Blumenthal Questions Hartford Media Merger
by Christine Stuart | April 9, 2009 11:55 AM
Posted to Media Matters
(Updated Friday 7 a.m. with Tribune’s response) Attorney General Richard Blumenthal wrote the owner of Tribune Wednesday saying that the merger of the Hartford Courant, WTIC-TV, and WTXX-TV may violate the Federal Communications Commissions ban on a company owning a television station and newspaper in the same market.
“I am concerned that allowing these entities to fully merge into one news and information operation goes well beyond what the FCC intended when it granted Tribune a two-year limited waiver,” Blumenthal wrote in this letter to Tribune Co. CEO Sam Zell.
Tribune said Blumenthal’s concerns are misplaced.
“I support exploration of innovative, alternative arrangements and business models that may allow newspapers to survive and continue to play their vital role holding government and business accountable,” Blumenthal wrote. “These new business models or partnerships may be “the future,” as one of your executives has characterized it. To advance this vision and goal, it must expand access to information and competition, not produce media monopolies that shut out voices, perspectives and important news stories.”
At the end of his letter Blumenthal asked Zell to answer a few questions. The first and most important question was: “Will job losses result from this consolidation? If so, how many, what type and which organization will bear the brunt of layoffs?”
Tribune Corporate Communications responded late Thursday to Blumenthal’s letter with the following response:
“Tribune’s decision to operate the Hartford Courant and its two television stations from one location in Hartford was designed to improve our ability to serve our readers, viewers and advertisers and the communities in which they live and work. Permitting WTIC and WTXX to draw on the rich newsgathering resources of the nation’s oldest newspaper makes them a better and more competitive news organization. Giving the Courant more direct access to the television stations’ video journalism makes the newspaper more relevant to its readers, and improves the 24/7 coverage the Courant and the stations provide over the internet . The Courant and the stations will continue to decide independently what news to present and how to present it to their print, broadcast and internet audiences.”
“These three business units have taken advantage of one another’s newsgathering resources for several years. This next step is in full compliance with the law, including the waivers granted by the FCC. We know our readers and viewers in Connecticut have many other choices to turn to for news, information and entertainment. In an economic environment where newspapers and broadcasters must innovate and become more efficient to survive, measures such as this are essential to preserve the quality journalism that the Courant and our television stations are known for. We appreciate Attorney General Blumenthal’s concerns, but we believe they are misplaced.”
Comments (6)
Posted by: Rick Hancock | April 9, 2009 12:41 PM
AG said:
"Will job losses result from this consolidation? If so, how many, what type and which organization will bear the brunt of layoffs?"
With all due respect to the AG: Has he been paying attention? Job losses are already occurring, especially at the Courant.
If he wants to see further job cuts at 61 and the Courant then he should do everything in his power to stop this move.
Posted by: Doug Hardy | April 9, 2009 2:16 PM
Rick, with all due respect I don't know if I appreciate your logic. I do understand and appreciate the natural fear of layoffs. It sucks. A lot of our colleagues are out of work so I get it. But you folks aren't the only ones whose jobs are at stake.
It's pretty clear that layoffs at the Courant are not because of a lack of profitability. Rather, it's the ridiculous and insurmountable debt service on the parent corporation. Meanwhile, they've created this cross-ownership monstrosity that can undercut the Hartford market with advertising bundles ... this can and likely will put all the smaller companies out of business. That's an anti-trust issue if there ever was one.
Allowing it to continue will not only cost more people jobs outside this cross-ownership group, but it also will undercut the democratic process in the region by killing off the papers that actually cover local and state gov't with an appropriate and productive level of scrutiny.
If a reporter doesn't stop in at Town Hall every day or two, then that paper or news program can't pretend that it actually covers the town. A news organization can pretend to cover a town by occasionally doing a story about a car accident or a fire or a tree falling on a house... Yes that fills space or air time, but doing so does not mean that station or newspaper actually covers that town in a way that contributes to the community conversation.
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | April 9, 2009 3:08 PM
At this point, it's all just kind of futile and sad. Why not let the dinosaurs of media die in peace, in their own peculiar ways. "Right-sizing", mergers, CPR . . . they'll all lead to the same end.
Posted by: ctkeith | April 9, 2009 4:35 PM
AG Blumenthal,
Please don't waste any taxpayer dollars on these near dead dinosaurs.They're run by Morons and will be a thing of the past before this case could ever get before a judge.
Here's more Proof just how their self inflicted wound are so wide and so deep that they won't last past this decade.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/9/718088/-In-the-wake-of-the-newspaper-execs-hissy-fit
Posted by: James D. | April 9, 2009 8:40 PM
"At the end of his letter Blumenthal asked Zell to answer a few questions. The first and most important question was: "Will job losses result from this consolidation? If so, how many, what type and which organization will bear the brunt of layoffs?"
AGB - this is a joke, right? Isn't it obvious by now that if Zell could hire a SINGLE person and a team of 5 trained monkeys to run ALL of his newspapers and TV stations (and who would stop him?), he'd do it in a heart-beat? Zell's got loans to pay off and couldn't give a rat's *ss what happens in Hartford - or anywhere else that isn't labeled "Mr. Zell's Personal Private Bank Account."
So save your bluster for a fight that is a bit more reality-based.
Posted by: edward ericson | April 10, 2009 2:06 PM
It's fair to say that Blumenthal does misunderstand FCC rules--but this is understandable, since the FCC has for more than a decade bent over forward in its interpretation of the underlying laws. As written, the law does forbid the combination of radio stations, TV stations and/or newspapers in a given market. But the law speaks to corporate ownership--not operating agreements or co-location of offices. Basically, Tribune has been in violation of FCC regs since the merger with Times-Mirror, as I explained in an August, 2002 annotation in Harper's, a few months before my dismissal from the Tribune-owned Hartford Advocate.... Tribune, like CitiGroup, always operated with the understanding that laws and regulations do not apply to it. This made it sloppy, both strategically and operationally (like CitiGroup). The idea was to create monopoly pricing power, but the model has failed, and (with the collapse in commercial real estate prices) the company has no 'Plan B.' Blumenthal would have done well to ask his pointed questions in the spring of 2000, when it might have mattered.