Commentary

Legacy Stations On The Ropes? Define Their 'Core'

by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, Yesterday

Legacy television -- especially local TV stations -- needs its live programming of all types to survive, including news, sports, special events and now even video podcasts.

But what is their real future -- from an advertising or other perspective?

The trouble is that other platforms are getting into the same game -- with the same focus -- and not just digital media social-media platforms, but YouTube and FAST channels in particular.

Perhaps the biggest positive factor is their "reach" of its local-market viewers when it comes to big brand awareness, with a continuing focus on "broadcasting." Is that enough?

Year in and year out, "core" advertising (non-political) remains a major issue, with low single-digit percentage gains at best.

This time of year is when those concerns are being shelved as a big political advertising period in the form of the midterm elections lies ahead.

Other "core" positive news is that retransmission revenues are still a decent generator for TV station groups -- even as cable, satellite, and video TV distributors keep losing legacy, linear TV audiences.

There are troubling issues surrounding core advertising, which continues to slip in the face of growing competition from still-growing digital media and social-media platforms (Meta, Google, TikTok) that can provide closer, directly connected return on media investments.

So TV station groups continue to seek other revenue sources, including big local sports program content from teams and leagues that are looking elsewhere, away from the troubling regional sports networks that are much too pricey for consumers, and offer little-to-no profits for TV distributors.

The jury is still out that soaring profits will come from that content.

What is left in terms of content -- news, entertainment syndicated and other programming?

TV stations cannot invest much more on local TV news, as their schedule is packed with nearly end-to-end newscasts on some outlets.

And they do not want to expand their entertainment-focused syndicated programming business. These, like other elements of legacy TV, continue to suffer because of ever-stronger streaming platforms, including FAST channels (free ad-supported and streaming television).

What’s left? Consolidation -- and that is why the bigger players keep looking for market leverage.

This includes Nexstar Media Group’s $6.2 billion deal, which in its purchase of Tegna has hit some legal snags in the court's halting integration of the two companies.

The deal closed in March of this year. In addition, there is Sinclair’s effort to pursue a deal with Scripps, a mid-sized TV station group, which has now rebuffed Sinclair’s pursuit.

Looking at all this, we wonder about a broad look at all "core" issues as TV stations -- not just advertising.

How do TV stations define "core" these days?

advertising, broadcasting, fasts, media measurement, reach, television, video, yahoo finance

2 comments about "Legacy Stations On The Ropes? Define Their 'Core'".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, June 1, 2026 at 11:35 a.m.
Wayne, as I keep saying, there are too many TV stations--and the same is true for radio--for all or even many to be viable business propositions in the face of declining audience time. When things were great--in the 1960s through to the early days of this century--hosts of stations sprang up--all trying to capitalize on four to five hours of daily viewing time for TV and about half that in listening time for radio, but even then many small market operators were losing money.

Now, with audiences down by about 50% due to the rise of CTV, social media, videogames, increased mobile usage, etc. TV stations---especially in markets 75 and down--are in trouble. Many are being "saved" by retransmission fees and, periodically, by political spending, but the long term prognosis is dire. Worse, by relying very heavily on local news as well as syndicated game and talk shows, the stations are reaching mostly 55+ audiences and there is no way to work around this by adopting supposedly better targeting schemes. The programming doesn't fit--where are the younger audiences?

Unfortunately, the stations keep seeking magical answers--like forcing Nielsen to go to "impressions" instead of showing ratings as rounded off percentages. And now they are being urged cto launch streaming services based on their local content. LOL on both of those ideas.

One thing I do believe is that the stations--the groups, in particular--- don't realize how weak their sales efforts are with legions of small advertisers who are feeding their dollars into socoal media and other "digital" buys. The TV stations are not even selling what the've got, effectively to such marketers.

Reply

Leo Kivijarv from PQ Media, June 1, 2026 at 4:03 p.m.

Interesting points Wayne and Ed. Maybe television and radio need to use the print media model in which newspapers and magazines are either shuttering entirely in rural areas and/or going to a digital-only model in larger markets. Unfortunately in the newspaper industry, this has led to "news deserts" in many rural regions per Northwestern University's database, which would become even worse if television and radio stations left those communities.