Approving the Sinclair-Tribune deal would be indefensible

In an Op-Ed piece, the LA Times Editorial Board says that the Sinclair/Tribune deal should be rejected.

 The paper writes in part, So why hasn't the FCC summarily rejected Sinclair Broadcast Group's proposed purchase of Tribune Media, which would allow Sinclair-owned stations to beam their programs to more than 70% of U.S. TV viewers? Because by the deliberately skewed calculations of the FCC's current Republican majority, those stations' broadcasts don't reach the households they really do reach.

The Times writes that the deal should be scrubbed, but not because Sinclair leans so far to the right. They write, "..Sinclair's political leanings are not the problem here. The real issue is whether any company — regardless of its politics — should be able to amass control over so much of the public airwaves."

They add, "the transaction won't go through unless the Justice Department's antitrust division signs off on it and the FCC agrees to transfer the licenses held by Tribune's stations to Sinclair. To bring itself down to the 39% cap with the UHF discount, Sinclair has said it would sell stations in San Diego, New York City and Chicago. But it also plans to continue to operate the New York and Chicago stations after the sale, while maintaining an option to buy the stations back. So much for diversity and localism."

Let's hope some people in power read the LA Times. 

---