Image: A viral video produced by Deadspin in March听2018 showed reporters at Sinclair stations across the country reciting the same script about "fake news."听
When big conglomerates buy up small news outlets, local news takes a hit. But the parent company may not influence the political agenda of its stations as much as some have suspected, finds听 of TV goliath Sinclair Broadcast Group.
The paper, published this week in the journal Electronic News, analyzed hundreds of thousands of news stories from six stations over six years, using big data to ask the question: What happens to a station after Sinclair buys it?
The findings, the authors say, are both bad news and good news for journalism.
鈥淭his paper provides strong evidence that when a large corporation takes over a news station, the amount of local content produced diminishes. That鈥檚 something to be concerned about,鈥� said co-author Chris Vargo, an associate professor in the College of Media, Communication and Information (CMCI). 鈥淏ut we did not see, at scale, the blatant issue manipulation some have suspected. We found no smoking gun.鈥�
Depleted newsroom and soaring syndication
With 186 stations across 620 channels in 82 markets, Sinclair is among the largest owners of TV news stations in the country, reaching about 40% of U.S. households.
Some have criticized the rapidly-expanding company for stripping newly acquired newsrooms of resources, even though federal licensure mandates an emphasis on local coverage.
If you鈥檙e looking for a silver lining here, it听appears the standards and norms of journalism are alive and well among individual journalists and not easily compromised by one new owner.鈥�
鈥揓ustin Blankenship
Sinclair has also been accused of imposing a top-down conservative editorial stance on its stations.
In one instance, the company required stations to run a weekly commentary called Bottom Line with Boris听presented by a former senior advisor to President Donald Trump.
In March 2018, Sinclair required all stations to听air a video of local anchors reading a script decrying the 鈥渢roubling trend of irresponsible, one-sided news stories plaguing our country鈥� and accusing other outlets for publishing 鈥渇ake stories鈥� and pushing their own 鈥減ersonal bias and agenda.鈥� about the incident abounded.
鈥淭his company has a reputation for buying up companies and rapidly expanding,听and also for its conservative spin. We wanted to ask, 鈥楬ow does that really trickle down to affect local coverage?鈥欌�� said co-author Justin Blankenship, an assistant professor at Auburn University.
To answer that question, the researchers utilized a massive database to analyze 346,586 news stories posted before and after six stations in Nebraska, Montana and California were acquired by Sinclair.
They found the amount of news content published overall steeply declined after a Sinclair acquisition鈥撯�揺vidence听the company may indeed be depleting its newsrooms of resources, the authors said.
For instance, at one Montana station, the average number of stories produced weekly dropped from 410 pre-acquisition to 160 post-acquisition.
For five out of six stations, local news content鈥撯�搘hich had already been on the decline鈥撯�揷ontinued to slide. For one station that had been expanding its local news coverage, that expansion slowed after acquisition.
Meanwhile, syndicated content reposted from other stations in different markets continued to increase.
鈥淭he situation was already bad for local news and then it got worse鈥� after acquisition, said Vargo, noting that one argument in favor of media consolidation is, via economies of scale, stations will be able to improve coverage. 鈥淭here is no evidence these stations are being better taken care of under a conglomerate.鈥�
Journalism standards 鈥榓live and well鈥�
The study did not, however, find a clear conservative shift in coverage once Sinclair took over.
Instead, it found that newly acquired stations covered party politics less.
Chris Vargo
鈥淪ome have assumed that if a conservative parent company took over, they would emphasize certain issues and deemphasize other issues. But we found no evidence that is happening at scale,鈥� said Vargo.
This finding is in line with other research on the so-called 听or what happens to stations under the company鈥檚 ownership.
In comparing the content of news shows on Sinclair vs. non-Sinclair stations, Blankenship found that听while those owned by the media giant tended to be more 鈥渃able-news style鈥� with dramatic debates involving highly partisan sources, they did not carry a conservative political bias.
The infamous 鈥渇ake news鈥澨齭cript incident, while troubling, only happened once, Blankenship notes. And, anecdotally, some news directors have pushed back on must-run segments such as听Bottom Line with Boris鈥撯�揹eliberately airing them at times of low viewership.
鈥淚f you鈥檙e looking for a silver lining here, It鈥檚 this:,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t appears that the standards and norms of journalism are alive and well among individual journalists and not easily compromised by one new owner.鈥�
