Benton RSS Feed
PRIVATE EQUITY: SO WHO ARE THESE GUYS?
[SOURCE: tvnewsday, AUTHOR: Price Colman]
As private equity funds increase their investments in broadcast, the ownership landscape is changing. Get past the network O&Os and the stations owned by old-line newspaper publishers like Scripps, Hearst, Gannett and the Washington Post and it seems the industry is being taken over by the big-money private equity firms. Among the TV groups in their thrall (or soon to be) are Barrington, Nexstar, the New York Times stations, BlueStone, Montecito, Freedom, Ion Media, Clear Channel Television, Tribune, LIN TV and Univision. The names of the private equity owners behind those companies are not so familiar: ABRY, Blackstone, Cerberus, Diamond Castle, HM Capital, Oak Hill, Pilot Group and Providence Equity. And, for the most part, the people who run the funds and ultimately control the stations are unknown in traditional broadcasting circles and to the men and women who actually run the stations. They aren't active in the trade associations, they don't give speeches or sit on panels at TV conventions and they may never have stepped inside of a TV station. Yet, so far, their growing presence in broadcasting has not tripped any alarms, or caused any upheavals in the way business is being done, although a private equity takeover almost invariably means the imposition of great efficiencies—that is, fewer jobs.
http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2007/05/09/daily.2/
Private Equity: So Who Are These Guys?
EIGHT MORE REASONS TO DISTRUST MURDOCH
[SOURCE: Slate, AUTHOR: Jack Shafer]
[Commentary] The Wall Street Journal may not be a perfect newspaper, but its news pages consistently run counter to its economic interests—that is, if the paper can bruise or bloody a misbehaving or corrupt business with a well-reported story, it does. The same goes for advertisers. The same can't be said for Rupert Murdoch, whose $5 billion offer for Dow Jones, which owns the Journal, seems unstoppable.
http://www.slate.com/id/2165839/
* The O'Murdoch factor
Rupert Murdoch's bid to take over the Wall Street Journal is a dramatic illustration of why public ownership is a disaster for newspapers.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/05/09/murdoch/
* Betting Against Murdoch
http://www.nysun.com/article/54080
* The Umpteenth Epistle to the Bancrofts
http://www.observer.com/2007/umpteenth-epistle-bancrofts
* For Clues to a Murdoch-Owned Journal, Look to London
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/09/AR200705...
Eight More Reasons To Distrust Murdoch
CBS-FOX DUOPOLY TAKES SHAPE IN TRAVERSE CITY
[SOURCE: tvnewsday]
Cadillac Telecasting Co. is buying WFQX, the Fox affiliate serving Traverse City-Cadillac, Mich., with the intention of entering into a “shared services agreement†with Heritage Broadcasting Co., under which Heritage will operate the station in tandem with its CBS affiliate in the market, WWTV/WWUP. Since FCC rules prohibit ownership of two stations in small markets like Traverse City, many small-market broadcasters operate so-called duopolies through shared services agreements and other contractual arrangements.
http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2007/05/09/daily.9/
CBS-Fox Duopoly Takes Shape in Traverse City (MI)
ZELL FIRM'S POINT MAN IS BELIEVER IN PAPER PRODUCTS
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: James Rainey]
A look at Bill Pate, a key player as the Chicago firm led by billionaire Sam Zell planned to take Tribune Co. private in an $8.2-billion deal. On Wednesday, Zell joined the board of Tribune, owner of the Los Angeles Times and the third-biggest U.S. newspaper chain by circulation. Pate is expected to join later this year. Pate, Zell and their colleagues at Equity Group Investments have been surprised by the attention the planned transaction has generated, considering that Equity Group has completed deals worth a whole lot more. On the other hand, none of those involved marquee holdings like The Times, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Cubs.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-madill10may10,1,57249...
(requires registration)
* Tribune CEO peppered with questions on Zell deal
http://chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=24934
Zell firm's point man is believer in paper profits
LOCKED OUT: THE LACK OF GENDER AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY ON CABLE NEWS CONTINUES
[SOURCE: Media Matters for America 5/7]
During the recent controversy over former radio and television host Don Imus' remarks about the Rutgers women's basketball team, some cable-news viewers may have noticed something unusual: the presence of significantly more African-Americans. The nature of the controversy led the cable networks to seek comment from a far more diverse group of people than they ordinarily do, which begs the question: To the extent these cable programs included a more diverse guest lineup during the Imus controversy, why do they provide such diversity only when issues of race are in the news cycle? Do cable-news producers view the guests added to the lineup during the Imus controversy as qualified to talk only about issues of race, and not other issues of national and political significance? And did these guests have any lasting effect on the networks' booking practices, or did they return to their old ways as soon as the Imus issue disappeared? To begin to answer these questions, Media Matters for America analyzed the race/ethnicity and gender of the hosts and guests on the major prime-time cable-news programs. This study looks at the guests who appeared on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC during the weeknights before the Imus controversy (Monday, April 2, through Friday, April 6), the weeknights of the Imus controversy (Monday, April 9, through Friday, April 13), and the weeknights following the Imus controversy (Monday, April 23, through Friday, April 27). In total, there are 35 hosts and co-hosts of cable-news programs during these hours. All 35 are white, and 29 of the 35 are male. Whites dominated the guest lists on all three networks in the weeks we examined. All three brought on substantially more African-American guests during the week of the Imus controversy, but largely went back to their white-dominated guest lists following the controversy.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200705070003?f=h_top
http://mediamatters.org/items/200705070003?f=h_top
WHERE'S THE PAPER?
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Robert W. McChesney]
[Commentary] The legendary journalist Ben Badgikian has argued for 25 years that the smartest newspaper publishers would upgrade their commitment to local journalism, downgrade the silly stuff the marketing people promoted, and suffer smaller profits in the near-term to guarantee a growing market down the road. Recent research at the University of Missouri provides supporting evidence for this analysis. Instead, many papers go the opposite route -- gut serious journalism because that costs money (and can antagonize powerful people in their community) and their marketing people tell them the desirable youth demographics (and major advertisers) want sports and entertainment and business and lifestyle news, which is far less expensive to produce. In the near term that equals higher profits. Younger readers over time find they can get this type of information faster and better on line and stop reading daily newspapers. By this time they have less of an understanding of what good local journalism is because they have not been exposed to it. So newspapers find themselves painted into a corner, producing less of the product that makes them distinct and not having nurtured a market for quality local news. But it will be a huge loss if American cities in the digital era do not have multiple newsrooms of well paid journalists competing to cover their communities. It is imperative that we develop policies to make certain we end up there, regardless of what happens to newspapers per se. In the near-term, policies to preserve and promote local (and possibly worker or community) ownership of daily newspapers would be a good start, and then these institutions could be our bridge to the paperless digital newsroom of the future. If we allow our newspapers to continue their downward spiral, and have nothing there to replace them, it will be a tragedy of epic proportions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-dustup9may09,0,7652881.story?c...
(requires registration)
* Can't anyone here play this game?
Glenn Harlan Reynolds responds to McChesney.
Where's the Paper?
AFTRA SEES RED OVER LA POLICE 'BRUTALITY'
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The American Federation of Radio and Television Artists, the union representing media workers, has issued a list of questions it wants answered and actions taken in the wake of the L.A. police's attacks on media workers during the MacArthur Park May 1 demonstration on immigration. Those include a public acknowledgment of wrongdoing by the mayor and police, ongoing training for police, and money. The police have conceded it was an overreaction and have reportedly taken some disciplinary steps.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6440890.html
* See press release: http://www.aftra.org/press/pr_2007_05_08_lamediamelee.html
AFTRA Sees Red Over L.A. Police 'Brutality'
WHERE HAVE THE TV VIEWERS GONE?
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: David Bauder]
ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox have 2.5 million less people watching this Spring than the same time last year. Everyone has a theory to explain the plummeting ratings: early Daylight Savings Time, more reruns, bad shows, more shows being recorded or downloaded or streamed. Scariest of all for the networks, however, is the idea that many people are now making their own television schedules. The industry isn't fully equipped to keep track of them, and as a result the networks are scrambling to hold on to the nearly $8.8 billion they collected during last spring's ad-buying season. The viewer plunge couldn't have come at a worse time for the networks — next week they will showcase their fall schedules to advertisers in the annual "up front" presentations. The networks argue that viewership is changing, not necessarily declining. Some advertisers respond that they are no longer willing to pay full price up front to reach viewers that may not tune in later.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070508/ap_en_bu/tv_missing_viewers
Where have the TV viewers gone?
QWEST RENEWS BID FOR FRANCHISE DEALS
[SOURCE: Denver Post 5/3, AUTHOR: Kimberly S. Johnson and Steve McMillan]
Qwest plans to relaunch its efforts to reach video-franchise agreements with a dozen Colorado cities in the next couple of months. Most of the cities will be in the Denver metro area, but Colorado Springs also will likely be part of Qwest's renewed effort to provide television services. The move comes on the heels of a new Federal Communications Commission order that goes into effect in July and gives companies such as Qwest the right to force cities to make a decision on a video-franchise proposal within 90 days. Comcast, the state's largest cable provider, said it would not try to stop Qwest from gaining local franchise agreements, but continued to stress the importance of offering services to all parts of a local community. Qwest has said it doesn't want to be forced into a video buildout schedule by cities.
http://test.denverpost.com/business/ci_5804655
Qwest renews bid for franchise deals
MYSPACE TO HOST ONLINE TOWN HALL FOR USERS TO QUESTION CANDIDATES
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Jill Lawrence]
A dozen presidential candidates will take part in interactive online town halls with members of the massive social network MySpace, the latest sign of the Internet's growing importance in U.S. political campaigns. MySpace.com, visited by 65 million Americans a month, plans to start the hour-long sessions with individual candidates after Labor Day. They will be physically present at a college campus along with about 200 MySpace members; other members can watch a webcast and submit questions.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070510/a_myspace10.art.htm
MySpace to host online town halls for users to question candidates