I’m pretty angry at you Justin. I did exactly as you told me to, I bought the audiobook before listening to your opinions. And then your opinions didn’t upset me at all. I could easily have got the audiobook after the opinions. I can’t believe I did what you asked.
Government has crossed a bridge it should not have. The FCC doesn't exist to control editorial content of programs. Regardless of what the red state affiliates thought/wanted, this is bad.
Justin doesn’t seems to think the FCC behavior is consequential or worth our concern. I am not familiar with their past behavior, but it would be helpful to put in context what they are doing now vs what they have done in the past and if it is stepping over a line.
Why not both? And although I agree with above that the FCC shouldn't make editorial choices, I think you're right about the corporate opportunism here.
I was driving so listened to your opinion before buying that audio book, so, lucky I guess that I liked your take lol
Justin's take that Disney had to go with the affiliates while also acknowledging that the broadcasting is not the money maker that it used to be is quite the paradox. Pointing out that this parallels the Jay Leno vs David Letterman, as if the business was still printing money through broadcasting or that the like often framed with maps after elections “look at that red, there's no way Trump (or any Republican) could have lost the election”; land doesn't vote and broadcasting across all those affiliates are the old and dusted business model and there's no electoral college to generate extra profits from the affiliates.
This weekend my wife and I sat down our kids to have a an uncomfortable discussion, and we decided to cancel our Disney+/Hulu subscription (the only way I ever watched any ABC programming, despite being in the WTNH-New Haven/Hartford media market). They were disappointed and understood that they could watch to their heart's content all the Disney content this Tuesday when they have off from school before the subscription is finished, but they will deal with the competing streaming services Netflix, HBOmax, Apple+, PBS, and we will be free to buy movies and TV shows rather than the all you can eat Disney+. They won't have the childhood fondness for Disney because of this decision to cling to the legacy business model that happens to be an ally of authoritarian politics. Trump, Card, and the MAGA coalition thinks that if they don't get the deference they believe they are entitled to they should throw temper tantrums because of the thin skin that they project onto the left; Target saw year over year loss in revenue that correlated to the boycott, Bud Light saw no difference from the boycott that had Kid Rock as a mascott despite his almost instantly forgot about the boycott seen drinking Bud light and making Fox News appearances wearing a Bud Light hat. The left has shown that they can more effectively withhold their dollars better than the right.
Does Disney want their next business model to be successful or do they want to locked into the dying business model and sticking with broadcast and legacy cable?
The boycott of the next newer business model, or boycott the over-the-air dying last breaths business model, which is more susceptible? I don't think that it would take as many individuals to cancel their subscription for the next earnings call to be problematic.
Wall St analyst: um excuse me, could you please explain the 2% dip in subscribers, isn't the streaming service the future for distribution? You know Netflix despite being saturated showed an increase in revenue.
Bob Igar: yeah but we needed to show our loyalty to the affiliates, who will be consolidating into even fewer firms who each get to leverage their smaller numbers to get better deals for affiliates than they have right now.
WSA: WTF are you talking about? Why should we care about the old affiliate system if we lose market share to competitors in the inevitable next business model!? You know that the advertising dollars is leaving broadcasting, right? You don't even broadcast Monday night football more, that's exclusively streamed or legacy cable providers, so if the American consumer is about to move on from over-the-air and you picked that side to stick to?! Not the new hotness that will be the next way to have customers for a generation?
Igar: yeah, but FCC Chairman threatened the owners of our affiliates so...
WSA: Then go and be an executive for those dinosaurs and resign from Disney. It's not your job to protect the shareholders of Nexstar and Sinclair, it's your job to do right by the shareholders of Disney.
Justin there are two other elements at play here. 1) know your very familiar that Disney lost to governor DeSantis in a fight over the “don’t say gay bill” They Lost the Reedy Creek Improvement District. They have put their appeals on hold while working with the governor who know appoints those on the new Central Florida Tourism Oversight Committee. Disney had their business affected in a major way getting involved in political fight. Sure they don’t want to piss off the party the has so much control over there parks. 2) Nexstar is trying to merge with Tegna which needs FCC approval. Does this have anything to do with their decision to speak up now? They say no and maybe it’s just the markets like you pointed out. Though we are in the time of conspiracy theories and coincidences are hard to ignore. It also helps get your merger approved when you back what the people in power are saying.
My question re: approvals is - what’s different between Trumps first term when his FCC and DOJ approved mergers from many of this companies as they blistered him?
Both Nexstar and Sinclair are beyond the statutory limit of 39% of media markets, so just like TikTok getting several delays to be shuttered, their acquisitions will be approved by the administration and everyone will just ignore what the law actually is. Even if a 21st century Nader's Raider challenged the acquisition in court, I have little faith that the Supreme Court would be true to their principles of original intent just as they threw out racial profiling for private universities and allowed racial profiling to be used by public employees like ICE agents to deprive individuals of due process. Authoritarian regimes don't need to abide by the written laws, they are the authority and can choose what laws to follow and what laws to flout.
while a descent into authoritarianism is possible, it is worthwhile to point out that declining markets (of which broadcast television is) have a history of having market caps eased or erased as they are no longer as powerful as they once were.
Heaton had Senator Phil Graham, and Senator was directly asked about his part of repealing Glass-Steagal Act and Graham with all sincerity said "we did not overturn anything, we just made legal what was already being done". The convoluted reasoning that exists in laws don't have to be abided by whenever it is convenient to your side but if anyone is coded to the otherside well you are with Hitler if you don't want to throw the book at them. The media ownership is way past the legal limits. TikTok and all the services that requires it to exist in the US are in violation of the law. Tom Homan and Eric Adams say sweet xenophobic things into Trump's ear and their crimes are thrown down the memory hole.
It not both-sides, one side is violating the spirit of the law the other side is brazenly flouting the letter of the law and thinks it is dumb to abide laws at all.
I'm getting some cognitive dissonance when weighing two of Justin's points on the NYC race. 1) The Republican party is in love with the idea of being able to run against SOCIALIST mamdani. 2) Trump is offering some favorable position to get Adams to drop out... Why offer Adams anything if GOP wants Mamdani to win?
I could see Trump and anti-Mamdani New Yorkers wanting to try to avoid Mamdani winning NYC, but the smaller GOP folks running across the country being quietly excited at the idea of the commie scare ads Justin's describing.
I’m pretty angry at you Justin. I did exactly as you told me to, I bought the audiobook before listening to your opinions. And then your opinions didn’t upset me at all. I could easily have got the audiobook after the opinions. I can’t believe I did what you asked.
I'm out of credits, but the audio book is on my wishlist. I'm looking forward to listening to it next month.
Government has crossed a bridge it should not have. The FCC doesn't exist to control editorial content of programs. Regardless of what the red state affiliates thought/wanted, this is bad.
How wild would it be if it was Republicans that reinstated the fairness doctrine, though?
Justin doesn’t seems to think the FCC behavior is consequential or worth our concern. I am not familiar with their past behavior, but it would be helpful to put in context what they are doing now vs what they have done in the past and if it is stepping over a line.
The head of the FCC is certainly more active on the podcast circuit and social media than any other head in history.
Does that mean he will attempt to revoke licenses tomorrow? Or does it mean he’s a gasbag who likes attention?
Why not both? And although I agree with above that the FCC shouldn't make editorial choices, I think you're right about the corporate opportunism here.
I was driving so listened to your opinion before buying that audio book, so, lucky I guess that I liked your take lol
With all the media stuff, you should get a Hollywood union guy on and Adam Conver would be aces.
Justin's take that Disney had to go with the affiliates while also acknowledging that the broadcasting is not the money maker that it used to be is quite the paradox. Pointing out that this parallels the Jay Leno vs David Letterman, as if the business was still printing money through broadcasting or that the like often framed with maps after elections “look at that red, there's no way Trump (or any Republican) could have lost the election”; land doesn't vote and broadcasting across all those affiliates are the old and dusted business model and there's no electoral college to generate extra profits from the affiliates.
This weekend my wife and I sat down our kids to have a an uncomfortable discussion, and we decided to cancel our Disney+/Hulu subscription (the only way I ever watched any ABC programming, despite being in the WTNH-New Haven/Hartford media market). They were disappointed and understood that they could watch to their heart's content all the Disney content this Tuesday when they have off from school before the subscription is finished, but they will deal with the competing streaming services Netflix, HBOmax, Apple+, PBS, and we will be free to buy movies and TV shows rather than the all you can eat Disney+. They won't have the childhood fondness for Disney because of this decision to cling to the legacy business model that happens to be an ally of authoritarian politics. Trump, Card, and the MAGA coalition thinks that if they don't get the deference they believe they are entitled to they should throw temper tantrums because of the thin skin that they project onto the left; Target saw year over year loss in revenue that correlated to the boycott, Bud Light saw no difference from the boycott that had Kid Rock as a mascott despite his almost instantly forgot about the boycott seen drinking Bud light and making Fox News appearances wearing a Bud Light hat. The left has shown that they can more effectively withhold their dollars better than the right.
Does Disney want their next business model to be successful or do they want to locked into the dying business model and sticking with broadcast and legacy cable?
the question on a boycott is how widespread it is. what is the market penetration beyond the very online? only time will tell.
tldr; I wrote a bit of fanfic of what could happen on the next Disney earnings call.
The boycott of the next newer business model, or boycott the over-the-air dying last breaths business model, which is more susceptible? I don't think that it would take as many individuals to cancel their subscription for the next earnings call to be problematic.
Wall St analyst: um excuse me, could you please explain the 2% dip in subscribers, isn't the streaming service the future for distribution? You know Netflix despite being saturated showed an increase in revenue.
Bob Igar: yeah but we needed to show our loyalty to the affiliates, who will be consolidating into even fewer firms who each get to leverage their smaller numbers to get better deals for affiliates than they have right now.
WSA: WTF are you talking about? Why should we care about the old affiliate system if we lose market share to competitors in the inevitable next business model!? You know that the advertising dollars is leaving broadcasting, right? You don't even broadcast Monday night football more, that's exclusively streamed or legacy cable providers, so if the American consumer is about to move on from over-the-air and you picked that side to stick to?! Not the new hotness that will be the next way to have customers for a generation?
Igar: yeah, but FCC Chairman threatened the owners of our affiliates so...
WSA: Then go and be an executive for those dinosaurs and resign from Disney. It's not your job to protect the shareholders of Nexstar and Sinclair, it's your job to do right by the shareholders of Disney.
Justin there are two other elements at play here. 1) know your very familiar that Disney lost to governor DeSantis in a fight over the “don’t say gay bill” They Lost the Reedy Creek Improvement District. They have put their appeals on hold while working with the governor who know appoints those on the new Central Florida Tourism Oversight Committee. Disney had their business affected in a major way getting involved in political fight. Sure they don’t want to piss off the party the has so much control over there parks. 2) Nexstar is trying to merge with Tegna which needs FCC approval. Does this have anything to do with their decision to speak up now? They say no and maybe it’s just the markets like you pointed out. Though we are in the time of conspiracy theories and coincidences are hard to ignore. It also helps get your merger approved when you back what the people in power are saying.
My question re: approvals is - what’s different between Trumps first term when his FCC and DOJ approved mergers from many of this companies as they blistered him?
Both Nexstar and Sinclair are beyond the statutory limit of 39% of media markets, so just like TikTok getting several delays to be shuttered, their acquisitions will be approved by the administration and everyone will just ignore what the law actually is. Even if a 21st century Nader's Raider challenged the acquisition in court, I have little faith that the Supreme Court would be true to their principles of original intent just as they threw out racial profiling for private universities and allowed racial profiling to be used by public employees like ICE agents to deprive individuals of due process. Authoritarian regimes don't need to abide by the written laws, they are the authority and can choose what laws to follow and what laws to flout.
while a descent into authoritarianism is possible, it is worthwhile to point out that declining markets (of which broadcast television is) have a history of having market caps eased or erased as they are no longer as powerful as they once were.
Heaton had Senator Phil Graham, and Senator was directly asked about his part of repealing Glass-Steagal Act and Graham with all sincerity said "we did not overturn anything, we just made legal what was already being done". The convoluted reasoning that exists in laws don't have to be abided by whenever it is convenient to your side but if anyone is coded to the otherside well you are with Hitler if you don't want to throw the book at them. The media ownership is way past the legal limits. TikTok and all the services that requires it to exist in the US are in violation of the law. Tom Homan and Eric Adams say sweet xenophobic things into Trump's ear and their crimes are thrown down the memory hole.
It not both-sides, one side is violating the spirit of the law the other side is brazenly flouting the letter of the law and thinks it is dumb to abide laws at all.
“If you can dream it, you can do it.” (Walt Disney) - then pull the plug. Looking for Barbra Streisand and Jimmy Kimmel. Can anyone help?
https://substack.com/@liatportal/note/c-157946992?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=4efjwe
I'm getting some cognitive dissonance when weighing two of Justin's points on the NYC race. 1) The Republican party is in love with the idea of being able to run against SOCIALIST mamdani. 2) Trump is offering some favorable position to get Adams to drop out... Why offer Adams anything if GOP wants Mamdani to win?
Trumps oldest friends are rich guys in NY. The GOP nationally wants to run against him
I could see Trump and anti-Mamdani New Yorkers wanting to try to avoid Mamdani winning NYC, but the smaller GOP folks running across the country being quietly excited at the idea of the commie scare ads Justin's describing.
Any chance you'll share some comments on the revelation we were robbed of the opportunity to vote for the Harri-Butt ticket?