We Know Where Fake News Comes From In Russia-- But What About In Trump's America

When Chris Hayes uses the phrase “Trump TV,” don’t you just assume he’s talking about Fox? I always do. But… what the hell is up with Sinclair News-- and why hasn’t anyone even heard of, as John Oliver reminds us, “the most influential media company that you’ve never heard of.” Did you know for example that Sinclair, the biggest broadcaster in America, forces more than 170 local television station anchors to read the same commentary? But when Señor Trumpanzee tweeted Monday morning that it was, at least for him, “So funny to watch Fake News Networks, among the most dishonest groups of people I have ever dealt with, criticize Sinclair Broadcasting for being biased. Sinclair is far superior to CNN and even more Fake NBC, which is a total joke,” it doesn’t recognize Sinclair-- the real Trump TV-- as a fount of fake news.

The new poll from Monmouth doesn’t single Sinclair out but found that “Large majorities of the American public believe that traditional media outlets engage in reporting fake news and that outside sources are actively trying to plant fake stories in the mainstream media. When it comes to the meaning of ‘fake news,’ a majority believe that it involves editorial decisions as well as inaccurate reporting. The public feels that social media platforms are partly to blame for the spread of fake news and are not doing enough to stop it. The poll also finds that Pres. Trump continues to be less trusted than the major cable news outlets as an information source.

The news about “fake news” is not good, according to the Monmouth University Poll. Large majorities of the American public believe that traditional media outlets engage in reporting fake news and that outside sources are actively trying to plant fake stories in the mainstream media. When it comes to the meaning of “fake news,” a majority believe that it involves editorial decisions as well as inaccurate reporting. The public feels that social media platforms are partly to blame for the spread of fake news and are not doing enough to stop it. The poll also finds that Pres. Trump continues to be less trusted than the major cable news outlets as an information source.

More than 3-in-4 Americans believe that traditional major TV and newspaper media outlets report “fake news,” including 31% who believe this happens regularly and 46% who say it happens occasionally. The 77% who believe fake news reporting happens at least occasionally has increased significantly from 63% of the public who felt that way last year.

Just 25% say the term “fake news” applies only to stories where the facts are wrong. Most Americans (65%), on the other hand, say that “fake news” also applies to how news outlets make editorial decisions about what they choose to report.

“These findings are troubling, no matter how you define ‘fake news.’ Confidence in an independent fourth estate is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy. Ours appears to be headed for the intensive care unit,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.

The belief that major media outlets disseminate fake news at least occasionally has increased among every partisan group over the past year, including Republicans (89% up from 79% in 2017), independents (82% up from 66%), and Democrats (61% up from 43%). In addition to the fact that a clear majority of Democrats now believe that traditional media outlets report fake news at least occasionally, the poll also finds that a majority of Republicans (53%) feel this happens on a regular basis (up from 37% in 2017).

A plurality of the public (42%) say that traditional news media sources report fake news on purpose in order to push an agenda. Fewer Americans (26%) believe that major media sources tend to report these stories only by accident or due to poor fact checking. Another 7% feel both reasons are equally prevalent. The remainder are either not sure or do not feel that fake news is reported by traditional media outlets. The number who believe this type of false reporting is done on purpose has not changed much from a year ago when it stood at 39%. The number who say it is done accidentally has increased from 17% a year ago as more people feel that the traditional media engages in reporting fake news stories.

Fully 83% of Americans believe that outside groups or agents are actively trying to plant fake stories in the mainstream media. Two-thirds (66%) say this is a serious problem-- including 74% of Republicans, 68% of independents, and 59% of Democrats.

“According to the public, fake news is the result of both outside agents trying to plant fabricated stories and the editorial processes of mainstream media outlets that disseminate false narratives. The perception of this problem couldn’t be more pervasive,” said Murray.

Attention has also focused on the role of social media platforms in the propagation of fake news. Nearly 9-in-10 Americans (87%) believe that outside groups are trying to plant fake news stories on social media sites like Facebook and YouTube. More than two-thirds (71%) say this is a serious problem-- including 81% of Republicans, 69% of independents, and 67% of Democrats.

Most Americans (60%) say that social media sites are partly responsible for the spread of fake news but that other media sources are more responsible. This compares to 29% who say that social media sites are mostly responsible for the spread of fake news. Just 6% say they are not at all responsible. There is bipartisan agreement on this opinion.

Even though social media may not be the principal culprit in spreading fake news, fully 69% of Americans say that these sites are not doing enough to stop the spread of fake news on their platforms.  Just 20% say they are doing enough.

“The way the public sees it, social media is just one cog that keeps the fake news wheel turning,” said Murray.

The poll also finds that a large majority of the public (86%) believe that online news websites also report fake news, which is up slightly from 80% in March 2017. However, the number who believe that online news sources regularly report “fake news” has increased from 41% a year ago to a majority of 52% today.

The Monmouth University Poll also finds that Pres. Trump is trusted less as source of information than three cable news outlets-- except if you ask Republicans. Nearly half the American public (48%) trusts CNN more than Trump, compared with one-third (35%) who trust Trump more than CNN and another 13% who trust both equally as a source of information. The results are similar when Trump is pitted against the left-leaning MSNBC-- 45% trust MSNBC more, 32% trust Trump more, and 16% trust both equally. The right-leaning Fox News also bests the president as a trusted information source-- 30% trust Fox more and 20% trust Trump more, although a plurality of 37% trust both equally.

The results for the president versus MSNBC have not changed much in the past year (47% trusted MSNBC more, 33% trusted Trump more, 15% trusted both equally in March 2017). The pendulum has swung slightly but not substantially away from Fox News and toward Trump in that matchup (37% trusted Fox News more, 17% trusted Trump more, 36% trusted both equally in March 2017). CNN was not included in the 2017 poll.

It should come as no surprise that many more Republicans trust the president as an information source than either CNN (12% versus 75% for Trump) or MSNBC (11% versus 72% for Trump). But Republicans are also somewhat more likely to trust Trump (35%) over Fox News (21%), with 40% trusting both GOP-aligned sources equally. In 2017, 29% of Republicans trusted Trump more, 26% trusted Fox more, and 44% trusted both equally, marking a slight gain for the president in the current poll.

“One bright lining in the whole fake news debate is that major cable news operations are still more trusted than a single officeholder. Unless you are a Republican, in which case Trump’s Twitter feed may be your go-to news source,” said Murray.

Monday’s NY Times was on the Sinclair case as well: “Although it is the country’s largest broadcaster, Sinclair is not a household name and viewers may be unaware of who owns their local news station. Critics have accused the company of using its stations to advance a mostly right-leaning agenda… Sinclair regularly sends video segments to the stations it owns. These are referred to as “must-runs,” and they can include content like terrorism news updates, commentators speaking in support of President Trump or speeches from company executives.”

Sinclair has been accused of using connections in the Trump administration to ease regulations on media consolidation. In an effort to expand its reach, the company is seeking approval from the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission for a $3.9 billion deal to buy Tribune Media.

Right-wing pervert David Smith is responsible for immense amounts if fake news in America

After the current sales go through, Sinclair will own or operate 233 TV stations in over 100 markets (covering 40% of American households), many of which are located in the South and Midwest. The majority ownership is by the 4 crackpot right-wing sons of company founder Julian Sinclair Smith. David Smith, who got his start selling porn videos in Baltimore’s relight district and has been arrested on perversion charges several times, is the Executive Chairman of the company. The NY Times referred to him as “a visionary” in their 1998 profile of him. Wikipedia:

Sinclair's stations have been known for featuring news content and programming that promote conservative political positions, and have been involved in various controversies surrounding politically-motivated programming decisions, such as news coverage and specials during the lead-ups to elections that were in support of the Republican Party. The Washington Post noted that WJLA-TV's news content began to exhibit a conservative slant following Sinclair's acquisition of the station, while the company also produces pieces from a Washington bureau that similarly exhibit a conservative viewpoint.

In 2004, Sinclair's political slant was scrutinized by critics when it was publicized that nearly all of Sinclair's recent campaign contributions were to the Republican Party. In particular, the Center for Public Integrity showed concern that the Republican slant of Sinclair's news programming, along with Mark Hyman's past history of government lobbying (such as for the FCC to loosen rules regarding concentration of media ownership-- a factor that has assisted in the company's growth), made its stations provide "anything but fair and balanced news programming." Hyman disputed these allegations by stating that its newscasts were "pretty balanced" and that "the reason why some on the left have characterized us as conservative is that we run stories that others in the media spike."

In April 2017, Sinclair announced it had hired Boris Epshteyn, who was briefly the White House assistant communications director for surrogate operations for the Trump administration, and a senior advisor of Donald Trump's presidential campaign, as chief political analyst. All Sinclair stations are required to air Mr. Ephsteyn's commentary nine times per week.

A couple dozen of the markets where Sinclair has been able to brainwash viewers into voting for Republicans by passing off GOP propaganda as “news” include:

• Birmingham, AL- WTTO, WABM, WDBB
• Little Riock, AR- KATV
• Bakersfield, CA- KBAK (CBS), KBFX (Fox)
• Chico/Redding, CA- KRCR (ABC), KXVU, KCVU (Fox)
• Eureka/Arcata, CA- KAEF (ABC), KBVU (Fox), KEUV (Univision)
• Fresno/Visalia, CA- KMPH (Fox), KFRE
• Quad Cities, IA- KGAN (CBS), KFXA (Fox)
• Des Moines, IA- KDSM (Fox)
• Sioux City, IA- KPTH (Fox), KMEG (CBS)
• Boise, ID- KBOI (CBS), KYUU
• Champaign/Springfield, IL- WICS & WICD (ABC), WRSP & WCCU (Fox), WBUI
• Peoria, IL- WHOI, WYZZ (Fox)
• Wichita, KS- KSAS, KAAS and KOCW (Fox), KMTW
• Portland, ME- WGME (CBS), WPFO (Fox)
• Kalamazoo/Grand Rapids, MI- WWMT (CBS)
• Upper Peninsula, MI- WPBN and WTOM (NBC), WGTU and WGTQ (ABC)
• St. Louis. MO- KDNL (ABC)
• Omaha, NE- KPTM (Fox), KXVO
• Las Vegas, NV- KSNV (NBC), KVCW
• Reno, NV- NRNV (NBC), KRXI (Fox), KAME
• Buffalo, NY- WUTV (Fox), WYNO
• Syracuse, NY- WSTM (NBC), WTVH (CBS), WSTQ
• Cincinnati, OH- WKRC (CBS), WSTR
• Oklahoma City- KOKH (Fox), KOCB

And that list doesn’t include dozens of stations in Texas, Wisconsin, Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia, Utah, Indiana, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Florida, New Mexico, West Virginia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Montana and Oregon.

Worse Than Fox! Trump’s FCC Revives Outmoded Rule To Let Sinclair Become The Fox Of Local TV News

-by Jack Hannold

While the FCC’s plan to drop net neutrality rules has garnered most of the attention that agency has received during the Trump Administration, another recent rule change, one seemingly tailored to help a media company even more radically rightwing than Fox, is getting less scrutiny.

The video above recounts how Sinclair Broadcast Group has been abusing its ownership of TV stations to promote conservatism in general, and the Republican Party in particular, for years. Sinclair’s “News Central” at its corporate headquarters in Maryland produces “must carry” programming for its stations, mostly pieces to be inserted in the station’s local newscasts. In December, the Washington Post analyzed Sinclair's pattern of pro-Trump propaganda.

Unlike Fox, Sinclair does not own a network. But like Fox, Sinclair owns TV stations-- and it owns, or controls, more stations than Fox.

Sinclair currently operates 173 TV stations, including both those it owns directly and those it controls through “Local Market Agreements,” or LMA’s-- contracts that allow one company to operate a station licensed to another company in return for a payment to the licensee. Some licensees are shell corporations controlled by Sinclair.

And now Sinclair has announced plans to buy Tribune Broadcasting. If regulators approve the deal, Sinclair will control the programming of an additional 42 stations-- some of them in major markets Sinclair has never been able to buy a station-- making Sinclair the largest single TV broadcaster in the US. Sinclair would then be able to reach over 70 percent of the US population, despite a rule limiting the combined reach of any single company’s stations to 39 percent.

Kushner-in-Law has openly bragged about cutting a deal with Sinclair, and this year that deal has paid off handsomely for Sinclair.  In April, the FCC voted to re-instate the “UHF discount” rule, a rule that was finally eliminated only last year.  Under that rule, the FCC counts only half the population reached by UHF stations when calculating the combined reach of all the stations owned by a licensee. For example, in the Los Angeles media market, which covers about 4.8 percent of the US population, a UHF station counts as reaching only 2.4 percent.

And that’s even worse than it sounds because, in the era of digital over-the-air TV, three out of four stations, commercial and non-commercial alike, are on the UHF band-- including many that identify over the air as VHF stations. Both WCBS-TV in New York and KCBS-TV in Los Angeles used to transmit their analog signals on channel 2, and both still identify themselves as channel 2, using channel 2 as their “virtual channel” (see link)-- though they now transmit their digital over-the-air signals on channels 33 and 43 respectively.

The use of VHF virtual channels with UHF transmitters is the rule these days. 53 of the 173 stations Sinclair already operates have VHF virtual channels, but only 27 actually operate in the VHF band. And of the 42 stations Tribune controls, 20 use VHF virtual channels, but only four transmit on VHF channels. The FCC will consider the 146 Sinclair stations and the 38 Tribune stations that operate in the UHF band (regardless of their virtual channels) as UHF stations for purposes of the UHF discount rule, counting only half those stations’ potential audiences when calculating the combined reach of all those stations. That should easily bring the total down to somewhere near 40 percent of the US population. And Ajit Pai, the former Verizon lobbyist Trump made his FCC chair, also plans to raise the limit from 39 to 45 percent, just to be safe.

That’s quite a reward for Sinclair’s support of Trump during the campaign!

The UHF discount should never have been revived. It was an indefensible anachronism long before the FCC eliminated it last year; in fact, it was obsolete even before it was first adopted in 1985. Consider the history of UHF.

When the UHF band was opened to TV in 1952, dozens of new UHF stations began operating. But few manufacturers equipped TV sets with UHF tuners, external UHF converter boxes were expensive and hard to find, and the quality of those UHF circuits was generally poor. And without a separate antenna designed for UHF, the results were usually disappointing. Viewers lost interest, and so did advertisers. Most of the UHF stations founded in the 1950s went broke within two years.

During the Fifties, some engineering improvements in UHF circuitry were made. But with few UHF stations on the air, few manufacturers were interested in using them.

Then the All-Channel Receiver Act of 1962 authorized the FCC to require that all TV sets shipped in interstate commerce be equipped to receive both VHF and UHF television. The FCC promptly adopted a regulation requiring not only all-channel receivers, but also setting a relatively high standard for the quality of the UHF circuits in order to make reception on both bands virtually equal. That regulation became effective in 1964.

Color TV also came of age in 1964, and leading manufacturers built the UHF tuners in color sets to even higher standards than those required by the FCC. New UHF stations struggled for the first few years, but by 1970 many independent UHF’s in mixed markets like Philadelphia were beginning to catch up with the long- established independent VHF’s in all-VHF markets like New York and L.A.

Then in the late Seventies, with the growth of cable TV, the last marginal disadvantages of UHF vanished, at least for cable subscribers.

So there was no justification for establishing the UHF discount in 1985, and there’s certainly no excuse for restoring it in 2017. The only reason it’s been brought back is to give the corrupt Trump Administration a way to reward a corporate lackey.

Local TV news-- with its sensationalized crime reporting, coverage of every fire and accident its crews can reach and mindless puff pieces planted by public relations professionals, is often a blight on journalism. But it’s still important, if only because 57 percent of Americans list it as their primary source of news.

And that’s why the reinstatement of an indefensible FCC rule-- for the sole purpose of allowing a rightwing outfit like Sinclair to insert their pro-GOP propaganda into the newscasts of more stations-- is alarming.


UPDATE: The Merger Lifts Sinclair from No. 4 to No.1 in Billings

Just how much will the Sinclair buyout of Tribune increase concentration? And what does that mean for profitability? Today’s edition of the online radio newsletter Tom Taylor Now explains that.

Sinclair will lead TV’s top groups by spot revenue-- though it’s still smaller than radio’s iHeartMedia

Just something to keep in mind when you scope out the latest “Top 30 Group Owners” in the TV field from TVNewsCheck-- radio’s largest group produces more revenue than any of them, even assuming Sinclair is able to scoop up Tribune. We’re used to iHeartMedia’s claims of having “the largest reach of any radio or television outlet in America” when it comes to listening/viewership. But there’s also the revenue angle. The radio/digital part of iHeart did $3.4 billion in revenue for 2016, up 3.6%% for the year. (That’s excluding its various outdoor divisions.) A merged Sinclair/Tribune would be $2.9 billion, and that’s enough to make it America’s top-billing TV station group. But it’s half a billion dollars smaller than iHeart Media. True, this NOW comparison is apples-to-tangerines or maybe grapefruit, since the TVNewsCheck chart is ranked by spot revenue, and iHeartMedia’s reporting total revenue, which would include digital and off-air. TV stations also benefit greatly from “re-trans” – retransmission fees paid by satellite and cable. While radio derives a much greater percentage of total revenue from spot sales. But it’s at least a rough guide to their relative size. With the caveat, let’s have some more fun.

Here are TV’s top-billing station groups, with a side-glance at radio – #1 on the TVNewsCheck roll call of TV groups, ranked by estimated 2016 spot revenues, is Sinclair/Tribune at $2.9 billion in spot revenue. (Adding Tribune Media lifts Sinclair from #4 to #1.) The #2-billing TV station group is CBS ($1.725 billion), and Fox is a very close #3 ($1.717 billion). #4 is Comcast/NBC ($1.48 billion) and Nexstar’s #5 at $1.249 billion. Okay, back to the parallel radio universe, for some very rough comparisons. The CBS Radio group reported $1.22 billion for last year, which is more than TV operator ABC-Disney’s $1.19 billion, Hearst’s $853 million and Univision’s $810 million. If you’re wondering how the future Entercom + CBS Radio would stack up, the annual revenue (disregarding possible divestitures) would’ve been about $1.7 billion last year. That’s close to the CBS-TV-owned stations and the Fox station group. See how the TV universe lays out with the TVNewsCheck Top 30 here. Revenue numbers are from BIA/Kelsey. Appraising the new position of Sinclair, its Dr. Mark Fratrik says “This is the first time in a long time-- maybe forever-- that a non [TV network] O&O is #1 in revenue.”

Note that these figures refer only to station spot sales revenues, not income from “re-trans” fees paid by cable and satellite-- and not to the other businesses of those corporations, e.g. networks (Fox, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc.), cable channels, or cable systems (Comcast).

And note, too, that Sinclair did not control the Tribune stations in 2016.  TVNewsCheck got some flack in the form of reader comments for misleadingly combining the two companies' earnings  instead of listing them separately (see the link in the second paragraph above).