Sinclair Thread incl. Tribune Merger

[Wilson]

So, basically, certain groups exercised their free speech in an effort to silence another group's free speech because the second group is saying things they don't like. And it worked.

So instead of a successful company owning the Tribune stations, they revert back to one that had already failed.

This is about a concerned vocal contingent attempting to block sweeping corporate power that looks to be in league with an unelected corporate shill (who happens to be under investigation for his coporate-shilliness by the very agency he heads). I guess there's, maybe, some angle here about the contestation of free speech (which is always in active negotiation), but I think the ethics of this issue center on the gaming of the trust behind local news, especially when it participates in anti-journalist sentiment.

[supersonic]

https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/sincla ... 202876611/

[famicommander]

So, basically, certain groups exercised their free speech in an effort to silence another group's free speech because the second group is saying things they don't like. And it worked.

So instead of a successful company owning the Tribune stations, they revert back to one that had already failed.

This is about a concerned vocal contingent attempting to block sweeping corporate power that looks to be in league with an unelected corporate shill (who happens to be under investigation for his coporate-shilliness by the very agency he heads). I guess there's, maybe, some angle here about the contestation of free speech (which is always in active negotiation), but I think the ethics of this issue center on the gaming of the trust behind local news, especially when it participates in anti-journalist sentiment.

The local news is a consumer product like any other. The stations providing it under the Tribune banner have failed to produce a product people will consume in great enough numbers to sustain the business.

I don't give a rat's ass about "balanced" news coverage. I don't care who's "shilling" what on whose behalf. There is no "right" to have whatever news coverage you deem to be "fair" beamed into your home on someone else's dollar.

The fact of the matter is that the people running Sinclair took their business from one TV station to an empire, and now they're being punished for out-competing other station owners.

To be clear, I don't support any political party or agenda.

But, basically, to me this sounds like a bunch of people are mad that the people on the local news might be talking about things they don't agree with.

Well, tough shit. Change the channel.

[AnHonorableMention]

So, basically, certain groups exercised their free speech in an effort to silence another group's free speech because the second group is saying things they don't like. And it worked.

So instead of a successful company owning the Tribune stations, they revert back to one that had already failed.

This is about a concerned vocal contingent attempting to block sweeping corporate power that looks to be in league with an unelected corporate shill (who happens to be under investigation for his coporate-shilliness by the very agency he heads). I guess there's, maybe, some angle here about the contestation of free speech (which is always in active negotiation), but I think the ethics of this issue center on the gaming of the trust behind local news, especially when it participates in anti-journalist sentiment.

The local news is a consumer product like any other. The stations providing it under the Tribune banner have failed to produce a product people will consume in great enough numbers to sustain the business.

I don't give a rat's ass about "balanced" news coverage. I don't care who's "shilling" what on whose behalf. There is no "right" to have whatever news coverage you deem to be "fair" beamed into your home on someone else's dollar.

The fact of the matter is that the people running Sinclair took their business from one TV station to an empire, and now they're being punished for out-competing other station owners.

To be clear, I don't support any political party or agenda.

But, basically, to me this sounds like a bunch of people are mad that the people on the local news might be talking about things they don't agree with.

Well, tough shit. Change the channel.

You've completely missed the point. I am not affiliated with either party however, news should be delivered with facts and no agenda. There should be zero propaganda mixed into the delivery of news. Sinclair ordering stations to deliver news with a slant is both ridiculous and unprofessional. It's not about tough shit, change the channel, it's about providing the people with unbiased coverage of what's happening around them.

[famicommander]

And who decides what constitutes a fact? What constitutes propaganda? What constitutes a slant?

Ministry of Truth bullshit up in here. There is no such thing as a person without a bias.

Sinclair owns the stations. They used their money to buy them, they pay the bills that keep them going, they pay the staff that does the work. My boss tells me to say or do shit I don't like or agree with every single day. And I do it anyway, because they own the company.

Again, Sinclair is using their property to exercise their right to free speech. You don't have the right to regulate what they do with their property on their time. Nobody does.

[AnHonorableMention]

And who decides what constitutes a fact? What constitutes propaganda? What constitutes a slant?

Ministry of Truth bullshit up in here. There is no such thing as a person without a bias.

Sinclair owns the stations. They used their money to buy them, they pay the bills that keep them going, they pay the staff that does the work. My boss tells me to say or do shit I don't like or agree with every single day. And I do it anyway, because they own the company.

Again, Sinclair is using their property to exercise their right to free speech. You don't have the right to regulate what they do with their property on their time. Nobody does.

Telling people what to say and how to say it, is exactly the opposite of free speech.

[dhads7161]

So just conservative leaning media outlets should catch crap is what your saying? Many outlets are liberal leaning yet do they get nearly as much grief as say SBG or Fox News? Double standard when it comes to media.

[famicommander]

And who decides what constitutes a fact? What constitutes propaganda? What constitutes a slant?

Ministry of Truth bullshit up in here. There is no such thing as a person without a bias.

Sinclair owns the stations. They used their money to buy them, they pay the bills that keep them going, they pay the staff that does the work. My boss tells me to say or do shit I don't like or agree with every single day. And I do it anyway, because they own the company.

Again, Sinclair is using their property to exercise their right to free speech. You don't have the right to regulate what they do with their property on their time. Nobody does.

Telling people what to say and how to say it, is exactly the opposite of free speech.

Free speech is a protection from government censorship. Free speech has nothing to do with what your boss tells you to say or not say on his own airwaves at his own studio with his own equipment.

[Wilson]

a) Ajit Pai decided to push this to administrative court while under investigation by the FCC for possible ties to Sinclair/the Trump administration. This case has always been about corporate footprint and not free speech.

b) Free speech involves power, who gets to wield it and who suffers from it. Legality of free speech is also neutral. It means it values disseminating notions of Islamophobia and anti-journalism as much as critique and assembly. When disenfranchised people push back against the material damage of harmful ideas and information, it cannot be censorious.

c) Right-leaning media are very right-leaning. They don't hire liberal writers, they are not bipartisan, and they increasingly move right (cf. liberal corporate outlets hiring conservative editors at reckless abandon). Of course there is going to be ideological conflict in this arena.

d) Temporarily closed thread. Don't know how we got here. Will open after more information regarding the case/Sinclair.

[Wilson]

Since The thread is closed I'll put this here. It's over

https://www.pwinsider.com/article/11949 ... t.html?p=1

I suppose this saga will truly close if nothing follows from All In Zero Hour being broadcasted from WGN, but what a weird story this has all been.

Write-up from Brian Fung and Tony Rumm at the Washington Post:

Tribune Media said Thursday that it would withdraw from its proposed merger with Sinclair Broadcast Group, while announcing a $1 billion lawsuit against Sinclair over its failed negotiations with federal regulators over the deal.

[...]

In terminating its merger agreement, Tribune on Thursday said that Sinclair had engaged in “unnecessarily aggressive and protracted negotiations” with the government. Tribune said that Sinclair “refused to sell stations in the markets as required to obtain approval, and proposed aggressive divestment structures and related-party sales that were either rejected outright or posed a high risk of rejection and delay — all in derogation of Sinclair’s contractual obligations.”

Speaking later on an earnings call with investors, Tribune executives said the lawsuit seeks a “large number” in damages but did not reveal a specific amount. Kern said he was “extremely pleased” with the state of Tribune in its current form, yet expressed an openness to mergers with other companies in the future.

[The Dragon Saga]

I'm super bummed by this personally. Once again, not living in America and also not really taking much notice of what media says on politics never had me caring much about the stance Sinclair did or did not have on the White House. I'm bummed because this has stumped a Ring of Honor nationally broadcast cable TV show in its tracks.

If they have a pilot and with WWE's success in gaining TV rights from Fox having created such interest I hope they can ship the pilot to various networks and get a show. I'm sure with the MSG buzz and how well the pre-sale has gone they can use that as momentum.

[monster mafia]

what this means for roh guys?

[AlexROH]

what this means for roh guys?

They won't be on Tribune stations (who have lots of stations in important markets like NY) and they won't be on WGN America, which is national tv on digital cable and satellite.

[supersonic]

Observer:

A new move is that Sinclair is in the running to buy the old regional Fox Sports Networks, the sports channels all over the country that cover local market team major sports franchises. Fox was selling to Disney but Disney is unloading, looking at upwards of $20 billion. There are a ton of people looking to purchase those stations which are built around the local sports franchises. Endeavor, the parent company for UFC has interest, as does YouTube Inc., Amazon.com, Inc. and a number of equity firms. Chris Ripley, the CEO of Sinclair, said he felt the networks would be a good fit for their profile

[Wilson]

Kicking this back up because Sinclair is being totally horrific about its call for militarized forces on migrants and refugees. The following link shows must-run being broadcasted to 200 local networks.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/sinclair-ma ... -migrants/

[supersonic]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sinclair ... 19262.html

[Chrisvegas27]

I guess they want to buy Cox communication

[supersonic]

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/sinc ... -agreement

[Chrisvegas27]

I wonder if roh will be on these channels

[supersonic]

Observer:

ROH: Sinclair Broadcasting and Disney have reached an agreement for Sinclair to purchase the old Fox Sports Net stations for $10 billion. The deal is not competed according to FOX because they are looking for equity investors for the stations and it’s still possible Sinclair will be outbid. Most of the Sinclair offer was said t be in cash. Where this relates to ROH is that it would seem t open the door for ROH to be on a number of regional sports networks if Sinclair takes over as owners of those stations. Sinclair had reached an agreement to purchase YES, the New York regional sports network, from Disney, for $3.4 billion, in March..