industry so closely that they will easily follow along.