Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General TV' started by Weeters, Mar 9, 2018.
For KDNL, anything would be an improvement.
Can that market support another news operation???
If so...then will that newscast be one of upmost quality...or just more crap?
We know crap sells...
And we know sex sells...
When you mix sex with crap you end up with a fetish.
I think STL will be just fine with the current crappy news operations already in town.
Trust this....No operator is going into STL to "make a difference" cuz those days are long gone.
Cannot read-- the Post insists that I subscribe!
It’s been a couple of years since I’ve seen revenue projections for the St. Louis market but for the top 3 stations wasn’t all the great, about on a par with mid 30 market top 3 stations. It’s very doubtful that another news operation would bring in new viewers or new advertising money, it would be taking viewers and advertising money from the other stations.
With St. Louis having low growth and an aging population it’s highly doubtful the market could support another news operation.
You know it's crazy when even a Conservative organization opposes the merger.
Might as well call off the merger and call it a day (or as Chris Ripley suggested just let it die) because this deal has more people against the merger than there are for the merger
As Myron has said, Sinclair isn’t worried because they still got Pai.
Business is not stopped in America by organizations who have agendas. This merger is going through. Period.
Even Newsmax opposed the merger.
I'd be amazed if this merger with THIS amount of opposition from BOTH sides goes through and gets done, regardless of the outcome from the courts related to the UHF Discount (therefore, the merger)
The thing is, now there are more major stakeholders in this besides Sinclair.
A key component of New FOX's strategy and success going forward hinges on it getting those stations once the merger goes through and generating that additional football revenue.
This is quickly becoming one of those "too big to fail" scenarios where a lot of things can go bad and a lot of jobs are at stake if this doesn't proceed. While I personally find that a bit lousy, it may be reason enough to bend the rules and let this go through now.
Are the shareholders of Sinclair against this deal ?
Are any laws being broken ?
Sinclair is doing what the govt is asking for.
So if they comply with request of the govt there is NO reason NOT to grant the transaction.
The "news coverage will suffer" is no longer a valid excuse in the land of the "Information Super-Highway"
There is plenty of news and information available to everyone...and plenty of different views from all over the political spectrum. All available to anyone in the USA for free.
Sinclair skewing right is just tough titties...the vast majority of US broadcasters skew left...that's called freedom of speech.
If the alt-left , antifa, the dems, camp bernie or The Clinton Foundation want to buy a bunch of TV stations to spew the liberal word then there is nothing stopping them.
It's called freedom of speech.
And some of us fought for that right...and some of my friends ( and maybe yours) died for that right.
A right that covers both democrats, republicans...even the commies.
Sinclair may be a bunch of jerks, assholes, bean counters...alt-right...whatever.
But they deserve that same "tolerance" you afford to others in the community.
If Mignon Clyburn does not vote (remember, she resigned recently) should either Brendan Carr or Michael O'Rielly defect from Pai, then it's deadlocked with a 2-2 vote.
Not that I expect a deadlock in the least, but that would be hilarious to witness.
Wow. Usually, Eat, you're the jolly jokester here on TVNT, but now this deal has pushed you over the edge.
Glenn Beck (dba TheBlaze), NewsMax, OANN all oppose it.
My suspicion has been that they really oppose it because Sinclair's business practices and lust for any publicity - as exemplified by the "dangerous to our democracy" forced anchor promo stunt - will make them all look bad as a result and do damage to their respective business models of conservative commentary based on current events.
Look. Boris Epysteyn is going to gush on and on about Trump three times a day on WGN, KTLA and WPIX with some of the homeliest production values possible and in a tone that makes Baghdad Bob look sane. The last thing those group and outlets want is guilt by association with that clown, who will be ascending to a very high-profile role as the main "voice" for Sinclair's unchallengeable political beliefs. To say nothing about any future stunts that Sinclair will inevitably try on their stations as a collective unit.
I'm sorry for being this cynical, but they are far more concerned with their bottom line and how Sinclair's rank amateurism could hurt it. It's not because of a so-called "come to God" moment of enlightenment.
You would think Sinclair would go for some serious production values and make it a bit more upscale (oh there I go being a west coast elite) and not so much aimed at the guns and lite beer crowd.
I have not been exposed to much Sinclair cept for some online Boris. So I actually get to throw some rocks and not have to worry about getting those Sinclair Cooties.
Glenn Beck switched sides and donned a MAGA hat because he needs the money. Same with a bunch of other "news-talkers" who were never trump.
TV Conservatism is Shtick
TV Liberalism is also Shtick.
The idea of an unbiased newscast in this day is wishful.. those days are gone.
Sinclair is hitching it's wagon on the winning side for now.
I sure like winning.
"There is the Home Team...
And The Visitors....
...and they both don't sit on the same side of the arena for a good reason."
Say what you will about Glenn Beck, but he and other Conservatives want to stay underground and not have their brand tarnished by The Bozos from Baltimore. Even they wouldn’t try half the stunts that Sinclair tried.
I assume Boris' shtick is filmed at WBFF. Why they don't make any effort to visually blend those segments into the newscast? Instead it looks like garbage.
And that's really why it will fail spectacularly in the big markets. Why tune in to watch a D-list commentator on a local channel when I can tune in Fox, OANN, NewsMax, or some other conservative outlet that actually gives a tangible effort?
Donning the cynicism hat again, many of those talk show hosts and pundits were simply anti-Trump. They were never pro-Hillary. Again, they thought his campaign would be toxic for their methods of business.
Salem Communications has arguably become far more pro-Trump than Sinclair has (to the point they recently shut down RedState, a website they acquired from anti-Trump pundit Erick Erickson). All their talk radio show hosts are Trump loyalists. We just don't talk about them here cause they don't do TV news, that, and their talk radio stations draw flies for ratings.
It is all about the money. Damn straight.
At this point, I'd take a competent newscast over an unbiased one.
He comes from WJLA, not WBFF. I think Hyman's stuff came from WBFF, though.