Is Local Television News Going the Way of SportsCenter?

Good luck, Mile High. First the Rocky, then someplace else that closed down, then the Orange County Register and now this. Holy Christ, you have had a terrible run.

 

A question.

I read that one motivation for this deal is that Sinclair wanted more Fox stations so they could be in a stronger bargaining position with Fox when they next negotiate network affiliation contracts. Sinclair is noted for not spending money on stations. Why doesn't Fox either buy some UHF religious station and transfer it's programming in Sinclair markets?

 

I just wonder how Sinclair has the money and credit to pull this off. Four years ago, they finally bought decent large market stations in the Albritton and Fisher deals.

Until then nearly all of their shops were third place newsrooms. Those don't make any money.

Now they will have competitive stations in many solid markets. What sucks is that this will take another option off the table for advancing on.

I would have worked for: Tribune, Media General, Lin, Fisher, Albritton. Now they're all under Sinclair or Nexstar. Gannett/Tegna has gotten worse and are constantly cutting budgets.

 

When an outfit like Sinclair is buying Tribune it is a bad sign for the industry. It's like Singleton buying up struggling papers. The strategy is to squeeze every ounce of profit out of properties - not to grow the product. I don't know if the current generation of Sinclair is running things just figures they can use the properties to boost their wealth, then discard them when there is nothing less to glean. You have to think if there was growth potential, other entities (publicly traded ones) would have outbid them. They bought Tribune for almost $4 billion, sinclair grossed $2 billion last year, netting $200 mill. It's estimated worth is $400m.
They can't afford this purchase, everyone knows it.

 

If they really wanted that stuff, wouldn't PBS' ratings be through the roof?

 

Does anyone know what happened to news rating of the ABC affiliate they bought in Washington after Sinclair bought it?

 

Sinclair can use their market strength to drive harder bargains for carriage fees, sell off excess properties to keep cash flow going, but the reality of local stations is the broadcasting medium has changed. Every thing you air is "competing" against every other show out there. It's one of the reasons daytime TV has been gutted - people home watching TV watch stuff on-demand or on their DVRs, or something streaming. Sinclair can't compete with that and won't. Even if they are the "only game in town" - that strategy hasn't helped newspapers much.

 

I should have been more clear.

People SAY they want the high-minded journalism but they don't really watch it. Viewers want trash and flash. They say they don't.

 

A long read, but great stuff on the inertia and long-term issues for local TV news, from Columbia Journalism Review:

https://www.cjr.org/local_news/tv-n...il&utm_term=0_d68264fd5e-5cef6228f6-395947541

But in the short term, as the article notes, TV news remains profitable even as its popularity is starting to slump. It's the cash cow for local network affiliates, so they're going to stick with the same "Action News" and "Happy Talk" formats that have ruled the local newcasts for decades.

 

One thing that would crush television news is if importation of prescription drugs was legalized. Big pharma would have to more compete on price and marketing budgets would get slashed.

 

This also depends on markets and regions as well. Go where younger professionals are who don't work in manufacturing and they don't watch local TV news.

The ideal local TV news market is a place with low unemployment but also low percentage of college degrees. Worker bees are the most reliable viewers. Always have been.