this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2025
66 points (95.8% liked)

politics

25872 readers
3535 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Apologies if this isn't the right community for a text post, but I wasn't sure where else to put this. I also apologize if this is a bit haphazard.

I posted originally about Kimmel getting the axe from ABC: https://lemmy.world/post/36079527

I'm angry about that. Very angry. I see a lot of people cancelling Hulu/D+ over it. I think it's a good step. But it got me thinking, how much farther can we go with it? Disney is a massive corporation that has revenue streams from a lot of different outlets and parks. It's good to hit them where their wallet is, but I argue 2 things

  • If you want to starve them we need to go farther. Streaming is only a fraction of their 23 Billion quarterly revenue
  • They are not the only player in this mess.

You also have the local broadcast affilitates who need FCC approval for local broadcasts and for mergers. Sinclair and Nexstar. Nexstar has a merger coming up with Tegna that would give them 32 out of 200 ABC affiliates.

I'm going to pick on Sinclair though as I don't think they're an honest player in this game and haven't been for a while.

One of the headlines circulating around is "Local TV giant Sinclair demands Jimmy Kimmel make ‘direct apology’ to Charlie Kirk’s family, donate to TPUSA"

https://nypost.com/2025/09/18/media/sinclair-demands-jimmy-kimmel-apologize-to-charlie-kirks-family/

For those that don't know, a lot of the local broadcast channels are owned by large corporations. Sinclair has been working on gobbling up a lot of local affiliate channels across the US. They do about 3.5 Billion dollars in revenue a year (according to their 2024 annual SEC filing).

While they're not an outright right wing propaganda network a lot of their networks tend to have a bit of "right washing" over stories where they conveniently leave out important tidbits or have things skew to what Sinclair wants.

John Oliver does a great expose on them and a lot of the dangers they present: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtNyOzGogc

It's not a surprise that they'd look for any excuse to cut Kimmel from their line ups.

Their revenue break down is as follows

Distribution revenue. Distribution revenue, which represents fees earned from Distributors for our broadcast signals, increased $52 million or 4% in 2024, when compared to the same period in 2023. Contractual rate increases favorably impacted period-over-period distribution revenue by high-teen percentages for the year ended December 31, 2024. The increase in distribution revenue as a result of increased contractual rates was offset by a decrease in subscribers by low double-digit percentages for 2024.

Core advertising revenue. Core advertising revenue decreased $40 million in 2024, when compared to the same period in 2023, with no particular product/services category dominating the variance and was primarily a result of the political crowd out effect.

Political advertising revenue. Political advertising revenue increased $361 million in 2024, when compared to the same period in 2023, primarily due to 2024 being a presidential political year, compared to 2023 which was an off-year election cycle, and therefore only had a small number of political races and correspondingly less political advertising spend.

You can see this all here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/sec.irpass.cc/2732/0001971213-25-000012.pdf

https://sbgi.net/investor-relations/sec-filings/sinclair-broadcast-group-sec-filings/

So here comes to the point. I want to stop giving Sinclair money. In fact I want to go farther and starve this beast. And I need ideas on how.

How do we hit them in their bottom line?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

That’s not fun at all