Media Shake-up: Warren Buffett Buys WPLG-TV

 

BY BUDDY NEVINS

 

 

Miami’s Channel 10-WPLG, best known among politicians as the home of political broadcaster Michael Putney, has been sold to billionaire Warren Buffett.

At lunchtime, WPLG’s website didn’t have the story. But Forbes said Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway would exchange stock in Graham Holdings for the station.

The station has a long history with the Graham family, who formerly owned the Washington Post. WPLG stands for Philip Leslie Graham.

 

Michael-Putney---26557268

Putney gets a new boss

It is way too early to know how the station will fare under the new ownership. According to the Wall Street Journal, this is Buffett’s first television station.

Hopefully Putney, who has been at WPLG 25 years after a stint as a Miami Herald columnist and write, will remain doing what he does best: Cover politics.  He is clearly the best-known, most respected political journalist in South Florida.

According to the November sweeps, WPLG’s news lagged badly among the key 24-54 demographic in the morning, landing in third place after Channel 7- WSVN and Channel 6-WTVJ. It was in second place at 6 p.m. to WSVN.  It was in the first place at 11 p.m., but WSVN’s 10 p.m. and 11 p.m. newscast combined ratings was ahead of WPLG.

This is just the first of shake-up in the Old Media scheduled to hit South Florida this year. The Tribune Company, parent of the Sun-Sentinel, is planning to spin off its newspapers into a new separate print-only company.

So the local Broward daily is scheduled to have a new owner.

The new newspaper company, which would own eight newspapers including the Sun-Sentinel, is expected to be on extremely shaky ground right from the start.

The Tribune Company will keep all the real estate and charge the newspapers rent  (The Sun-Sentinel printing plant in Deerfield Beach, for instance). It will keep or sell many of the most lucrative Internet operations.

The Tribune Company is also requiring the newspapers to take on millions in debt to pay a huge dividend of up to $325 million.

Media writer Ken Doctor explained why the new newspaper company, whose future is tied to the Sun-Sentinel, is starting out with two strikes against it.

“Given that revenues will continue to be down this year (for Tribune newspapers), somewhere in the mid single digit range, they’ll have to continue cutting costs and staff to maintain profitability. The new debt service and lease obligations won’t break their backs, but they’ll be added new weight on backs already bent,” Doctor wrote in the Nieman Journalism Lab.  

Another possibility is that the new spinoff Tribune newspaper company sells the Sun-Sentinel. But who would buy it?

The one thing certain is that it will be a nerve-racking year in the newsrooms of South Florida.



22 Responses to “Media Shake-up: Warren Buffett Buys WPLG-TV”

  1. Sam The Sham says:

    I’ll give them a dollar for the Sun Sentinel. That is a good price for them.

  2. Broward Resident says:

    I stopped watching that channel when they hired Bob Norman.

  3. Chaz Stevens, Festivus says:

    Since Buffett owns Geico, and now owns WPLG, can we expect Bob Norman to start stunt-doubling as as a gecko?

    Hopefully, the new leadership at WPLG will finally awaken to Norman’s lying ways.

  4. must see tv says:

    Bob Norman interviewing Warren Buffet would be epic tv.

    especially if Bob hits Warren with some of those unsubstantiated rumors and innuendos he loves so do with out the facts to back it up.

    For example

    Bob: Mr. Buffet why were you hanging out at a teen club in Pompano.

    Warren: I have never been to such a place and I don’t even know where Pompano is.

    Bob: That’s a Damn Lie, the felon Drug Trafficer who owns the club, Scott Rothstien, Richie Incognito and an unnamed source who has been dead for 15 years saw you there.

    Welcome to WPLG Warren

  5. Retraction Bob says:

    Bob Norman is a no good lying slob disguised as a reporter constantly forced to issue retractions because his intentionally sloppy and inaccurate stories are consistently unworthy of any credible news source. He claims to report about corruption and ethics but nobody in his field is more corrupt or unethical than him.

  6. Willie BV says:

    Michael Putney is the best! I can’t believe anybody would believe he is not the heart of the 10 News. I learn ore from him than any 10 of the others with their coiffured hair and short skirts or rolled up sleeves.

  7. Retraction Bob says:

    @6 That is because Putney is a professional while Norman is not. Oh, did I forget to say that Bob Norman is a lying unethical slob?

  8. mrkneeley says:

    Once saw Norman reporting with a “No Trespassing” sign right over his shoulder -a guy who will break the law to try to catch a story should not be trusted. He looked like Tom Hanks in “Big” only a bit more of a doofus.

  9. Ghost of McLovin says:

    ….sure, you all hate Bob Norman but have read and watched every story he’s submitted in the past 5 years…hilarious

  10. Sad relaity says:

    Norman is going nowhere. Ch 10 loves him and he brings ratings.

    Look at the stories he has made retractions on, all against public officials who cant sue him. Probably an extra protection in the law that if you do a retraction within X amount of time.

    At a minimum Ch 10 should make Norman do the retraction himself instead of having the news anchors do it. Even a few days passing from the offending story, if some other guy reads a retraction most people will not put it all together.

    FROM BUDDY:

    You are right. Florida law reduces the financial penalty if there is a retraction within a few days of the alleged defamation.

    You people are obsessed with Mr. Norman. If you don’t like him, turn him off. There are other stations and the endless Internet.

    Who watches evening news anyway, except shut-ins and the elderly? Their audience skews old, old, old and is dying off…just like print newspapers. The news is old, old, old by the time it is on TV or in the newspapers.

    WPLG does have a star in Putney, who I have met a few times but don’t really know. We have no relationship. Putney brings added value to WPLG with his interview show, his contacts and his knowledge of politics gathered over years.

    Norman’s value to Channel 10 is not so much on television, but as a writer on their website, I have been told. Of course, WPLG can’t make money on that website. They are just trying to drive up clicks. Is there a financially beneficial future in that? Probably not.

  11. Chaz Stevens, Festivus says:

    @Buddy

    Given all the crap Norman has thrown your way over the years, I’d have not imagined you going all manzy-panzy on us.

    Folks are “obsessed” with him because we understand the damage he does, with such reckless abandon.

    Norman represents a lot of what’s wrong in today’s media. And to those of us bothered by it, we’ll continue to be obsessed.

  12. Sam The Sham says:

    I saw through Bob Norman years ago when he wrote for the New Times rag. Sensationalism, almost entirely unsubstantiated rumors and innuendo are his forte`. Never read or watched him since.

    Putney is a biased jerk in a biased industry. He leans left but nobody notices because of the overwhelming left demographics in the area. Plus, his longevity makes him the darling of the Geritol crowd.

  13. Real Deal says:

    The only thing I expect from the news media is the truth. It is their job to deliver that to us. When they don’t we are cheated and if the topic they cheat us on involves “news” of ethics, scandal or corruption, it transforms the news cheat into a hypocrite. Society depends on news to help it make decisions. Broadcasting misinformation steals that right from them and in a democracy that is the height of corruption.

    FROM BUDDY:

    Never forget that commercial news outlets must be compelling and ‘sticky’ enough to grab a viewer and keep them watching. So they often reach for the sensational. Lots and lots of crime news, which is easy to cover and very visual. The “investigation” that’s not really an “investigation.” The ambush interview. Consumer reports that are obvious to everybody but an idiot (“Public Bathrooms and Deadly Germs”). Everything backed by ominous music.

    That said, a lot of what’s done on local TV is top rate. For instance, the dirty restaurant reports on Channel 10, an old saw, is always riveting. Sports coverage is pretty good across the board.

    Sensationalism in the presentation of news is not new. Hearst and Pulitzer made a lot of money doing it 120 years ago.

  14. Sam The Sham says:

    @ Real Deal,

    Your understanding of journalism is a little off base. We have no “right to the truth” in journalism. We can hope for it or expect it but we cannot claim it as a right. Try to get Sam Fields to file a class action suit against “corrupt” journalists.

    Journalist might commit libel or slander but I doubt it is a crime. The place where misinformation is a crime is when it comes from government.

    We as consumers of news must be able to discern the crap (like what Norman and Putzney give us) from the truth.

  15. Real Deal says:

    @Sam. Incorrect. The press is given extraordinary constitutional protection so they are free to inform the people. This is why they are referred to as the fourth estate. Abuses of that power are corrupt and should be punishable in the same way as any other corruption. I do not buy Buddy’s excuses either. He is a great guy but there is a double standard in his logic that some corrupt are OK but others not. One is either corrupt or they’re not, ethical or not, truthful or not. When the news media violates abuses the authority given them so they can do their job well, they corrupt journalism and there has to be a price for that. They have no right whatsoever to create sensationalism. Sensationalism should arise naturally from the facts truthfully told.

  16. Chaz Stevens, Festivus says:

    When Bob Norman reported about the Parkland Pine Hollow affair (the Laramees), he intentionally only covered one half of the tale, leaving out Howard Dvorkin’s side — as I opine Bob’s got a raging boner for Dvorkin and his deep pockets.

    You see, had Mr-Sleeves-Rolled-Up-Hard-At-Work reported both sides, the Laramees would have come off as morons — skulking about in black clothing, blowing air horns, acting bat shit crazy, all in the hopes of scaring the living shit out of horses carrying young children.

    Bob didn’t allow that to make the airwaves.

    And where was his coverage when Laura Laramee almost ran over a couple of horses (this time, one rider was an off-duty cop)?

    You see Buddy, that’s the sort of shit Norman does on a regular basis, and thankfully, there’s a few here in the audience who choose not to remain silent.

  17. Sam The Sham says:

    “@Sam. Incorrect. The press is given extraordinary constitutional protection so they are free to inform the people. This is why they are referred to as the fourth estate. Abuses of that power are corrupt and should be punishable in the same way as any other corruption. I do not buy Buddy’s excuses either. He is a great guy but there is a double standard in his logic that some corrupt are OK but others not. One is either corrupt or they’re not, ethical or not, truthful or not. When the news media violates abuses the authority given them so they can do their job well, they corrupt journalism and there has to be a price for that. They have no right whatsoever to create sensationalism. Sensationalism should arise naturally from the facts truthfully told.”

    Good luck with that as your legal argument.

    FROM BUDDY:

    The media has every right to “create sensationalism.” Just look at the supermarket checkout line. The Constitution gives us Freedom of the Press. It doesn’t stipulate what kind of press should be free. In fact at the time the Constitution was written, the press often contained the most scurrilous half truths and outright lies about politicians.

  18. Chaz Stevens, Festivus says:

    >>> In fact at the time the Constitution was written, the press often contained the most scurrilous half truths and outright lies about politicians.

    A tradition I’ve tried proudly to carry on with my blog!

  19. Real Deal says:

    Buddy, it’s not simply that I do not agree. It’s that no rationally thinking person could agree with your comment.

    Sensationalism is by definition the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the “expense of accuracy” in order to provoke public interest or excitement. It is first cousin to propaganda, which is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

    Both are fist cousin to falsehood — the state of being untrue.

    Nobody has a right to lie especially not members of a profession whose job it is to tell the news truthfully. You guys wipe your asses with your own codes of ethics and then presume to report about the ethics of others. You’re just full of shit.

    All we want from you guys is the truth. How hard is that? Why can’t reporters muster the professional discipline to keep their egos in check? Newsflash — you are NOT the news makers. You are the news reporters. Just tell us the truth! Let us decide what’s right and wrong. Who the hell are you to mind screw society with your clever word tricks?

    Why do you reporters insist on mind control through lies, disguised as truth defining the work of journalists? Do you not understand that this is why people do not respect your profession anymore? Do you fail to appreciate that lack of truth is a big reason why society is so fucked up right now?

    Talk about arrogance you guys just take the cake.

  20. Apples and oranges says:

    As a wise journalist with a political column in the SSent told me 20 years ago at a YD meeting, there is a difference between a reporter and a columnist. A reporter,or an investigative reporter like BobNorman is supposed to report facts. A columnist writes a column based on that columnist opinions. Same thing with this blog, it is opinion, take it or leave it. Buddy never claimed to be a reporter on here. It is unfair to lump Nevins and Norman together as reporters as different standards apply to each.

  21. Ha Ha Ha says:

    http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/supreme-court-decide-if-anti-abortionists-have-right-lie-political-ads?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark

    January 16, 2014 – Republican lawyers are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to declare that they have a First Amendment right to lie during political campaigns. […]

  22. Chaz Stevens, Festivus says:

    Buddy…

    Are you suggesting the ethics of WPLG resemble those of The National Enquirer?

    When I compare Norman to Putney, it’s readily apparent that the WPLG blogger will never have the gravitas exuded by his colleague.

    Let’s play a game … Try to recall the top three stories that Norman’s broke since coming onto the air.

    Not easy right? Drawing a blank?

    Okay then, how about the top one story?