Sinclair, Tribune Close to Merger Deal

[Eat News 4738]

. Who the heck watches Tennis Channel anyway?

 

Tennis fans...

 

And Former NFL viewers.

[CalItalian2 163]

Rumors that Sin-Don't Care could hire Bill O'Relly to host a 2 hour show on WGN America have been reignited by the "failing" New York Times: http://deadline.com/2017/10/bill-oreilly-sinclar-broadcasting-back-on-air-harassment-settlement-1202194564/

Don't believe everything you read...this story is one of them. This is an anti-Sinclair hit piece.

[The Frog 393]

Don't believe everything you read...this story is one of them. This is an anti-Sinclair hit piece.

No kidding. The comments are hilarious...someone compared this to women losing the right to vote. Very Myron Falwell-esque.

[hmaxhanson 650]

Don't believe everything you read...this story is one of them. This is an anti-Sinclair hit piece.

 

Says the guy who wants KTLA to become Sinclair-ized.....

[Rusty Muck 4167]

Don't believe everything you read...this story is one of them. This is an anti-Sinclair hit piece.

Uh-huh. That means Lisa de Morales is telling the truth and you, generic Republican, are not.

 

Sinclair is asking for trouble here by openly declaring war on one half of the populace. They deserve to be boycotted, attacked, vilified and blackballed into oblivion by that one half when they hire this sicko. It will be a mammoth revenue and public relations disaster from a company who already has a Russian stooge spouting off fascist talking points nightly.

 

Grab em by the wallet.

[Rusty Muck 4167]

Tennis fans...

 

And Former NFL viewers.

All twelve of them.

[Rusty Muck 4167]

The FCC has no authority to raise or modify the ownership cap. Only Congress does.

Congress can’t agree on tying their own shoes, even with being in firm GOP control. That’s why Paid Off reinstated the UHF discount because it was the only thing he had the authority to do. (Like when he’ll kill off Net Neutrality because Comcast and AT&T slip a few Benjamins and “incentives” his way.)

 

The inherent problem with thinking that a network can get as big as Sinclair is now an impossibly unless they all pool to engineer a hostile takeover and carve-up of Sinclair. Otherwise ... how can they buy their own affiliates?

 

But if Chris Ruddy really has Trump’s ear (SNERK!) ... if that argument against the merger works, then so be it.

[tyrannical bastard 3468]

...and now Pai wants to allow top 4 duopolies on a "case by case" basis...REGARDLESS of the number of stations...

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/108395/pai-invites-tv-duopolies-into-every-market

 

I see it as the "shack up with the FOX/CW" rule, because such a combination allows news operations to compete at different times of the day, with 7-9 and 9/10pm newscasts being in prime slots along with the usual AM/Noon/5/6/10/11 slots...

 

It allows instant duopolies with many of Sinclair's shells like WTTE, WVAH, WRGT, etc...legitimizing the grandfathered LMA's they've lived under ever since they tried that game...

[broadcastfan9751 136]

...and now Pai wants to allow top 4 duopolies on a "case by case" basis...REGARDLESS of the number of stations...

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/108395/pai-invites-tv-duopolies-into-every-market

 

I see it as the "shack up with the FOX/CW" rule, because such a combination allows news operations to compete at different times of the day, with 7-9 and 9/10pm newscasts being in prime slots along with the usual AM/Noon/5/6/10/11 slots...

 

It allows instant duopolies with many of Sinclair's shells like WTTE, WVAH, WRGT, etc...legitimizing the grandfathered LMA's they've lived under ever since they tried that game...

 

I wonder if Sinclair will try to use this as an excuse for keeping the Indy duopoly intact, since it complied with the rules when Tribune acquired WTTV/WTTK from Sinclair in 2002.

[JCB4TV 333]

Hence, as mentioned a hubbing would make no difference there. That is also true in a bunch of other Sinclair markets.

What gets me on this is the issue in Scranton where Sinclair only operates WOLF and its sisters, therefore, can we theorize that if/when Sinclair takes WNEP, can WNEP take over production of WOLF's newscasts, assuming that its not hubbed to New York?

[GoldenShine9 1509]

Uh-huh. That means Lisa de Morales is telling the truth and you, generic Republican, are not.

 

Sinclair is asking for trouble here by openly declaring war on one half of the populace. They deserve to be boycotted, attacked, vilified and blackballed into oblivion by that one half when they hire this sicko. It will be a mammoth revenue and public relations disaster from a company who already has a Russian stooge spouting off fascist talking points nightly.

 

Grab em by the wallet.

 

I've heard from others that the Tribune stations are seeing an exodus of talent, both in front of and behind the camera, and jobs are having a hard time being filled.

[Samantha 2878]

I've heard from others that the Tribune stations are seeing an exodus of talent, both in front of and behind the camera, and jobs are having a hard time being filled.

 

The buyer being Sinclair might exacerbate it, but I can see this being an issue in any lengthy M&A. There have certainly been some drawn-out mergers in recent years in this industry.

[Rusty Muck 4167]

The buyer being Sinclair might exacerbate it, but I can see this being an issue in any lengthy M&A. There have certainly been some drawn-out mergers in recent years in this industry.

Especially an M&A that is this incredibly politically charged. If you're a Republican, you're praising it without any thought. If you're not a Republican, you're systematically condemning it and all the people allowing it to proceed.

 

I've heard from others that the Tribune stations are seeing an exodus of talent, both in front of and behind the camera, and jobs are having a hard time being filled.

Staffers at stations like WPIX, KTLA, WJW and WGN are no doubt taking stock of their lives, and if they can flee this sinking ship, they will.

[Breaking News 802]

From FTVLive.com

 

There is no doubt that Sinclair has FCC boss Ajit Pai in their hip pocket and Pai will do just about anything for his friends at Sinclair.

 

Yesterday, Pai told at House oversight hearing that he wants to relax the local broadcast ownership rules would allow a broadcaster to own two TV stations in any market, regardless of size, and, in some cases, both stations could be Big Four network affiliates.

 

Of course, this would make it easier for Sinclair when they take over the Tribune stations. There was word that Sinclair would have to sell off some stations in markets where the ownership rules would not allow it. But, thanks to their lapdog Pai, that will no longer be the case.

 

Pai also said that the proposal will say that joint sales agreement do not count against the local two-to-a-market cap.

 

In other words, Pai is handing Sinclair the Tribune stations on a silver platter.

 

Ajit Pai is going to ruin the TV business and turn the entire industry into a monopoly.

 

And at this point, Sinclair owns Boardwalk and Park Place.

 

 

From Newsblues.com

 

PAI'S FOLLY

 

 

First it was dumping the "main studio" rule.

Get ready for another nail to be driven into the coffin of local tv. Especially news

 

FCC Chair Ajit Pai yesterday unveiled plans to lift restrictions on local broadcast ownership rules.

 

Speaking to the House Communications Subcommittee, Pai said the Commission would vote on a measure to allow a broadcaster to own two TV stations in any market, regardless of size, and, in some cases, both stations could be Big Four network affiliates.

 

With a straight face, he framed the proposal in First Amendment terms. “If you believe as I do that the federal government has no business intervening in the news, then we must stop the federal government from intervening in the news business.”

 

The rules currently prohibit ownership of two stations in markets with fewer than eight independently owned stations — that is, small markets. They also ban ownership of two top-four-rated stations, typically the Big Four affiliates, in all markets, regardless of size.

 

Pai said that in advance of a November 16 commission meeting, an entire draft of the proposal would be released. At that meeting, a vote would be taken.

He added that the proposal will say that joint sales agreements do not count against the local two-to-a-market cap.

The proposal would also eliminate the broadcast-newspaper and radio-TV crossownership rules.

 

That will have the effect of allowing broadcasters to use joint sales agreements to operate — but not own — a third or fourth station in a market.

 

So much for diversity and choice.

 

Imagine a market where Block newspapers control both the local paper and several local tv stations.

 

Imagine a market where you turn the dial and the glowering face of Boris Epshteyn greets you on every channel.

Where every tv news operation in the market works out of the same newsroom- maybe not even in your city, offering up a homogenized, standardized set of "news" programs - three newsrooms in one. Fewer jobs with far less diversity.

 

The old dismissive line, "Well if you don't like what you see, just turn the dial" will go the way of that dial.

 

One of Pai’s colleagues isn’t fooled. Speaking before the same subcommittee, Jessica Rosenworcel called for an investigation into what she said is a push for rules changes and polices that seem “custom-built” to benefit the Sinclair Broadcast Group.

“I’m also concerned that if you look at the series of media policy decisions that has been made by this commission, they all seem to serve Sinclair broadcasting’s business plan — from reinstating the UHF discount, to changing the 39% rule that was enacted by Congress, to possibly foisting on all of our households a new broadcast standard for which they own many, many patents.

[T.L. Hughes 751]

One of Pai’s colleagues isn’t fooled. Speaking before the same subcommittee, Jessica Rosenworcel called for an investigation into what she said is a push for rules changes and polices that seem “custom-built” to benefit the Sinclair Broadcast Group.

“I’m also concerned that if you look at the series of media policy decisions that has been made by this commission, they all seem to serve Sinclair broadcasting’s business plan — from reinstating the UHF discount, to changing the 39% rule that was enacted by Congress, to possibly foisting on all of our households a new broadcast standard for which they own many, many patents.

Rosenworcel clearly sees the "if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck and sounds like a duck" issue with Pai and Sinclair. Someday, we're going to find out that David Smith and other Sinclair executives grafted Pai with monetary gifts to do their bidding, and the Trump administration would have to toss him out like they did with Spicer, Bannon, Priebus and Flynn. But how does she plan to convince Congress to investigate this matter? With the GOP in charge, it would have to take the same pressure that was placed to initiate the Russia investigation to get the ball rolling, unless they appoint a special counsel to independently investigate.

[Rusty Muck 4167]

Rosenworcel clearly sees the "if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck and sounds like a duck" issue with Pai and Sinclair. Someday, we're going to find out that David Smith and other Sinclair executives grafted Pai with monetary gifts to do their bidding, and the Trump administration would have to toss him out like they did with Spicer, Bannon, Priebus and Flynn. But how does she plan to convince Congress to investigate this matter? With the GOP in charge, it would have to take the same pressure that was placed to initiate the Russia investigation to get the ball rolling, unless they appoint a special counsel to independently investigate.

And with Sinclair stations firmly committed to using their newscasts as political weaponizing against anyone Not A Republican, they will work to ensure permanent governance by the Republican Party. Paid Off and the Smith KKKlan will get away with everything because they'll control the message and exterminate the opposition.

 

This is how fascism begins. Sinclair hasn't even begun to show off their evil nature.

 

The only wlld card is if the existing special prosecutor Robert Mueller looks at Sinclair and Osama bin Epshteyn. It's obvious they go father back then his hiring this spring.

[hmaxhanson 650]

Alright. Who's ready to move with me to the Philippines?

[GoldenShine9 1509]

What happens in 2021 or 2025 if a Democratic POTUS is elected, could he order the breakup of Sinclair?

[Eat News 4738]

"Dad...That crazy man is talking to himself again."

 

"It's ok...he is just on his bluetooth."

[TennTV1983 743]

What happens in 2021 or 2025 if a Democratic POTUS is elected, could he order the breakup of Sinclair?

What happens if the Democratic Party ceases to exist after 2019 or 2021? I'm afraid by the time we even get to 2020, irreparable damage will have already been done by Drumpf, Pai, and anyone else in the back pocket of the Smith Empire.

 

Once you've opened up Pandora's Box, it's near impossible to put everything back in.

[Rusty Muck 4167]

What happens in 2021 or 2025 if a Democratic POTUS is elected, could he order the breakup of Sinclair?

Sinclair is setting themselves up for a big time backlash from non-Republicans.

 

I find it hard to believe that there are enough Republicans to support agitprop on WPIX and WGN (look at the ratings for conservative talk radio stations in New York City and Chicago; they are all bottom-dwellers with audiences in the 55-dead demo). It may not be that big a deal for WPIX, but a mass audience and advertiser exodus from WGN could be catastrophic for a company with failing stock and significant debt.

 

The real problem is, through this merger, Sinclair is becoming too-big-to-fail. If they collapse financially, what happens then? Will the GOP be motivated to bail them out like Ford and GM? Wouldn’t put it against them.

 

Breaking up an unbreakable company (And how do you do that? Through forced liquidation? Seizure of assets?) may be the last thing to worry about.

[hmaxhanson 650]

What I've been wanting to happen to the big broadcast owners (IHeart, Sinclair, Nexstar, Cumulus) when they go bankrupt is have the company break up into several smaller regional companies, sort of like the old days of ITV. Would that be at all possible?

[Rusty Muck 4167]

What I've been wanting to happen to the big broadcast owners (IHeart, Sinclair, Nexstar, Cumulus) when they go bankrupt is have the company break up into several smaller regional companies, sort of like the old days of ITV. Would that be at all possible?

iHeartMedia and Cumulus are trying to avoid bankruptcy by any means possible. Assuming their luck runs out and they enter bankruptcy, it will most likely be simply a restructuring without an induced breakup.

[T.L. Hughes 751]

What happens in 2021 or 2025 if a Democratic POTUS is elected, could he order the breakup of Sinclair?

Not directly, but the FCC chief he/she would appoint could.

 

Sinclair is setting themselves up for a big time backlash from non-Republicans.

 

I find it hard to believe that there are enough Republicans to support agitprop on WPIX and WGN (look at the ratings for conservative talk radio stations in New York City and Chicago; they are all bottom-dwellers with audiences in the 55-dead demo). It may not be that big a deal for WPIX, but a mass audience and advertiser exodus from WGN could be catastrophic for a company with failing stock and significant debt.

 

The real problem is, through this merger, Sinclair is becoming too-big-to-fail. If they collapse financially, what happens then? Will the GOP be motivated to bail them out like Ford and GM? Wouldn’t put it against them.

 

Breaking up an unbreakable company (And how do you do that? Through forced liquidation? Seizure of assets?) may be the last thing to worry about.

 

Two words: hostile takeover. That's the main way that Sinclair could conceivably be broken up.

 

BTW, maybe we should dial down the influence that an enlarged Sinclair would have. Few of the company's stations are top two outlets as it is; in fact, many of Tribune's stations are outside of the top two as well, and Sinclair's frugality runs the risk of dragging down the ratings of any top-four station they operate, especially in larger markets, if viewers dislike the quality of the broadcasts.

 

Plus, the type of conservative punditry that Sinclair endorses appeals mainly to older voters over the age of 40, and they and other conservative media only put out the red meat for one reason: so Republican voters don't realize the benefits that an egalitarian democracy would grant them, so the rich and big companies like Sinclair can reap in more money for the executives and stockholders while simultaneously bilking the regular Joe. The Republican Party revels in reverse Robin Hooding the working class; the Democratic Party has a similar issue with corruption, but not to the same thinly veiled extent. That's why candidates like Trump and Bernie Sanders resonated with voters during this election, because they weren't part of the "establishment". That's why you have Steve Bannon on the right, and grassroots orgs like Justice Democrats, Brand New Congress and Our Revolution putting in progressive challengers to establishment Dems on the left. Though, obviously, only one side still uses red meat for their base, rather than relying mainly on economic solvency for the working class.

 

But, it fails to realize that younger voters are turned off by the party's red meat rhetoric, especially that which is against gender and racial equality. The effect that Sinclair would have on whether Republicans maintain or retake Congress and the Presidency is about as much as that which Fox News Channel has, modest but a bit overblown when you consider the relatively narrow base of the voting electorate who pays the most attention. In addition to the fact that the audience for local news is getting increasingly older, Sinclair is taking advantage of that first fact. News consumption among younger viewers is increasingly shifting toward digital, even as younger viewers begin supplementing OTT content with traditional OTA television.

 

But Sinclair and the NAB's justification for wanting ownership rules relaxed blatantly ignores the fact that local media is fairly concentrated within any given area, and not every market has a independent local news organization online that is not connected to existing print and broadcast media. Their justification is based on greed and greed only, because local media's only major competitors on the digital side are national news sites. But most national news orgs don't provide localized content beyond weather. That's why having a diverse array of local media platforms makes sense, because people still and more often want to find out what's going on in their area.

 

The bigger effect will be felt by consumers who may see Sinclair stations gone from cable and satellite providers they get into retrans fights with, and incremental increases in their cable and satellite bills when Sinclair strongarms them into paying what they want (or approximately thereof). That would hasten the cord-cutting phenomenon already occurring in a trickling basis. Some advertisers would also pay group rates for buying ad time, which would cause station owners that don't (want to) run more than two stations in the same market to potentially lose a portion of the revenue they receive from advertising; but that runs the risk of pricing out small businesses who wish to use local TV to reach potential customers.

[MidwestTV 1173]

Not directly, but the FCC chief he/she would appoint could.

 

The FCC has the authority to do this? Break up mega companies?