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

[Rusty Muck 4174]

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.

Here's the funny thing. Cox Media as we know it started when the aforementioned Governor Cox purchased a small station in Oil City, Pennsylvania (to the northeast of Youngstown) and successfully relocated it to Dayton, relaunching it as WHIO 1290. Because Cox was a former governor, he had some political pull to make the move.

 

The only part of the company that I would say operates with a conservative agenda is their chain of talk radio stations, led of course by WSB 750/95.5 (not including their respective news departments).

[Rusty Muck 4174]

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 thought WMC still led in some periods, with WREG leading in others. My bad.

 

I knew such a swap wouldn't happen anyway... I just thought it would be funny because of the fact that WMC blatantly ripped off WSB's logo and on-air appearance (as did all the other stations in Burt Ellis' chain) because Bert was so enamored with WSB.

[cbs2newengland 71]

 

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.

 

A secret staffer comes off as a pompous ass and deflect the attention elsewhere, and one that posts anonymous statements saying everything nice about local station's format and question (or speak negatively) about a group's format. And also WBZ is very private to the public, most notably claiming "personnel" matters when the ND was unexpectedly got let go recently. I don't intend to profile people, but I'm really disappointed of your honesty.

 

If people think I am nutty making statements about KTVU being liberal, ok I'll rescind the political part. TVNT isn't the forum for politics, but I will standby the liberal style format (which involves theme packages graphics, etc), the allegedly "middle" of the road reporting, but the Affluenza ridden communities shouldn't be the focus. WBZ winning in the snobby audience is not surprising given how European the graphics looked and how progressive the theme package was towards a traditional news format. Their format again was a stab to the heart of the working people who aren't "in the bubble" or has that "full name"/Do-You-Know-Who-The-Hell-I-Am? crowd.

 

Again I'll say this for the last time, Boston is suburban DMA. Boston goes to sleep at 8:00 in most neighborhoods, is that the area you want to cover only less than a million people and the audience that doesn't watch the news like they used to?

[bostonmediaguy 123]

 

A secret staffer comes off as a pompous ass and deflect the attention elsewhere, and one that posts anonymous statements saying everything nice about local station's format and question (or speak negatively) about a group's format. And also WBZ is very private to the public, most notably claiming "personnel" matters when the ND was unexpectedly got let go recently. I don't intend to profile people, but I'm really disappointed of your honesty.

 

If people think I am nutty making statements about KTVU being liberal, ok I'll rescind the political part. TVNT isn't the forum for politics, but I will standby the liberal style format (which involves theme packages graphics, etc), the allegedly "middle" of the road reporting, but the Affluenza ridden communities shouldn't be the focus. WBZ winning in the snobby audience is not surprising given how European the graphics looked and how progressive the theme package was towards a traditional news format. Their format again was a stab to the heart of the working people who aren't "in the bubble" or has that "full name"/Do-You-Know-Who-The-Hell-I-Am? crowd.

 

Again I'll say this for the last time, Boston is suburban DMA. Boston goes to sleep at 8:00 in most neighborhoods, is that the area you want to cover only less than a million people and the audience that doesn't watch the news like they used to?

 

My reputation on this board speaks for itself.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

A secret staffer comes off as a pompous ass and deflect the attention elsewhere, and one that posts anonymous statements saying everything nice about local station's format and question (or speak negatively) about a group's format. And also WBZ is very private to the public, most notably claiming "personnel" matters when the ND was unexpectedly got let go recently. I don't intend to profile people, but I'm really disappointed of your honesty.

 

If people think I am nutty making statements about KTVU being liberal, ok I'll rescind the political part. TVNT isn't the forum for politics, but I will standby the liberal style format (which involves theme packages graphics, etc), the allegedly "middle" of the road reporting, but the Affluenza ridden communities shouldn't be the focus. WBZ winning in the snobby audience is not surprising given how European the graphics looked and how progressive the theme package was towards a traditional news format. Their format again was a stab to the heart of the working people who aren't "in the bubble" or has that "full name"/Do-You-Know-Who-The-Hell-I-Am? crowd.

 

Again I'll say this for the last time, Boston is suburban DMA. Boston goes to sleep at 8:00 in most neighborhoods, is that the area you want to cover only less than a million people and the audience that doesn't watch the news like they used to?

What exactly makes KTVU "liberal"?

[C Block 1488]

 

If people think I am nutty making statements about KTVU being liberal, ok I'll rescind the political part. TVNT isn't the forum for politics, but I will standby the liberal style format (which involves theme packages graphics, etc), the allegedly "middle" of the road reporting, but the Affluenza ridden communities shouldn't be the focus.

 

But KTVU does not have a liberal bias, and you have yet to show specific instances where their reporting has been overly biased, and that's likely because you don't live here and have never watched KTVU. Instead, you've pointed to the graphics being "liberal," which is not only laughable considering how traditional KTVU's navy and blue graphics actually are, but also because graphics are the most apolitical and meaningless part of any newscast. You realize that graphics aren't even made or determined by the news department? That creative services departments have hardly any editorial control whatsoever? That graphics have no bearing on the content of a newscast?

 

This isn't to say that a news outlet's presentation isn't unimportant, but graphics are probably the worst metric anyone could use to determine whether a newsroom is biased. Even then, most local newscasts in this country are not biased in the way some national outlets are. In most cases in which stations or station groups have tried to cover local news with political slants, they have usually failed and have gone back to objective reporting. This is even true in FTS' experiments in the last decade or Sinclair's occasional election spins. Biased local news reporting usually doesn't work, it can't be found at KTVU, it can't really be found in CMG, and it certainly can't be found in the style of any particular stations' graphics. There's more to a newscast than just graphics.

[Jess 1110]

If there's an overall bias to news coverage, it's a conservative one, not a liberal one. It's pro-corporation, pro-business, etc. at least in my opinion. There's too little coverage of world news or real politics. San Fran might have the liberal label slapped on it because it's one of the most progressive areas of the country, technologically and socially. But that newscast is straight, down the middle, well-produced.

 

What I really worry in Fox taking over KTVU is that they're not as quality minded. Cox, Comcast, and ABC have seemed to be "okay, what can we do to put the best possible product on our air?" Fox is more "okay, what's the barest minimum we have to do for picture and sound to come out on channel five?"

[DirtyHarry 719]

 

If there's an overall bias to news coverage, it's a conservative one, not a liberal one. It's pro-corporation, pro-business, etc. at least in my opinion. There's too little coverage of world news or real politics. San Fran might have the liberal label slapped on it because it's one of the most progressive areas of the country, technologically and socially. But that newscast is straight, down the middle, well-produced.

 

What I really worry in Fox taking over KTVU is that they're not as quality minded. Cox, Comcast, and ABC have seemed to be "okay, what can we do to put the best possible product on our air?" Fox is more "okay, what's the barest minimum we have to do for picture and sound to come out on channel five?"

 

I was curious what a Fox O&O's schedule looks like so I went to WJBK's website. What I saw there was news, news, news, news, news ... trashy talk shows ... news, news, news, news, news ... 1 1/2 hours of syndicated programming ... two hours of Fox prime time ... news. That's a lot of news they have to generate. Do most American cities have enough news to fill that many hours? I don't think so.

 

But this goes back to a comment I made last year. Is Fox really a network or is it a chain of O&O stations heavy on local news?

[detroiter313 178]

 

I was curious what a Fox O&O's schedule looks like so I went to WJBK's website. What I saw there was news, news, news, news, news ... trashy talk shows ... news, news, news, news, news ... 1 1/2 hours of syndicated programming ... two hours of Fox prime time ... news. That's a lot of news they have to generate. Do most American cities have enough news to fill that many hours? I don't think so.

 

Try Tribune-owned, Fox-affiliate (and former Fox O&O) WJW in Cleveland, they have 65½ hours of news each week, more than Fox O&O WJBK (with 63½ hours of news) and Sunbeam-owned WSVN in Miami (with 61½ hours of news)

[ns8401 846]

I was curious what a Fox O&O's schedule looks like so I went to WJBK's website. What I saw there was news' date=' news, news, news, news ... trashy talk shows ... news, news, news, news, news ... 1 1/2 hours of syndicated programming ... two hours of Fox prime time ... news. That's a lot of news they have to generate. Do most American cities have enough news to fill that many hours? I don't think so.[/font']

 

But this goes back to a comment I made last year. Is Fox really a network or is it a chain of O&O stations heavy on local news?

More of a chain of stations with 2 hours of new material in prime time and some sports. News and trashy stuff otherwise. Often the news is a poor product to boot. You would think with over 60 hours it would be better. It sure isn't lack of practice that makes it terrible.

[DirtyHarry 719]

 

More of a chain of stations with 2 hours of new material in prime time and some sports. News and trashy stuff otherwise. Often the news is a poor product to boot. You would think with over 60 hours it would be better. It sure isn't lack of practice that makes it terrible.

 

What's interesting to me is that Fox has been in business almost 30 years now and they are still nothing much more than two hours in primetime.

[Rusty Muck 4174]

Try Tribune-owned, Fox-affiliate (and former Fox O&O) WJW in Cleveland, they have 65½ hours of news each week, more than Fox O&O WJBK (with 63½ hours of news) and Sunbeam-owned WSVN in Miami (with 61½ hours of news)

Following their launch of an 11pm newscast tonight (June 30), and with a 7pm newscast set to debut in September, WXIN in Indianapolis will leap ahead of WJBK to tie WJW for the most amount of news by a station in the United States with 65½ hours per week.

 

If you want to know what station has the most news output in North America, that honor goes to CHCH in Hamilton/Toronto. That station has a mind-boggling 76½ HOURS PER WEEK!

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

What's interesting to me is that Fox has been in business almost 30 years now and they are still nothing much much more than two hours in primetime.

 

The power that Fox Sports has on an entire network.

[Rusty Muck 4174]

What's interesting to me is that Fox has been in business almost 30 years now and they are still nothing much much more than two hours in primetime.

They have tried programming in the 9am hour several times, the last two of which (a national rendition of "Good Day LA" and "The Morning Show with Mike & Juliet") were directly syndicated by 20th Television. Chevy Chase's historical six-week failure as a late night host in 1993 ensures to this day that Fox will never program anything in the 11pm-12am slot.

 

And Fox Kids had a three-hour daytime block that existed from the late 80s until Fox sold the entire division off to Disney/ABC.

 

Outside of that, what really is there to program? A national breakfast television program would be a non-starter BECAUSE the local affiliates and O&Os have had so much success with local morning shows. A block of network-offered daytime talk strips and court shows (which is all that is available, as soap operas continue their gradual vanishing act) would be a downgrade from the lucrative talk strips and court shows that Fox O&Os and affiliates can contract to air. And a national network newscast would be a simple exercise in diminishing returns, would take viewers away from Fox News, and would unfairly tie the Fox Broadcasting Company affiliates with the Fox News Channel.

 

So yeah... two hours of prime time only sounds about right.

[TexasTVNews 1366]

 

They have tried programming in the 9am hour several times, the last two of which (a national rendition of "Good Day LA" and "The Morning Show with Mike & Juliet") were directly syndicated by 20th Television.

 

You mean Good Day Live (In my opinion, my favorite show to watch and I still miss it). Wish Good Day Live was back on the air, only this time have show based in NY instead of LA.

[Jess 1110]

Simple.

 

Fox is a hard-core pornographic channel. It evolved gradually from a regular network in 1993, and by 2010 was the hot, nasty pornographic action we all love today.

 

Fox's major competition is CNNBCBS, A division of the Walt Disney Company.

 

...oh wait, that's one of my top ten episodes of The Simpsons. My bad.

[C Block 1488]

 

What I really worry in Fox taking over KTVU is that they're not as quality minded. Cox, Comcast, and ABC have seemed to be "okay, what can we do to put the best possible product on our air?" Fox is more "okay, what's the barest minimum we have to do for picture and sound to come out on channel five?"

 

That's a shame, because I don't always remember FTS being that way. I grew up watching KDVR transform from a blip on the dial to completely overtaking the established KWGN in less than a decade. In less than five years after Fox bought KDVR, it built what is probably still the highest quality broadcasting facility in the state, started a news department

with high profile talent, and executed it with a design that looks leaps and bounds ahead of the standardized stuff that replaced it later on. They were a little heavy on crime and slimy investigative pieces, and it was a mistake in hindsight to have made Tom Martino the centerpiece of the news operation, but it was still a quality broadcast that was very exciting, fresh, and big budget. And from what I know, this was a pretty common trend in Fox investing heavily into its O&Os in the late 90s/early 2000s. Fox didn't seem so scary or poor quality back then. I don't know when FTS started to decline in quality, but it must have been around the same time they sold KDVR and all the other stations to Local TV, because they were spared from a lot of the ill-conceived on-air experiments that tried to mimic FNC on a local level, and even today, whenever I see something from a Fox O&O, the reporting isn't necessarily bad, but their news operations look tired and neglected. I'm not sure how accurate that assessment is, but I consider KDVR to be lucky being in Tribune's hands now and to have been sold when it was. The lack of investment into their own stations is what worries me the most about KTVU's sale.

[sanewsguy 509]

 

That's a shame, because I don't always remember FTS being that way. I grew up watching KDVR transform from a blip on the dial to completely overtaking the established KWGN in less than a decade. In less than five years after Fox bought KDVR, it built what is probably still the highest quality broadcasting facility in the state, started a news department

with high profile talent, and executed it with a design that looks leaps and bounds ahead of the standardized stuff that replaced it later on. They were a little heavy on crime and slimy investigative pieces, and it was a mistake in hindsight to have made Tom Martino the centerpiece of the news operation, but it was still a quality broadcast that was very exciting, fresh, and big budget. And from what I know, this was a pretty common trend in Fox investing heavily into its O&Os in the late 90s/early 2000s. Fox didn't seem so scary or poor quality back then. I don't know when FTS started to decline in quality, but it must have been around the same time they sold KDVR and all the other stations to Local TV, because they were spared from a lot of the ill-conceived on-air experiments that tried to mimic FNC on a local level, and even today, whenever I see something from a Fox O&O, the reporting isn't necessarily bad, but their news operations look tired and neglected. I'm not sure how accurate that assessment is, but I consider KDVR to be lucky being in Tribune's hands now and to have been sold when it was. The lack of investment into their own stations is what worries me the most about KTVU's sale.

 

I think you can blame Jack Abernethy.

 

[Rusty Muck 4174]

Simple.

 

Fox is a hard-core pornographic channel. It evolved gradually from a regular network in 1993, and by 2010 was the hot, nasty pornographic action we all love today.

 

Fox's major competition is CNNBCBS, A division of the Walt Disney Company.

 

...oh wait, that's one of my top ten episodes of The Simpsons. My bad.

I wish I could "like" this post a thousand times.

[WXmanTim 88]

I think you can blame Jack Abernethy.

 

I guess he should be considered the Jeff Zucker of Newscorp.

[justin2kx 229]

 

They have tried programming in the 9am hour several times, the last two of which (a national rendition of "Good Day LA" and "The Morning Show with Mike & Juliet") were directly syndicated by 20th Television. Chevy Chase's historical six-week failure as a late night host in 1993 ensures to this day that Fox will never program anything in the 11pm-12am slot.

 

And Fox Kids had a three-hour daytime block that existed from the late 80s until Fox sold the entire division off to Disney/ABC.

 

Outside of that, what really is there to program? A national breakfast television program would be a non-starter BECAUSE the local affiliates and O&Os have had so much success with local morning shows. A block of network-offered daytime talk strips and court shows (which is all that is available, as soap operas continue their gradual vanishing act) would be a downgrade from the lucrative talk strips and court shows that Fox O&Os and affiliates can contract to air. And a national network newscast would be a simple exercise in diminishing returns, would take viewers away from Fox News, and would unfairly tie the Fox Broadcasting Company affiliates with the Fox News Channel.

 

So yeah... two hours of prime time only sounds about right.

 

Good Day Live was by far one of the best daytime shows to watch ever, no hyperbole. I agree with TexasTVNews. Bring it Back with the OG cast (Steve, dorothy, and Jillian if allowed or through different company or have Greg and Rosanna from NY to do it, they deserve it)

 

About soap operas, if there was any indication that soaps are going by the wayside of westerns and playhouse and variety shows, this year's hot mess (which is an insult imo to other hot messes of which i'm sure they don't even want to be compared to) that is the daytime emmy awards would prove that no network (broadcast or cable) would want it and leave it on buffering livestream, as it should be, and even that is wasting bandwith.

 

Edit: just search Daytime emmys 2014 for clips to see what i'm talking about since livestream full show is down.

 

OT but my prediction of next soap to get axed: (unpredictable yes but) Days of our lives. Just saying. Back to the topic.

[rkolsen 1679]

OT but my prediction of next soap to get axed: (unpredictable yes but) Days of our lives. Just saying. Back to the topic.

 

Oh boy - I wonder what format the future fifth hour of the Today Show will take on? I honestly doubt they would give that time back to affiliates - maybe a strip of a news magazine ( I am still mourning the loss of Rock Center and wished msnbc or cnbc picked it up).

 

Anyway back to Cox/Fox talk.

[NEOMatrix 1295]

A bigger question would be the future of WHBQ. There's no doubt that Cox will put a ton of investment into Fox 13, but let's see if Fox 13 turns into a "KTVU Memphis".

[Samantha 2878]

 

A bigger question would be the future of WHBQ. There's no doubt that Cox will put a ton of investment into Fox 13, but let's see if Fox 13 turns into a "KTVU Memphis".

 

That's not going to happen. Cox has experience running successful stations in the South, in places like Atlanta and Charlotte. They also now have Tulsa, which isn't that far away.

 

Cox is going to take a different approach to WHBQ which really comes out the winner. Cox will probably soften out the areas that were thinly run under Fox (personnel, mostly).

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

That's not going to happen. Cox has experience running successful stations in the South, in places like Atlanta and Charlotte. They also now have Tulsa, which isn't that far away.

 

Cox is going to take a different approach to WHBQ which really comes out the winner. Cox will probably soften out the areas that were thinly run under Fox (personnel, mostly).

 

How do you think they'll handle WFXT? The Northeast is the wilderness for Cox and outside of KTVU, KFOX, and the few they picked up from CC, they don't have much of a record with Fox stations.