When the Wire Goes Dark

If you grew up watching a local newscast almost anywhere in America, you probably saw CNN without knowing it. The anchor in Fort Wayne or Fresno or Fargo would toss to a package on a hurricane, a Supreme Court ruling, or a war overseas, and the footage was often shot by a CNN crew thousands of miles away. Nobody announced it. A small credit sat in the corner of the frame, or none at all. It was invisible infrastructure, and it helped hold American local news together.

Today, as a new corporate owner takes control of both CNN and CBS News, that infrastructure deserves a hard look. The threat is not technology or audience taste. It is ownership.

Subscribe

## The invisible wire

CNN Newsource, the network's syndication arm, rested on a simple idea. A mid-sized station could not afford a Washington bureau, a correspondent in Baghdad, or a crew on the ground when an earthquake hit another continent. But it could pay a subscription fee and receive professional video and reporting, which its producers cut into their own broadcasts. The station got the world. CNN got revenue and reach. The viewer got a newscast that felt larger than the market it served. CNN says Newsource partners with more than 1,000 local and international news organizations.

The arrangement worked because it was agnostic. A station's network affiliation did not decide whether it could use CNN's material. ABC, NBC, Fox and CBS affiliates could all buy in, as could independents. The networks ran their own services for their own affiliates, including CBS NewsPath, NBC NewsChannel, ABC NewsOne and Fox News Edge, but Newsource sat across the lines. These services were also two-way streets: NewsPath relies heavily on affiliates contributing their own footage, which meant a local station's reporting could reach the national stage.

I don't want to romanticize it. Wire feeds homogenized coverage, and stations leaned on them partly because it was cheaper than hiring reporters. But the wire was plural. Stations could choose among sources, and the choice was itself a small check on any one organization's judgment about what mattered.

## The first domino

The shared wire did not begin to fray today. It began years ago, at the country's largest local television group.

Nexstar Media Group owns the cable channel NewsNation. According to reporting, Nexstar required its stations to withhold breaking news footage from competing networks so NewsNation would get first coverage, and that led CNN to terminate a video-sharing agreement that gave Nexstar's 197 stations access to Newsource. CNN was the first source Nexstar's stations lost.

Others followed. This summer, Nexstar ended its CBS NewsPath agreement at more than three dozen CBS affiliates it owns or operates, after earlier dropping CNN Newsource and NBC NewsChannel. The Desk reported that Nexstar's Fox affiliates would rely almost exclusively on NewsNation packages and live feeds starting in September. Other reports said the company's stations would use only the Associated Press and NewsNation going forward. The loss runs both ways: CBS News will no longer receive live feeds from many Nexstar-owned CBS affiliates during breaking news.

The logic is plain. A company that owns a national news brand and hundreds of local stations has every reason to make the former feed the latter. It saves licensing fees, guarantees distribution, and centralizes control over which national stories get told and how.

## Others are building their own

Nexstar is not the only station group with a national news product of its own.

Sinclair produces The National Desk, launched in 2021, which airs on more than 70 stations and draws on content from Sinclair's stations around the country. This September it expanded to more stations, and in places like Toledo it has replaced a station's daytime local newscasts. Gray Media distributes InvestigateTV, which offers investigative and consumer reporting along with stories from Gray stations in over 100 markets. The E.W. Scripps Company operates Scripps News as a national streaming news channel.

I want to be careful about what this shows. None of these companies has said its product is meant to replace CNN Newsource or to rival NewsNation, and The National Desk predates the current upheaval by years. They are also different things: a newscast, an investigative franchise, a streaming channel. But the cumulative effect is worth noting. More of what viewers see on national stories now comes from a station group's own operation, not from a shared wire that many owners buy from. Taken one at a time, none of this is sinister, and some of it is good journalism. Taken together, it points in one direction.

## The other consolidation opens for business

The second shift arrived today. Paramount Skydance completed its $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, rebranded as Skydance, uniting CBS News and CNN along with networks like Comedy Central and TNT. CNN chief Mark Thompson and CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss will continue in their roles. Shares of both predecessor companies have been discontinued on the Nasdaq.

The path here was rough. The merger survived a bidding war with Netflix and a legal fight with 12 state attorneys general and the Writers Guild. To get past a federal judge, Ellison promised an independent oversight board to protect CNN from political interference. California's attorney general said the company agreed to an editorial board to help CNN and CBS maintain editorial independence.

I'm glad the states pushed for that. But notice what the commitments cover. They address editorial interference and, in a separate deal, a five-year layoff pause at CBS. As far as the public reporting shows, they do not address the commercial question that matters to local news: who gets to buy CNN's material, and on what terms.

## The question nobody has answered

That is the question I can't answer, and I'd argue no one outside the company can yet: what happens to the stations outside the Skydance family?

CNN still presents Newsource as an open service for local news organizations. Whether it stays that way for independents and for groups with products of their own is not something the public record settles. Contracts presumably run for fixed terms and renew on negotiated conditions. A company carrying heavy merger debt has an obvious financial reason to keep selling to a thousand customers. Those are reasons for cautious optimism. They are not guarantees, and nothing I have found in the public reporting commits Skydance to keeping Newsource open on equal terms.

That uncertainty is itself the story. The editorial board addresses independence. The state settlements address competition in film and employment. No one appears to have been charged with protecting access to a news wire that serves a thousand stations. The only protection for the independent station in a small market is the goodwill of a very large seller.

## What we lose

It helps to be specific about the stakes.

First, plurality where it counts. Local television remains how tens of millions of Americans get their news. If the national and international segments of those broadcasts come increasingly from one in-house source per owner, the range of editorial judgment reaching viewers narrows, whether or not anyone intended it.

Second, redundancy. A producer with several feeds can cross-check and compare. A producer told to use one source cannot.

Third, a shared baseline. When a big story breaks, there is value in many stations working from the same raw video and facts. A fractured system in which each owner supplies its own national narrative makes it easier for one event to look very different depending on which station you watch.

Fourth, the economics of national newsgathering. International bureaus are expensive, and syndication helped pay for them by spreading the cost across a thousand customers. As customers peel away into proprietary systems, that revenue shrinks, and the first things cut are the costly beats nobody's quarterly numbers reward.

## The counterargument

Defenders will say the old system was never sacred, and they have a point. Stations are businesses. If Nexstar or Sinclair can build a national product that serves its stations well, that is the market working. More national brands means more competition. And viewers have more ways to get news than ever.

But the argument misses the specific problem. The concern is not that new national brands exist. It is that one company can own both a brand and the pipe into hundreds of stations, and use that control to shut out alternatives. Competition among cable channels means little if the gatekeeper of the local newscast decides which one gets through. And the existence of other sources online does little for the viewer who simply watches the six o'clock news, which is exactly the viewer local television has always served.

## What should be done

I am not arguing that regulators should dictate editorial choices or force stations to buy from particular vendors. But some steps fit existing competition policy and the public-interest obligations that come with a broadcast license.

Regulators reviewing station-group deals should treat national news supply as a real factor, with conditions attached where a deal would let one owner control both a news brand and the national news diet of dozens of markets.

Editorial independence arrangements like the one attached to the Skydance deal should be extended to commercial terms. If CNN Newsource is meant to remain an open marketplace, the conditions of that openness should be public and verifiable, not simply assumed.

And stations, especially independents, should resist letting any single supplier become their only supplier. Maintaining several sources costs money, but it is the cheapest insurance a local newsroom can buy.

## A utility worth defending

The shared national wire was never glamorous. Few viewers knew its name. But it let a station in a town of 80,000 cover the world with some of the resources of a station in New York. It spread the cost of good journalism across the country and left the choice of sources in local hands.

Ownership concentration now pressures it from several directions. One owner pulled its stations out of the common marketplace, starting with CNN. Others are building national products of their own. And today a new company opened for business with two of the country's biggest national newsrooms under one roof, and with no public promise that everyone else can keep buying from them. None of these moves is necessarily malicious. All are rational. That is exactly the problem. When rational choices by a few large owners add up to a narrower, less plural system, the public pays the cost and never gets a vote.

The next time a local anchor tosses to a clip from a faraway story, ask where it came from, and who decided you would see it.