Breaking: Cox/Fox swap stations, KTVU to become Fox O&O

[DirtyHarry 719]

 

Salt Lake City, Columbus, Birmingham, Cleveland? They probably didn't care, but enjoying repeating the $$$. If WHIO was owned by CBS they wouldn't get that much traction, but since it Cox second station and owns the radio/newspaper it got some new digs.

 

Being an O&O is not what it used to be, look at WWJ/ 62 CBS in Detroit and it been 20 years and their owned by CBS with no news department.

 

 

 

That's a great example. Birmingham was one of Taft's crown jewels. They made a ton of money because it was a two VHF station market. Better to have 50% of a smaller pie than 20% of a large one.

 

That said, Broadcasting is an interesting business because of how often these properties change hands.

 

You never see people in other businesses going in and out of markets like they do in the TV business. They hold onto newspapers for a long time. Gannett doesn't buy a paper only to sell it five years later. I wonder how much money they waste going back and forth on these TV deals all the time.

[Breaking News 802]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's a great example. Birmingham was one of Taft's crown jewels. They made a ton of money because it was a two VHF station market. Better to have 50% of a smaller pie than 20% of a large one.

 

That said, Broadcasting is an interesting business because of how often these properties change hands.

 

You never see people in other businesses going in and out of markets like they do in the TV business. They hold onto newspapers for a long time. Gannett doesn't buy a paper only to sell it five years later. I wonder how much money they waste going back and forth on these TV deals all the time.

 

 

Not only that but look at the stations that are stilled owned by the same company since day 1. WSB, KSTP, WBNS, WHIO, WEWS, WCPO. The pie of ownership is getting smaller and smaller and let see how many survive in the next 5 yrs. Very eerie wouldn't you say?

[ns8401 846]

How long the contract WJBK has with FOX and is CBS thinking about jumping another station in Detroit soon?

WJBK became a FOX O&O in 1994 when New World was purchased by FOX. CBS owns WWJ/WKBD so I think ownership and affiliation is set in Detroit for the long term, unless something seismic occurs in the industry.

[Rusty Muck 4174]

Cox is a pretty good company. Memphis' success will be important to Cox and Memphis will get more TLC under Cox than they did under Fox.

 

It's funny that Cox is entering a market that is still led (in most cases) by WMC - a station that, thanks to Bert Ellis, became the ultimate copycat of WSB's on-air look.

 

I know it wouldn't happen. But what if Cox and Raycom were to trade WMC and WHBQ?

[DirtyHarry 719]

 

It's funny that Cox is entering a market that is still led (in most cases) by WMC - a station that, thanks to Bert Ellis, became the ultimate copycat of WSB's on-air look.

 

I know it wouldn't happen. But what if Cox and Raycom were to trade WMC and WHBQ?

 

I've got a better what if: They take the ABC affiliation away from Ch. 24.

[Rusty Muck 4174]

How long the contract WJBK has with FOX and is CBS thinking about jumping another station in Detroit soon?

As long as Fox owns WJBK, they will be on channel 2 in perpetuity. And even if they sold the station, Fox would ink a long-term affiliation deal. The Fox O&Os sold to LocalTV, plus WBRC, are affiliated with the network until 2017.

 

It was only a series of tragicomic events (WADL should have become the CBS affiliate/O&O, and it might have had a chance as CBS 38, but Franklin Adell was asking for too much) that forced CBS onto channel 62. And unfortunately, that's where it is going to stay for the very long term.

[Samantha 2878]

 

I've got a better what if: They take the ABC affiliation away from Ch. 24.

 

As much as 24 has been a laugher over the years, it's better now than ever.

 

Though WPTY really, really got off to an inauspicious start with its news. It was positively horrendous.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

Again, the areas that you and Cox are obsessed with are not what the market really is. Sure Massachusetts had computer technology firms, they had been bought up by HP in legacy acquisitions. And Boston has hills and mountains too. And there is 3 more million people they can reach. Wine sippin' liberals and trust funded babies DO NOT watch WFXT and nor do THEY EVER WATCH OTA TV. The market already has an established liberal, far to the left, for the cosmos who think Boston is just within the I95/128 beltway and that's WCVB. We do not need another liberal, wine sipping news station for trust fund/Occupy Wall Street yuppies!

 

I had to chime in on this hilarious diatribe.

 

You do know that Cox runs stations like WSB, WSOC, and WFTV right? Stations that are relatively conservative. Not Sinclair-type conservative mind you but a noticiable conservative tilt regardless. What you're freaking out about is absurd, just because Cox is taking over Fox 25 doesn't mean it's magically going to turn liberal overnight.

 

The real concern would be if Cox pulls what they did in Jacksonville with WFXT. WFXT's raitings are probably not good enough for Cox which might give them an excuse to purge and start over.

[tyrannical bastard 3474]

 

I had to chime in on this hilarious diatribe.

 

You do know that Cox runs stations like WSB, WSOC, and WFTV right? Stations that are relatively conservative. Not Sinclair-type conservative mind you but a noticiable conservative tilt regardless.

 

Conservative to the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mentality. If they can dominate their marketplace, why change them?

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

Conservative to the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mentality. If they can dominate their marketplace, why change them?

 

I meant the political tilt those stations have but you raised another good point. That's why I'm a little worried about the people at WFXT. Being a 4th place station in a 4-station market isn't exactly what Cox likes to see.

[C Block 1488]

 

I had to chime in on this hilarious diatribe.

 

You do know that Cox runs stations like WSB, WSOC, and WFTV right? Stations that are relatively conservative. Not Sinclair-type conservative mind you but a noticiable conservative tilt regardless. What you're freaking out about is absurd, just because Cox is taking over Fox 25 doesn't mean it's magically going to turn liberal overnight.

 

Yes. This. Saying that KTVU is excessively liberal sounds like it's coming from someone who has never watched KTVU (and it sounds like that's the case here with that diatribe, as well as other strange, provincial diatribes recently). KTVU is a very safe newscast in terms of content and presentation. Everything is down the middle, objective, and fair. KTVU's news product is presented with an understated tone that is very hard to find in local news anywhere in the U.S these days. Cox is a very good owner that treats their employees very well and lets the station do what's best for them in order to become a market leader. WFXT viewers have nothing to worry about in this deal.

 

It's not like most local news is heavily partisan like it is nationally either.

[tyrannical bastard 3474]

Look no further than Jacksonville, FL. Cox is making some major moves to bring their stations out of the basement. If WFXT is that bad, they better watch out.

[Breaking News 802]

If anyone has watched Cox's mother-ship station WSB-TV it soo not conservative but liberal and the company itself is liberal. Daddy Cox James M. Cox founding father and former Ohio Governor was a Democratic, which means nothing.

 

However I've always held this company and their stations to high regards and a great company. Yes they have that if it not broke don't fix it mentality, but all in all. It no Sinclair!

 

 

As for Cox owning FOX 13 they might do some upgrades, but after a few years sell the station.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

Yes. This. Saying that KTVU is excessively liberal sounds like it's coming from someone who has never watched KTVU (and it sounds like that's the case here with that diatribe, as well as other strange, provincial diatribes recently). KTVU is a very safe newscast in terms of content and presentation. Everything is down the middle, objective, and fair. KTVU's news product is presented with an understated tone that is very hard to find in local news anywhere in the U.S these days. Cox is a very good owner that treats their employees very well and lets the station do what's best for them in order to become a market leader. WFXT viewers have nothing to worry about in this deal.

 

It's not like most local news is heavily partisan like it is nationally either.

 

Yeah, I've watched KTVU multiple times and I think they're pretty neutral. I have no idea where he got the idea that they're liberal (just because they're based in Oakland?)

 

Either way, even if Cox does give WFXT a makeover to reach a larger demographic, he can still watch WHDH. They go after the same suburban demographics that WFXT apparently goes after.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

If anyone has watched Cox's mother-ship station WSB it soo not conservative but liberal and the company itself is liberal. Daddy Cox James M. Cox founding father and former Ohio Governor was a Democratic, which means nothing.

 

However I've always held this company and their stations to high regards and a great company. Yes they have that if it not broke don't fix it mentality, but all in all. It no Sinclair!

 

And yet WSB and WHIO Radio are the textbook definition of conservative talk radio, go figure.

 

But I agree, they're a great media company and they're always consistent (but not in the bland way like Gannett can be). Their massive purge in Jacksonville is really the only time I ever disagreed with a move they made (because it seems so extreme).

 

The only thing I can't figure out is how Cox will run WFXT, I don't think they have much of a presence in the Northeast and they don't have much of a track record with Fox stations either (except KTVU, KOKI, and WAWS). So it'll be interesting to see what moves they make there when the deal gets finalized.

[C Block 1488]

 

Yeah, I've watched KTVU multiple times and I think they're pretty neutral. I have no idea where he got the idea that they're liberal (just because they're based in Oakland?)

 

Either way, even if Cox does give WFXT a makeover to reach a larger demographic, he can still watch WHDH. They go after the same suburban demographics that WFXT apparently goes after.

 

There were some other bizarrely disparaging things said about Californians in another thread, so I'm guessing there's some deeply rooted irrationality there too...

 

And SF and Boston are very different TV markets. Despite political similarities in their populations, all of the SF stations follow KTVU's sobering tone. Meanwhile, in Boston, flash and flair tabloid style approaches at WHDH, WCVB, and to an extent WFXT seem to be what works there, while WBZ, which has usually carried a sober and understated approach to their news product, has struggled for some time.

[DirtyHarry 719]

 

If anyone has watched Cox's mother-ship station WSB-TV it soo not conservative but liberal and the company itself is liberal. Daddy Cox James M. Cox founding father and former Ohio Governor was a Democratic, which means nothing.

 

However I've always held this company and their stations to high regards and a great company. Yes they have that if it not broke don't fix it mentality, but all in all. It no Sinclair!

 

As for Cox owning FOX 13 they might do some upgrades, but after a few years sell the station.

 

My understanding is that when Gov. Cox bought the Dayton Daily News he essentially rebranded it to something analgous to the "On Your Side" format. They fought for the common man. When Gov. Cox ran for President, FDR was his running mate and often a guest at his home in Kettering.

 

Nevertheless, this is indeed a great company. Top notch operator.

 

I don't agree they sell Memphis, though. They tend to keep what they buy. They've owned Manheim Auctions/Auto Trader since 1968.

 

 

 

 

And yet WSB and WHIO Radio are the textbook definition of conservative talk radio, go figure.

 

But I agree, they're a great media company and they're always consistent (but not in the bland way like Gannett can be). Their massive purge in Jacksonville is really the only time I ever disagreed with a move they made (because it seems so extreme).

 

The only thing I can't figure out is how Cox will run WFXT, I don't think they have much of a presence in the Northeast and they don't have much of a track record with Fox stations either (except KTVU, KOKI, and WAWS). So it'll be interesting to see what moves they make there when the deal gets finalized.

 

 

 

I think what they've done with KTVU speaks for itself. They know how to run a Fox station. As for being in the northeast, how different is Boston from Pittsburgh or Dayton? Dayton-Cincinnati together would be a rather large-ish market in its own right, probably about the size of Cleveland.

 

San Fran, Atlanta and Seattle are probably the markets they own that are most analogous to Boston. Based their track record, they'll do just fine in Boston.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

There were some other bizarrely disparaging things said about Californians in another thread, so I'm guessing there's some deeply rooted irrationality there too...

 

And SF and Boston are very different TV markets. Despite political similarities in their populations, all of the SF stations follow KTVU's sobering tone. Meanwhile, in Boston, flash and flair tabloid style approaches at WHDH, WCVB, and to an extent WFXT seem to be what works there, while WBZ, which has usually carried a sober and understated approach to their news product, has struggled for some time.

 

Has WCVB gotten that tabloid-y lately? I just figured they did their own thing while WSVN North continues to beat WBZ. Which is also odd because I thought that WHDH was third in the ratings for the longest time because the over-the-top WSVN approach wasn't working. I wonder what changed?

[C Block 1488]

I don't know, and this is why I try to avoid talking about markets that I don't live in or know much about. I remember reading an article in the Boston Globe a few years ago when WBZ was trying to move away from the CBS branding, and it said that WBZ had struggled because they didn't go for a flashy format like many of the Boston stations. Perhaps that has changed now. What I can tell you from the Bay Area is that most of the stations here try to avoid hyperbole and ostentation, and they mostly follow market leader KTVU's down-the-middle approach. WFXT has little to worry about with being in Cox's hands, much less being hijacked by some imaginary, ultra-leftist news agenda.

[bostonmediaguy 123]

 

I don't know, and this is why I try to avoid talking about markets that I don't live in or know much about. I remember reading an article in the Boston Globe a few years ago when WBZ was trying to move away from the CBS branding, and it said that WBZ had struggled because they didn't go for a flashy format like many of the Boston stations. Perhaps that has changed now. What I can tell you from the Bay Area is that most of the stations here try to avoid hyperbole and ostentation, and they mostly follow market leader KTVU's down-the-middle approach. WFXT has little to worry about with being in Cox's hands, much less being hijacked by some imaginary, ultra-leftist news agenda.

 

What's interesting is that WBZ was winning with the format of hard news and toned-down graphics between 2008 and 2011. The audience was highly educated and highly affluent; and was beating the other stations. For whatever reason, the whole thing was abandoned in late 2011.

[24994J 5277]

KTVU is a very safe newscast in terms of content and presentation. Everything is down the middle, objective, and fair

Yeah, so liberal.

[TennTV1983 748]

 

It's funny that Cox is entering a market that is still led (in most cases) by WMC - a station that, thanks to Bert Ellis, became the ultimate copycat of WSB's on-air look.

 

I know it wouldn't happen. But what if Cox and Raycom were to trade WMC and WHBQ?

 

Used to be led by WMC, don't you mean? They have become a solid second-place station behind market leader, WREG, in virtually all time slots as of late.

 

Cox is not going to pass up on an opportunity to make WHBQ competitive again, so any idea of a Cox/Raycom trade happening in Memphis is a pipe dream at best.

 

 

I've got a better what if: They take the ABC affiliation away from Ch. 24.

 

Not likely, unless Nexstar really screws things up with the ABC network in terms of affiliation agreements, and I don't think they want a repeat of WTVW when they lost Fox (which is now on a subchannel of WEVV).

 

 

As much as 24 has been a laugher over the years, it's better now than ever.

 

Though WPTY really, really got off to an inauspicious start with its news. It was positively horrendous.

 

They were trying to do something new and non-traditional back in 1995 as a startup newscast, which for a while earned them some respect from the Associated Press, but their last few years as WPTY were a joke, necessitating the need for Nexstar to blow it up and start over from scratch as WATN.

 

 

If anyone has watched Cox's mother-ship station WSB-TV it soo not conservative but liberal and the company itself is liberal. Daddy Cox James M. Cox founding father and former Ohio Governor was a Democratic, which means nothing.

 

However I've always held this company and their stations to high regards and a great company. Yes they have that if it not broke don't fix it mentality, but all in all. It no Sinclair!

 

 

As for Cox owning FOX 13 they might do some upgrades, but after a few years sell the station.

 

I seriously doubt that will happen. Cox will be in it for the long haul at WHBQ, otherwise they wouldn't have acquired stations in Tulsa and Jacksonville.

[cbs2newengland 71]

We'll see what Cox can do with WFXT, maybe I am clueless on this subject. I thought I knew the market enough (and the respective station) to put out a concern with a new owner.

 

Anyways that's all I have left to say on this subject...

[cbs2newengland 71]

 

What's interesting is that WBZ was winning with the format of hard news and toned-down graphics between 2008 and 2011. The audience was highly educated and highly affluent; and was beating the other stations. For whatever reason, the whole thing was abandoned in late 2011.

 

and what's this source from? Are you a secret WBZ staffer? I've actually wanted to ask this directly (now I might have a chance...)

[bostonmediaguy 123]

 

and what's this source from? Are you a secret WBZ staffer? I've actually wanted to ask this directly (now I might have a chance...)

 

I'm not sure what a secret staffer is. Either way, I will not reveal my employer.

 

This information is public knowledge. If you're interested, I would suggest searching news archives of both the Globe and Herald, or news releases from WBZ.