Talk:List of United States over-the-air television networks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Re: The Omni Broadcast Network: Someone has listed the network as having 38 full-power affiliates in the table. I would like a source on this. The ONLY reference I can find on Omni is the company web-site, which boasts 38 stations, NOT 38 full-power stations. In fact, Omni's flagship station, its only O&O, is an LP (low power) station. Until I see a source for this rather unknown company having 38 full power stations, I'm changing the number back to what it originally was: 0.--Firsfron 10:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Is there any point in having the section that tells what the analog channels are in the US? Seems out of place here. sam 23:26, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

  • Agreed. --Firsfron 02:29, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

---

Once again, I must object. These are television networks, not channels. A channel, also called a station, is KABC or Channel 7. I'm going to move the article. -- Zoe

(much later)

This page was moved from List of American television networks to List of United States television networks in order to be consistent with List of United States radio networks. See the talk page for why it was this page, rather than that one, moved. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:57, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The nicknames for the networks are pretty controversial! Furthermore, they are indicative of a particular point of view about the network that isn't commonly held. IMO if anywhere, they belong a) with some explanation of the criticisms they reflect and b) on the networks' individual pages. KeithTyler 22:49, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

---

It should perhaps be made more clear that a "television network" is a network of broadcast stations -- not a cable channel. KeithTyler

Movement[edit]

I don't understand the need to move the article. A television network is a network of stations, not just a studio with a satellite uplink. I don't care what you call yourself, you're not a network if you only have one node. Certainly plenty of cable channels call themselves "networks" to make themselves sound significant, but that doesn't make them television networks.

In any case I'd think a move like this would have necessitated some discussion first. KeithTyler 17:05, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)

Massive problems[edit]

Please see my comments in Talk:Lists of television channels if you are interested in standardizing the various television station/channel pages. - dcljr 02:37, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)


I have worked on standardizing the various TV network pages. Prior to this standardizing, some of the pages (like the ABC page) focused nearly exclusively on corporate mergers, while others (like the FOX page) listed mostly TV shows aired on the network.

Now each page contains a little bit about the shows, but also contains info on how many affiliates that network has, how many people receive a signal from the network, etc. I also built a comparison chart on this page.

Naming[edit]

I think that either all of the networks should be referenced by their full names in the "English-language American commercial over-the-air television networks" area, or by their abbreviations, with their full names following [not some each way]. Tonsofpcs 05:55, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • The problem with that is that some networks normally refer to themselves by their acronyms, while some networks don't normally use acronyms at all. I have included the acronym if the acronym is ever used, but haven't included abbreviations to networks which never use an acronym. At one time, I think I might have listed each network by its full name, but it was large and unweildy, and made the table show up overly large in my browser.--Firsfron 09:17, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The CW Network[edit]

Well, it was bound to happen. Two limping netlets ((Used Parts Network and The WB) finally merge.

What will happen to the tables once the network comes on the air?

Will we start seeing a hungry NBC licking its lips at i (TV network) next?

Raccoon Fox 03:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once UPN and WB merge, we'll have to update the table. But they won't merge until Autumn. The pages which list each network's affiliates will also have to be updated, as well as the lists of US TV stations beginning with K, W, and X.--Firsfron 23:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I can handle updating the lists if you want. Shouldn't be too difficult. Just curious, though...should i add the CW Network and My Network TV to the table, or wait until they launch? Raccoon Fox 03:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion it is better to wait until they are actually up and running (or close to it) before they appear on this list. That is just my opinion, though. I think there will be many changes before they are finally on the air, and it doesn't make sense to me to update the list continually, based on the vagueness that currently surrounds the question of which nets will get which affiliates. Currently, the list of CW network affiliates is in bad shape because editors have added potential affiliates to the list, and the list of My Network TV affiliates may get to be the same way.--Firsfron 19:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Syndication/Programming Blocks or Network Programming?[edit]

Since Deutsche Welle offers programming to different stations, and is called a "Network", should it be listed with the affiliates? and if so, should the same go for the Kids WB, FoxBox/4Kids Entertainment, and BKN animation blocks? That is how the Retro Television Network (RTN) started, at least.... User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 00:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed FoxKids and Kids WB from the list. These aren't separate networks, obviously, as their name implies, but just programming offered by the same company. RTN, from what I see, is just airing syndicated programming, so I'm unsure it should even be listed as a network, but if they're marketing themselves as a network, I'm cool with leaving them in the list, for now. DW... do we have a source where they themselves call the company a network?--Firsfron of Ronchester 16:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asia Vision[edit]

Is this an actual network? The article in its flagship station WIAV-LP seems to say so....three stations, to be precise. does that warrant it to be a Network, and for it to be listed here? User:Raccoon Fox - Talk 00:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the link, the "official web-site" of Asia Vision doesn't mention Asia Vision, and the company that owns the station, Radio Music Productions, says it offers TV and Radio advertisement production. What television network makes local (DC-area) commercials? And what television network makes no mention of its name on its official web-site? (To be fair, I only checked out the main page and the four or five pages underneath it, but there was no mention of Asia Vision anywhere on them). I removed the network from the list, temporarily, until a link can be provided showing Asia Vision is an actual network (like an official web-site, heck one of the "networks" we list has only a MySpace account!) --Firsfron of Ronchester 16:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shop at Home[edit]

It seems that Shop at Home has been revived as a part-time network. I think we can remove references to its closure now... --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --Firsfron of Ronchester 16:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urban America Television[edit]

uatv is being put on the defunct list, then taken off, then put on again.maybe should we wait till it is confirmed that the network is defunct.there is still a chance (albeit slim) that it may go back on the air.

Organization[edit]

Shall i organize the Table by Network Name, Age, Size (affiliate number), or by type? Should i even break the template up into different templates? it seems to be getting awfully big... User:Raccoon Fox • Talk 23:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was huge. I don't object.--Firsfron of Ronchester 01:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MyNetworkTV[edit]

Someone should add MyNetworkTV to the table of networks. i was thinking about adding it myself, but i dont know several important details (eg: % of U.S. Households Reached, # of Households Viewable, # of full-power affiliates, # of low-power affiliates & transmitters), so i hope someone will do it.Yet-another-user 04:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PBS Kids[edit]

This channel is not defunct! It never really was a channel, anyway (it is attached to normal PBS). I say to move it to another section or delete it from the article for good!

Non-broadcast networks[edit]

I'm noting several of non-broadcast networks here (Bloomberg, HITN, HTV); I'm going to remove them, unless someone can point to them as full-time broadcast networks someplace (Yes, I know they are cable/satellite, but this article is for broadcast nets) --Mhking 14:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If someone can provide refs that they operate over-the-air stations, they should be kept. Barring that, there's no reason they should be in these lists. Firsfron of Ronchester 21:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RacconFox -- unless you can provide notation as to WHERE those networks are broadcast networks, they shouldn't be included. --Mhking 18:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


PBS[edit]

I dont think PBS should be included as a network becouse its govorment affiliated, non comercial, and all its stations are independent of each other, nor should its predicesor NET. --J intela 03:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of how it's funded, PBS is a "network" in that all of its stations follow a similar branding pattern, carry much of the same programming (though not always on the same schedule), and are controlled by a single entity (the Corporation for Public Broadcasting). Whether it's "commercial" or not has nothing to do with it - PBS, and its NET predecessor, have always been a true network of TV stations. Duncan1800 (talk) 07:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


May I just submit this thought - PBS stands for Public Broadcasting Service. It is service as opposed to system because it's a programing and content provider not a network. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.230.8.165 (talk) 01:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you say the same about the BBC in the UK, CBC in Canada, TVNZ in New Zealand, etc., as they're all public television broadcasters, much like PBS? The thing is, even though PBS member stations aren't "technically" owned by PBS, they still air a lot of its programming. I mean, to an extent, even stations actually owned by the major US networks (CBS, NBC, ABC) don't always air network programming, but they're still considered network affiliates. Just because a network produces programming doesn't always mean a station affiliated with said network will air that programming; WBBM (CBS 2 Chicago), WMAQ (NBC 5 Chicago), WLS (ABC 7 Chicago), WFLD (Fox 32 Chicago), & WPWR (My50 Chicago) don't always air programming produced by the network they're owned by, but they're still considered network stations. 2600:1700:C960:2270:918D:B7CC:B727:5ADE (talk) 05:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Updating[edit]

This article really needs updating. For example, The Tube Music Network is now defunct, But has not been added to the list of defunct TV networks. I'd do it myself but I'm half-asleep 58.104.20.194 (talk) 07:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take this on, as it's desperately in need of help. I'll be placing an edit tag on top of the page, as it might take me a day or so to do the research. Duncan1800 (talk) 07:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I can't get to it right now, so I've removed the edit tag. Feel free to revert if you wish, but I didn't honestly change much. The plan was to reconcile the text at the bottom of the page with the tables on top, to split up both of those blocks. I would also argue that the specific info about each network could be moved to the relevant articles, as this page is already 38k in hugeness. Duncan1800 (talk) 09:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

high-traffic alert[edit]

Expect high traffic to this page, fellow wikipedians. Yahoo! is linking to it from [1] RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 20:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is so out of date it's funny[edit]

Really, many of the networks mentioned have added PLENTY of affiliates since the numbers were added to this article. Retro Agnostic (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please add My Retro TV[edit]

Just started this month, please add it! My Retro TV. Retro Agnostic (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already exists - RTN Retro Television Network (myretrotv.com). Not a new network, but changed hands in 2008 due to the Equity Media Holdings chapter 11 bankruptcy, now operated by Luken Communications. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 05:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FOX, CW and MyNetworkTV[edit]

The article says FOX, CW and MyNetworkTV reach exactly the same number of people, which is obviously incorrect. Does anyone have the real numbers? Pja1981 (talk) 18:59, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About myNetworkTV[edit]

It should be removed from the major television networks section, since News Corp has announced that MNT is technically no longer a TV network, but more of a programming syndication service now. 67.173.117.222 (talk) 09:57, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is technically true, and the change was made for legal reasons. However in practice it is still treated as a TV network by almost everyone, including elsewhere on Wikipedia, plus by the affiliates and TV listings. Therefore it's been re-added to the list. 82.153.198.135 (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your "by almost everyone" is a WP:WEASEL violation as it is unverifiable and violates the WP:V mandate. Therefore, I am removing this as unverifiable original research under the WP:NOR mandate. - Davodd (talk) 11:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with the above comments. myNetworkTV is no longer a major network and it needs to be bumped down. Rreagan007 (talk) 04:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retro Television Network % of U.S. households reached[edit]

I've been trying to find an updated number, but RTN has lost many affiliates in the last year to competitors like Antenna TV and MeTV, so 67% is probably no longer correct. (Esw01407 (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I'm going to copy this over to WP:TVS so that someone more familiar with the math of this article can help us out. Nate • (chatter) 01:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PBS, stations vs. population reached[edit]

can someone explain why, despite having many more stations than the commercial networks, PBS reaches less population? 68.227.174.198 (talk) 00:58, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some television markets just don't have a PBS station or are served by satellite stations, or for larger states with a less dense population, are served by translators that aren't counted in the numbers. Nate • (chatter) 02:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of United States over-the-air television networks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:16, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfC about PBS's status, not just as a US TV network, but as a major US TV network[edit]

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus was reached that PBS is a US TV network & it is a major US TV network. As a result, the article for PBS will be edited to reflect this community consensus. And, the un-sourced comments about viewership will be disregarded. 2600:1700:C960:2270:94A6:8FE6:3787:1A0D (talk) 04:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should PBS be considered a United States TV network? And, based off that, should it be considered a major United States TV network? 2600:1700:C960:2270:918D:B7CC:B727:5ADE (talk) 06:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, and yes since it is in the US and is a TV network, and it is the largest non-profit one with a long history. I see in above discussions only two arguments with any relevance: a) that it's a content provider not a network, but this is a meaningless distinction today, a period in which most networks are also content providers of their own; and b) that it's not a network because its stations are independent, but this is also true of many other networks, and we are using "network" very loosely defined.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • and more yes because PBS is a public broadcaster just like any other US station, and they follow the same FCC rules for the public and broadcasting as any other public broadcaster in the US must. It's even in their names for crying out loud (Federal Communications Commission, and Public Broadcasting Service). Also, agree with SmC about PBS being largest non-profit with a long history. As SmC has explained, "network" is a very loose term referring to what the FCC calls "public broadcasters", and PBS is for sure on the FCC official list of registered public broadcasters. Huggums537 (talk) 16:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Endorse The reason for my reversion was past consensus and because the heading is built more for major commercial networks just because the 'MyNet/Ion is major!' argument is just...all-around exhausting. That said, now that we converted the top image to a gallery rather than a solid image, I would not be opposed to having PBS in that category, as long as it's agreed to by consensus. Nate • (chatter) 20:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Been a while since I reviewed this article, and I don't know who started this nonsense about removing the CW from "The Big 5" when there are sources for them being part of the big 5 major networks. The "MyNet/Ion is major!" argument might be exhausting, but it has no basis in sourcing, so there is no justification for it to be included as major, but there are sources to justify the CW as major. Me thinks it's pretty dumb to have the major and minor sections anyway. Wikipedia should not be defining what is a major network, and what isn't. For example, the image caption should not read; "The five major commercial broadcast television networks, operating in the United States" as in an authoritative voice, but more like, "The logos of five common commercial broadcast television networks, which operate in the United States". It is original research for us to be arguing about what is a major network and what isn't. If it were my article, I would drop the language of "major networks" all together. For example, in the lede, I would change: In the United States, for most of the history of broadcasting, there were only three or four major commercial national terrestrial networks. to something more along the lines of: "In the United States, for most of the history of broadcasting, there were only three or four widely available commercial national terrestrial networks." Huggums537 (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Are there research or statistics on historical viewership of these networks? Senorangel (talk) 23:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, and No - Yes as network, No not major. The label ‘network’ is not used as much for it as for others, but seems used enough to include it. (e.g. yougov) But it does not seem ‘major’ as the viewership numbers are so far below the biggest networks (ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC...) and so many others are above it. My impression is that PBS would be somewhere between #11 and #20, behind others like TNT, ESPN, Univision, HGTV, etcetera. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Um, except TNT, ESPN, Univision, HGTV, etcetera are not terrestrial over the air broadcast networks so even if you had any data supporting this it would be inapplicable to this article. Huggums537 (talk) 05:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As far as your claim about viewership; do you have any data to back it up? I mean, you made a claim without linking to anything that backs up the claim. If you're going to make accusations/allegations, then it's common sense that you then provide sources that back up what you're saying. So, I am requesting that either you provide a source for the data you're referencing, or be smart enough to retract your statement before you hurt your side. 2600:1700:C960:2270:D19C:DC99:A287:62E7 (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So Markbassett, you've got nothing, no data, no sources, to back up your claim about viewership numbers for PBS.
Honestly, I would almost ask another Wikipedia editor to have your claim about viewership numbers stricken from this discussion. 2600:1700:C960:2270:E064:F985:6600:2A0F (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, and yes it is indeed a (public broadcaster) TV network based in the US. NMasiha (talk) 17:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Concerning the inclusion of the PBS logo in the article...[edit]

Someone needs to write up a valid non-free use rationale on the image page for the PBS logo, so that the logo can be included in the box with the logos for ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, & The CW. Honestly, I have no clue how to do it myself (I've never written up something like that), so a more experienced editor would need to write one up, so the logo can be put back in the article. 2600:1700:C960:2270:5D07:23C4:1139:5BF1 (talk) 08:26, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning The CW's status as a TV network...[edit]

This has been open at least fourteen months too long. The CW is a broadcast network and the addition of sports only solidifies that, and the IP has tried to belabor the point so long it's now dull. Nate • (chatter) 00:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An editor has decided, without discussing it beforehand, to demote The CW's position within the article to a minor TV network.

Now, after doing some research through Google ([2], [3], [4]), it seems to me that The CW is in fact America's fifth major TV network after ABC, CBS, Fox, & NBC.

So, should The CW's position in the article be reverted back to being a major TV network? 2600:1700:C960:2270:4DA1:A876:E48E:5AC (talk) 23:04, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All reverted; clear vandalism. The IP has been doing this same thing for months and trying to be WP:POINTy about MyNetworkTV being a network rather than the time-filler block it is now (and some foggy CRYSTALing that the C-Dub will end up only carrying NewsNation when Nexstar acquires control, which isn't happening). I'll continue to revert this; it carries original programming. End of. Nate • (chatter) 23:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This too; the network will find replacement affiliates despite the loss of CBS stations and they still originate mostly original programming, even if it's from unconventional or international sources. Nate • (chatter) 01:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CW Sports programming is not carried by CW affiliates owned by CBS News and Stations (which dropped the network's programming on September 1, 2023, and already has rival PGA Tour), Lilly Broadcasting, or Tegna Inc.; In the affected markets that don't air coverage of LIV Golf, CW Sports programming will air on digital multicast networks carried on digital subchannels under a secondary affiliation agreement, so technically CW Sports is a programming service similar to MyNetworkTV. 2603:8001:B202:3294:B8C5:DD92:B856:1582 (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a clearly temporary situation that will resolve over time as affiliation agreements are updated or made (which NX is taking care of as far as the loss of the CBSNS group); the articles to note this are those involving The CW, not this one, because that goes into finite detail territory. Also it features original content for sure, not a rerun feed like MyNet. Nate • (chatter) 18:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth noting that the new CW affiliate in Seattle (KOMO-DT2) has a secondary affiliation with the digital multicast network Comet, so technically it has a similar format to MyNetworkTV, which usually maintains secondary affiliation agreements with other digital multicast networks. 2603:8001:B202:3294:D9FA:68F:C5EB:5439 (talk) 02:24, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nexstar's acquisition of The CW resulted in criticism, specifically their strategy is to cut back on its original programming, instead by converting the network into a programming service relying on syndicated content from broadcast networks and cable channels, and sports programming. It's worth mentioning that most CW stations owned by Nexstar have deemphasized the network's branding outside of the network's programming schedule. 24.30.157.170 (talk) 02:37, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A so-called "programming service" (which is wholly uncited) wouldn't be adding sports programming in new timeslots or just carrying old Dateline episodes found on Xumo and calling it a day. Canadian content not seen in America before, along with sports programming, is still new content and it's clear this is a transition period as a network, not a white flag. And one very unusual aberration in its affiliation base (which was a last-minute issue and will be settled down the line) does not portend the network's fate. Unlike MyNetworkTV which is declining into a true secondary service on subchannels with 'primary' as a misnomer, The CW is still a network, and you need to stop unless you have strong industry sourcing as to this conclusion. Nate • (chatter) 03:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nexstar does has the option to buy the remaining stakes of The CW sometime between 2024 and 2026, just to confirm that Nexstar is violating FCC ownership regulations since the company owns almost 200 stations, and it's possible that Nexstar will highly likely downgrade The CW to a to a minor broadcast network. 2603:8001:B202:3294:A87A:F9DC:F23B:5ED (talk) 04:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Until, and if that day comes that they just offer a flat 24/7 feed of repeats, right now it's a major broadcast network. They have affiliates and offer original programming. It's a network. This argument is tiresome and you're now in the territory of debate for the sake of it even as your argument was refuted months ago. Nate • (chatter) 13:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were recent affiliation changes that happened in Phoenix DMA, as KASW recently became an independent station airing telecasts of the Arizona Coyotes hockey team, and The CW affiliation moved to KNXV-DT2, sharing a secondary affiliation with the multicast network Antenna TV. Now it's confirmed that The CW has a similar format to MyNetworkTV. 2603:8001:B202:3294:54BF:A16:D250:30E1 (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And this changes absolutely nothing. Still a broadcast network, not a syndicated service. We're done here. The horse has reincarnated into something else and wants you to move on now. Nate • (chatter) 00:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

About Ion Television[edit]

Ion has main-channel coverage throughout the country on full-power stations and affiliates broadcasting over-the-air, it's a broadcast network, procedurals and all. Discussion closed. Nate • (chatter) 05:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ion Television is not a broadcast network, as the majority of the network's affiliates are automated with the same schedule of duplicative programming easily found on streaming services, unlike the other broadcast networks which program their own schedules. In fact, Ion Television also operates as a streaming channel and as a pay television network. The network obviously had a better history when it was known as Pax TV, which had original programming in its early years. I wish Ion Television shuts down forever and their stations will revert to their independent status afterwards. 2603:8001:B202:3294:54BF:A16:D250:30E1 (talk) 04:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has television stations that broadcast it as a main channel. There are affiliates. There is sports coverage on the network. It is free-to-air to everyone and not a 'pay channel'. This is becoming disruptive and you've been told this multiple times. Stop your persistence and find something else to do; further questions like this will be removed unanswered (and certainly not debated). Nate • (chatter) 05:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If Ion Television does shut down, Ion Plus would take over Ion's channel space, and then Qubo would relaunch afterwards. Besides, both networks had more better programming, particularly Canadian content.2603:8001:B202:3294:8BD:3038:1118:CE8A (talk) 08:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Broadcast networks that share secondary affiliations[edit]

As above; no need to engage the IP any further. Nate • (chatter) 14:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In the past, the Big Four networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox) maintained secondary affiliations on stations affiliated with other networks depending on the market; This would also apply to UPN and The WB, which usually relied on secondary affiliations as well. 2603:8001:B202:3294:255C:4D3F:B587:AC8E (talk) 02:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, the only two broadcast networks that share secondary affiliations with other networks are The CW and MyNetworkTV, both of which are programming services that share secondary affiliations with digital multicast networks such as Antenna TV. 2603:8001:B202:3294:EC21:A6B8:73DE:92D7 (talk) 02:30, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What?? The CW is a network, not a service. It's not like MyNetworkTV, and yes, stations like Sinclair-Owned KOMO-TV and Scripps-Owned KNXV-TV air the CW on a digital subchannel, it's not considered a programming service but it airs programs that aren't all repeats. I don't understand your reasoning but it's not a service, it's a network. Mer764Wiki (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What about The CW Sports, which is a syndication service that shares secondary affiliations with other stations, as most CW affiliates refused to air sports programming. 2603:8001:B202:3294:EC21:A6B8:73DE:92D7 (talk) 04:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's part of the network. Stop. Nate • (chatter) 14:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hybrid networks[edit]

In 2024 I hope you resolve to find something else to do; it's a broadcast network owned by a broadcast group. Ion is a broadcast network owned by a broadcast group, and a hybrid network is something you made up and not for here or any respected broadcast forum. Nate • (chatter) 02:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nexstar's majority purchase of The CW resulted in some odd side-effects, which is the network is clearly becoming more of a hybrid rather than a true broadcast network by sharing secondary affiliations with digital multicast television networks (such as the affiliate in Phoenix, Arizona, which shares a secondary affiliation with Antenna TV on it's second subchannel), which clearly relegates the network's status from major to minor. The tipping point is that Nexstar gave CBS the right to drop The CW affiliations, which led to an affiliation realignment of owned-and-operated stations. 2603:8001:B202:3294:8BD:3038:1118:CE8A (talk) 08:09, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, sounds like you've been at this behavior for some time.
I mean, @MrSchimpf: (a.k.a. Nate) has had to tell you to cease your attempts at pushing the narrative that The CW isn't a major TV network.
The thing is, with the discussion I linked you to on here from your talk page, the user who started that discussion used multiple sources that clearly reference The CW as a major TV network. How does a station's CW affiliation being placed on a subchannel (?.2, ?.3, etc.) mean The CW is no longer a major TV network? You do realize there's stations in some US cities where affiliation with NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, etc. is placed on a subchannel sometimes because there aren't enough stations in certain cities to accommodate all the currently-existing networks, don't you?
So, using your logic, does that then mean that, if a station affiliated with one of the major TV networks (NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, etc.) in some random US city has its NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox affiliation on a subchannel, rather than on the main channel, then NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox is no longer a major TV network? ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 10:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To begin with, when The CW Sports division was announced, several affiliates declined to carry the network's sports programming (particularly the CBS-owned stations), and in those affected markets, CW Sports programming instead aired on Nexstar-owned stations or digital subchannels, or on other stations via secondary affiliation agreements. When CBS-owned stations decided to drop the CW affiliations, it was all clear to me that The CW has became more of a hybrid rather than a true broadcast network like MyNetworkTV. 2603:8001:B202:3294:8BD:3038:1118:CE8A (talk) 10:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just because when you've posted elsewhere using that terminology, I didn't quite understand.
What do you mean by a "hybrid" network? ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 10:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A hybrid network refers to a programming block, as it's a format that mixes elements of both network and syndication models as original and syndicated programming are supplied during prime time by the networks and by their stations at all other times. 2603:8001:B202:3294:8BD:3038:1118:CE8A (talk) 11:03, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, you're saying just because The CW on some stations in some cities was relegated to a subchannel, rather than the main channel, that means it's no longer a major TV network?
I mean, from what I'm aware of, the major networks, for the most part, are major due to the fact of how widespread their carriage is. If you look at the table listing for the networks, you'll see a column that is titled ""% of U.S. households reached". The CW is right up there with NBC, CBS, ABC, & Fox at 97%. Of course, MyNetworkTV is also at 97%, but Fox has openly & officially declared MyNetworkTV a programming syndication service. As for Ion Television, their number is at 75%.
So, your claim of a "hybrid" network has no basis in reality. A programming block is a block of programming broadcast on a TV network; a good example of a programming block is Heroes & Icons (H&I)'s "All Star Trek" programming block Monday through Friday.
So, honestly, I completely disagree with your premise of The CW being a "hybrid" network, as it's nothing of the sort. ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 15:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From what I've remembered, the Tribune-owned CW affiliates deemphasized the network's branding during its early years, to the point that the CBS-owned CW stations have kept the network's branding up until their stations disaffiliated from the network. 2603:8001:B202:3294:8BD:3038:1118:CE8A (talk) 16:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Syndication packages[edit]

It's not syndicated, it's simply not a part of their current network contract and they aren't required to carry it under those terms, so it's sub-contracted to another station. Further disruption will lead to a noticeboard report for persistent harassment. Nate • (chatter) 17:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If The CW Sports is not officially part of The CW's schedule, let's consider it as a syndication package similar to ACC Network. Currently, CW stations owned by Tegna Media or Lilly Broadcasting refused to carry it as they have the right of first refusal, and it's instead being carried on digital subchannel networks, MyNetworkTV affiliates, or independent stations under secondary affiliation agreements. 2603:8001:B202:3294:C95A:64A7:3DEF:9B2C (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From my awareness, The CW Sports is the sports division of The CW, so claiming it's not is incorrect.
And, again bringing up stations' affiliate status with The CW has already been proven not to affect the network's status as a major network., as user Nate/MrSchimpf has reminded you multiple times already.
So, at this point, I am kindly reminding you of @MrSchimpf:'s multiple comments to you on this issue. I will also kindly request that you cease & desist your actions on this subject; your thoughts have been acknowledged & addressed. ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_United_States_over-the-air_television_networks&oldid=1203700384"