Bio
I'm a single black woman living in the NYC area. I work in the media and love tennis, movies, television and pop culture. I get fired up about poli...
 
 
 
 

Most Popular

Media 101: Who Owns What in the TV World

  • Share This Post
  • Pin It
  • 5
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

If you wanted to boycott a particular TV network because they canceled your favorite show, odds are it might be harder than you think.  Take Fox's show "Dollhouse."  It's one of those "on the bubble" shows and last week my fellow CE Sweetney posted a plea to Fox not to cancel it.  In the comment thread, one angry viewer, Bambi, threatened to boycott Fox and watch Hulu instead if "Dollhouse" gets cut.  I had to give her the bad news that watching Hulu wouldn't hurt Fox in the least, because Hulu is partially owned by News Corp, which also owns Fox. 

When another CE, Nordette wrote in the thread that she was surprised Fox and Hulu were kissing cousins, I decided it was time for
a post about who owns what in the modern TV/media family. 

Incestuous relationships are everywhere.   At a glance some of them only make sense on paper, but to media moguls like Rupert Murdoch and Sumner Redstone, those relationships are
all part of their plans for world media domination.

At the end of this post I'll give you resources to check out more details of exactly who owns what, but first let me give you some examples of how hard it would be to put a dent in any network that did something you didn't like.

Suppose you were offended by Justin Timberlake's "Motherlover" video on NBC's "Saturday Night Live," or suppose you're considering cutting off the network if they dare to cancel "Chuck."  Better be prepared to also ditch "The Real Housewives of New York, (Bravo), reruns of "Battlestar Galactica" (Sci Fi Channel), "Dog The Bounty Hunter" (A&E) and "Life After People" (History Channel).  That's because NBC is owned by General Electric which also owns Bravo, Sci Fi Channel, History Channel, A&E, and all the little NBC clones like CNBC, MSNBC, and ShopNBC.

Pissed off that MTV never plays real music videos anymore? 
Complain to Sumner Redstone.  He owns Viacom and tucked away in their corporate CD collection are MTV, VH1, VH1 Classic, CMT and BET.  But you may have a problem if you have kids.  In the world of kid TV, Viacom battles Disney's lineup of family cable fare with Nickelodeon, Noggin, and Nick, Jr. So if your kids love Sponge Bob (Nickelodeon)
but you're highly offended by the crap, er...I mean programming on
MTV, hard choices will have to be made. 

Viacom also owns TV Land and Comedy Central for old timers like me.  

Are you worried the Disney-owned ABC network might cancel "Castle" starring the very cute Nathan Fillion?  Are you threatening to boycott if they do?  Be prepared to also banish ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic and all the other ESPN's fielding teams.  Not to mention SOAPnet, Lifetime, and A&E (Disney and GE share ownership).

Don't like "Gossip Girl?"  Think it's corrupting the morals of a generation?  Go back to the Redstone family who own CBS which also partially owns the CW. 

Remember last year when CBS aired an edited version of "Dexter."  You were probably thinking, "Dexter" aired on Showtime, how did it get to CBS?  That's because Showtime is owned by, you guessed it, CBS.

One of the other owners of the CW is Time Warner.  Notice how you never catch CNN doing a negative story about shows on TNT or
HBO?  Maybe that's because they're all owned by the big TW.  One good rule of thumb, if there's a Turner in the network's name, it's probably owned by Time Warner.

Finally we come to the Big Kahuna:  Rupert Murdoch.  If you're upset by the latest antics of Jack Bauer on "24," and decide you want to teach Fox a lesson, you'll also have to give up FX, Fox News Channel, Fox Movie Channel, Fox Sports, The National Geographic Channel and FSN.  That's because Rupert owns News Corp and News Corp owns all of the above and more.

Now you might say, if that's the case, why are there "House" reruns on USA Cable?  After all "House" airs on Fox.  Well GE owns Universal and USA Cable.  Though "House" airs on Fox, it's produced in association
with Universal Media Studios, so that's why you see Hugh Laurie's,
handsome, crusty mug on USA several times a week.

Which brings us back to Hulu.  As of last week Hulu was owned by News Corp and GE but just cut a deal for Disney and ABC to buy in as well.  

Have you got all that?  I hope so because it would

  • 5
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Nordette Adams 6 pts

That kind of information is only important to people who think more deeply than the average bear ...

You've made my case. :-)

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Megan Smith 5 pts

Hi Nordette,

Boycotts are very tricky to pull off in this age of globalization.

I'm a big believer in being a smart consumer and especially
being a smart media consumer.  From an early age whenever I read
something in newspapers or magazines I wanted to know a bit about who
wrote it.  Then later I wanted to know more about specific writers and
their agendas.

Knowing who owns what may not damage a viewer's
enjoyment of their favorite TV program, but it may enlighten them about
why that program rather than another one made it on the air in the
first place.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/Online Video ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/megan-smith )

Megan's Minute ( http://www.megansminute.com/

Nordette Adams 6 pts

Whenever I think about boycotts, I think of the Christian teaching to "Love not the world or the things of the world" and the Apostle Paul's advice to not eat foods tainted by idol worship if the person notifies you that the food has been "tainted."  

Boy that's a lot of stuff to avoid!

Sometimes, it's best not to know who owns what because so much is connected. My mind then goes to the people who make no decisions at all who would lose work when we boycott certain media outlets.   Nevertheless, sometimes boycotts are fully warranted and necessary. So, no matter how much I like a certain show and feel I need to see it, if it's connected to something else that's feels unforgiveable, I may have to go Spock and say, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one."

But it's ineffective if the corporation doesn't know you're boycotting them. Effective boycotts make lots of noise.

That said, I think with the global interconnectivity of all things these days, we'll find it more and more difficult to boycott a corporation. We may have to boycott individual products or shows like no O'Reilly Factor if you're progressive and no Keith Obermann if you're not. No Wal-Mart period if you don't like its labor practices, but why boycott Sam's if Sam's Club doesn't work the same way as Wal-Mart although part of the same company?  Too much to think about for most folks. (I don't know about Sam's labor practices.)

Informative post, Megan, and I'll be digging through your links.  When I posted on Dickipedia ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com/2009/05/yo-mamas-at-di... ), I let people know that it and Chickipedia (a site some feminists may find offensive) were owned by the same group, but I wasn't advocating any action, just making an observation. That kind of information is only important to people who think more deeply than the average bear or who are on some spiritual quest for media purity.

For most people it boils down to I like it, I don't like it.  If they like it, unless the producers are eating babies for breakfast, they'll probably keep watching. But some people will watch no matter what, including shots of folks eating babies. 

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE and NOLA Lit Examiner ( http://nola101.com ). Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ).

Megan Smith 5 pts

You're right about the news outlets. 

The number of media companies that own multiple TV stations and newspapers in the same market is quite scary because a democracy depends on hearing a range of voices and not just a select few.

An excellent post ( http://www.blogher.com/big-news-big-media )from December 2007 by CE Kim Pearson ( http://www.blogher.com/haystackprofile/viewprofile... ) covers the changes at the FCC that allowed these mega media companies to grow.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/Online Video ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/megan-smith )

Megan's Minute ( http://www.megansminute.com/

Chgkim 5 pts

So true Megan, your links are great....we just can't forget all the "news" (ok, infotainment) outlets these biggies own as well.  For me, that is the truly scarey part of the planned media domination!