Who feels large media Corps are getting TOO large?

[schuck6566]

Anyone else feel that media Corps are getting too large and being left too unsupervised? For example,Disney,when they purchased Lucas Films,bought all their contracts and royalty rights also. Now,normally that's not such a bad thing,but Disney acquired the rights to contracts for books that had been written for Star Wars also.These contracts gave the authors a percentage of royalties and Lucas got a percentage as the TM holder who authorized the books to be written. Disney stopped paying the royalties to the author. When contacted they at first ignored him, Then after being contacted by his lawyer,they requested he sign a NDA before they would talk with him agreeing NOT to disclose what was discussed or that it was even held. SERIOUSLY? After the writers guilds got involved, Disney said they weren't responsible for the royalty payments because his contract had been with Lucas Films. If that had been allowed to stand, ANY company could get out of contract obligations simply by selling them to a sibling company. I can just see google selling it's playstore contracts to alphabet and telling developers "we don't owe you the 70% of sales because your contract was with google and alphabet owns it now."The problem is that authors are under different contract laws then others(say actors)and it's crazy that companies can use a loophole like this legally.               https://www.polygon.com/2020/12/16/22166064/star-wars-alien-novelization-disney-royalties-sfwa-alan-dean-foster                "Lawyers familiar with contract law tell Polygon that Disney’s arguments, that the transfer of the property to another publisher, and the ending of an original publisher’s edition of a book, nullifies any obligation to pay a writer or establish a new contract, might hold up. Companies buy assets and not the liabilities all the time, precisely because they don’t want to shoulder the burden of those obligations."               If you buy a companies assets,you should ALSO have to abide by the liabilities it incurred and had at the time of your purchase, that includes dealing in good faith with the people you owe.

 

[pio]

I'll admit I didn't read your post entirely, but yes.....I've been complaining of big businesses since ehhhhhhhh 2007 or so?

[schuck6566]

5 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

I'll admit I didn't read your post entirely, but yes.....I've been complaining of big businesses since ehhhhhhhh 2007 or so?

Too many mergers into one giant company anymore....

[UltraMega]

Without picking a side, I just want to point out; I think a lot of these companies wanted to be bought. 

[bonami2]

I think when you sign a contract you can add line that prevent this. Not too sure depend on country law etc.

 

It always the same thing. Big corporation buy every smaller opponent that how they stay on top sadly.

[ENTERPRISE]

Across the board in all areas, this is am issue. My first hand experience is with media companies buying up internet properties and bastardizing them. It sucks.

[schuck6566]

6 hours ago, bonami2 said:

I think when you sign a contract you can add line that prevent this. Not too sure depend on country law etc.

 

It always the same thing. Big corporation buy every smaller opponent that how they stay on top sadly.

lol, 1 of the contracts in question was for ghost writing the Star Wars novel for Lucas based on his script. Who could have imagined all the media buyouts back in the 70's?

[schuck6566]

6 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Without picking a side, I just want to point out; I think a lot of these companies wanted to be bought. 

I'm sure many of them did,especially when they're being forced to compete with corps that are more than 10x's size their size. The govt. is always stepping in to make sure that companies like Microsoft aren't becoming too large or becoming a monopoly but you hardly see that in the film industry buy outs. They make Cable companies sell movie/film divisions when purchasing other companies to break them up, but let media companies like Disney & paramount just keep buying out smaller film & tv companies.

[UltraMega]

2 hours ago, schuck6566 said:

I'm sure many of them did,especially when they're being forced to compete with corps that are more than 10x's size their size. The govt. is always stepping in to make sure that companies like Microsoft aren't becoming too large or becoming a monopoly but you hardly see that in the film industry buy outs. They make Cable companies sell movie/film divisions when purchasing other companies to break them up, but let media companies like Disney & paramount just keep buying out smaller film & tv companies.

Well, to be fair, there seems to be plenty of big media companies so no need to worry about a monopoly right now. 

[UltraMega]

I was thinking about this a bit more and I'm not sure there are actually fewer large media companies today compared to a time before streaming took off. How many media companies were there before streaming? I think it was probably a lot less since people were limited to cable providers of which there are few and really you get the same content with all of them. After that, we had Netflix and Hulu as the only real streaming services competing with cable, but for a long time Comcast was a major share holder of Hulu anyway so it was less so competition for them, but rather expansion and adapting to technology. 

 

If Disney hadn't bought Lucas Films and Marvel then they probably could not have launched Disney+ and there would be one less option among large media companies/distributors. 

 

I think for a long time people were happy with just having Netflix and Hulu if they ditched cable but now it feels like people have to subscribe to more of these services to get the content they want. Does that mean people are being charged more for the same amount of content overall or are there just more options with more content overall? Maybe a bit of both. While it does feel annoying to have to pay for more streaming services, I think it's hard to argue that there are fewer large media companies today than there were in the past. In a sense there may be too many now. 

 

We read about mergers but we don't hear really consider the flip side of how other companies have grown over time to compete with companies that used to dominate the media landscape. Mergers often are part of those companies growing to be large enough to compete with the other dominating market forces. 

[pio]

22 minutes ago, UltraMega said:

I was thinking about this a bit more and I'm not sure there are actually fewer large media companies today compared to a time before streaming took off. How many media companies were there before streaming? I think it was probably a lot less since people were limited to cable providers of which there are few and really you get the same content with all of them. After that, we had Netflix and Hulu as the only real streaming services competing with cable, but for a long time Comcast was a major share holder of Hulu anyway so it was less so competition for them, but rather expansion and adapting to technology. 

 

If Disney hadn't bought Lucas Films and Marvel then they probably could not have launched Disney+ and there would be one less option among large media companies/distributors. 

 

I think for a long time people were happy with just having Netflix and Hulu if they ditched cable but now it feels like people have to subscribe to more of these services to get the content they want. Does that mean people are being charged more for the same amount of content overall or are there just more options with more content overall? Maybe a bit of both. While it does feel annoying to have to pay for more streaming services, I think it's hard to argue that there are fewer large media companies today than there were in the past. In a sense there may be too many now. 

 

We read about mergers but we don't hear really consider the flip side of how other companies have grown over time to compete with companies that used to dominate the media landscape. Mergers often are part of those companies growing to be large enough to compete with the other dominating market forces. 

As of September of 2020, there were 6.  6 corporations that own ALL media in the US.  There's a lot less "major" corporations involved than you think.  Because things like CBS, NBC, Nickelodeon, etc, they're all owned by somebody else already anyway.  Note, I didn't bother reading this article, nor am I linking it for the article itself.  The graphics are enough, you can connect the dots from there through your own research if the article isn't sufficient.  If you follow who actually owns your favorite media company, chances are its one of these 6.

These 6 corporations control 90% of the media outlets in America. The illusion of choice and objectivity | Tech News | Startups News

TECHSTARTUPS.COM

 

[UltraMega]

9 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

As of September of 2020, there were 6.  6 corporations that own ALL media in the US.  There's a lot less "major" corporations involved than you think.  Because things like CBS, NBC, Nickelodeon, etc, they're all owned by somebody else already anyway.  Note, I didn't bother reading this article, nor am I linking it for the article itself.  The graphics are enough, you can connect the dots from there through your own research if the article isn't sufficient.  If you follow who actually owns your favorite media company, chances are its one of these 6.

These 6 corporations control 90% of the media outlets in America. The illusion of choice and objectivity | Tech News | Startups News

TECHSTARTUPS.COM

 

I think you have to add Netflix, Amazon, and Apple to that list at the very least. There were only a few companies in the past so that seems like more to me. Maybe not a lot more, but more. 

 

Then minus one because CBS and Viacom are the same company now. 

 

I don't really agree with that list though because it ignores things like Spotify, YouTube, and a bunch of less popular but still relevant streaming services. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by UltraMega

[UltraMega]

I looked it up and I found a good list with relevant info on this:

 

The World's Top Media Companies

WWW.INVESTOPEDIA.COM

---

Here are the top global media companies and how they got to this status.

 

Some of the main points:

Quote

How Many Media Companies Are There?

Approximately 176 media companies operate in the United States.28 However, Comcast, AT&T, Disney, Paramount Global (formerly ViacomCBS), News Corporation (owner of Fox), and Sony control more than 90% of the media.29

 

How Do Media Companies Make Money?

Media companies primarily make money from advertisements and paid subscriptions. Other revenue drivers include internet services, filmed entertainment, and licensing.

 

The Bottom Line

Media is a diverse field. Many companies in the “media” category also operate businesses that may not necessarily qualify as media, such as software solutions and lobbying services.

 

[pio]

1 hour ago, UltraMega said:

I think you have to add Netflix, Amazon, and Apple to that list at the very least. There were only a few companies in the past so that seems like more to me. Maybe not a lot more, but more. 

 

Then minus one because CBS and Viacom are the same company now. 

 

I don't really agree with that list though because it ignores things like Spotify, YouTube, and a bunch of less popular but still relevant streaming services. 

Oh I can agree with both of your posts there.  As I said originally, that article was as of Sept. 2020, so of course things have changed a little bit since then.  Youtube is Google, Netflix is owned by Blackrock if I searched that correctly.  It's not good news for actual creative people though, nor is it good news for consumers of media either.  But, sadly, its been a problem for many many MANY years now.  One of those things where, yeah its a problem, but what can we really even do about it kind of thing.

[UltraMega]

31 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

Oh I can agree with both of your posts there.  As I said originally, that article was as of Sept. 2020, so of course things have changed a little bit since then.  Youtube is Google, Netflix is owned by Blackrock if I searched that correctly.  It's not good news for actual creative people though, nor is it good news for consumers of media either.  But, sadly, its been a problem for many many MANY years now.  One of those things where, yeah its a problem, but what can we really even do about it kind of thing.

Yes, we all know Youtube is owned by google, that's why I didn't list them both. 

BlackRock is an investment group. Netflix is not owned by any other company, but like all publicly traded companies they have investment groups as shareholders. BlackRock only owns ~28 million in Netflix shares which is about 6.5% of the company. Certainly not a controlling stake by any means. 

You say it's not good news for creative people, but is that really true? I doubt it. people have a lot more platforms and options to control their own creative process and find a way to distribute it now than ever before, and there is more competition among media outlets. 


I think you have to separate talking about the media when talking about things like Netflix and Disney from conversations about the news because they're separate issues. IMO the main thing wrong with the news is that it's all geared towards maximizing clicks instead of reporting on news worthy information so instead of informing people about important topics, we all get gas-lit by headlines constantly. That definitely has nothing to do with Stuff like Netflix or Disney or other entertainment media. With that said, there is still plenty of diversity in terms of actual news sources, but they all have to play by the same crappy rules of the game which simply isn't a diversity issue. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by UltraMega

[tictoc]

I think one of the bigger problems is that a large percentage of "media" companies are owned or run by the companies that are actually delivering the media.  This is especially a problem when there are large swathes of the US outside of major cities that only have one or maybe two options for internet/TV service. 

 

Companies like Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, and Charter are able to leverage their infrastructure to prop up their own media companies.  This requires an obscene amount of oversight, since it would be easy for the companies that deliver the media to push the scales to favor their own in house media companies.  

[bonami2]

On 03/05/2022 at 09:18, schuck6566 said:

lol, 1 of the contracts in question was for ghost writing the Star Wars novel for Lucas based on his script. Who could have imagined all the media buyouts back in the 70's?

True but still to this days everyone still get scammed.

Good lawyer back in the 70 probably knew this too.

 

Am not old enough to really know either 

 

[UltraMega]

2 hours ago, tictoc said:

I think one of the bigger problems is that a large percentage of "media" companies are owned or run by the companies that are actually delivering the media.  This is especially a problem when there are large swathes of the US outside of major cities that only have one or maybe two options for internet/TV service. 

Aside from the issues that would come from lack of internet access, it seems like a good thing to me to have a company be able to control their own distribution. I'm not sure what benefits come from having to pay a middle man. I mean, look at the gaming industry. Companies like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are definitely among the highest quality content providers. 

[Storm-Chaser]

It's really bad in the mainstream media as well. 90% of news outlets are owned by a select few corporations. They only tell you the picture of the world they want to represent, not always the truth. 

 

Honest Journalism is dead. 

[schuck6566]

10 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Aside from the issues that would come from lack of internet access, it seems like a good thing to me to have a company be able to control their own distribution. I'm not sure what benefits come from having to pay a middle man. I mean, look at the gaming industry. Companies like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are definitely among the highest quality content providers. 

The problem is that the "providers" are also the creators in the majority of cases. Look at how many studios are owned by these 5 Media Corps, and the shares they own of streaming channels.    

Major film studios - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

 

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, schuck6566 said:

The problem is that the "providers" are also the creators in the majority of cases. Look at how many studios are owned by these 5 Media Corps, and the shares they own of streaming channels.    

Major film studios - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

 

There's definitely bias in the news media and a bunch of other issues, but I don't think that comes from a lack of cable providers. As long as people can get online they can choose from all the same sources as everyone else and while parts of the country may have weak internet, it's definitely few and far between at this point. 

 

It would agree with you if there were some examples of cable providers that control a region only broadcasting the news channels they agree with but that's not the case as far as I know.

[bwalker36]

12 hours ago, Storm-Chaser said:

It's really bad in the mainstream media as well. 90% of news outlets are owned by a select few corporations. They only tell you the picture of the world they want to represent, not always the truth. 

 

Honest Journalism is dead. 

 

That is my biggest issue.  And they pretend like they are not biased, never put out corrections after they completely lie about something...

[schuck6566]

12 hours ago, UltraMega said:

There's definitely bias in the news media and a bunch of other issues, but I don't think that comes from a lack of cable providers. As long as people can get online they can choose from all the same sources as everyone else and while parts of the country may have weak internet, it's definitely few and far between at this point. 

 

It would agree with you if there were some examples of cable providers that control a region only broadcasting the news channels they agree with but that's not the case as far as I know.

perfect example when I was still subscribing to cable tv, suddenlink and viacom had an issue over viacom wanting to raise their rates and I lost a half dozen channels for over 9 months. NOW these are some of the 1's they control....

[UltraMega]

4 hours ago, schuck6566 said:

perfect example when I was still subscribing to cable tv, suddenlink and viacom had an issue over viacom wanting to raise their rates and I lost a half dozen channels for over 9 months. NOW these are some of the 1's they control....

OK, but there are still other options. You could get a dish or just use streaming instead. 

[schuck6566]

3 hours ago, UltraMega said:

OK, but there are still other options. You could get a dish or just use streaming instead. 

It isn't so much about controlling how you watch it as controlling what's produced to watch or read. As for "you can just stream it" let's see, Disney owns at least 30% of HULU, NBCUniversal through Fandago purchased VUDU,along with having Peacock, ViacomCBS own PlutoTv, Amazon of course owns Amazon media(licensed & original movies,tv).  Remember that NBCUniversal is owned by Comcast. Poor Netflx is like "Why people want to jump me for a rate hike?"

"On February 25, 2020, Comcast announced it would purchase Xumo from the Panasonic/Viant joint venture for an undisclosed sum. The acquisition of the service—which will continue to operate as an independent business, albeit within Comcast's cable television division—stems mainly from Xumo's partnerships with smart TV manufacturers (including LG, Panasonic, and Vizio), which would allow Comcast to use Xumo's placement to market or showcase Xfinity and other Comcast services as well as use its technology to develop additional streaming platforms. The company plans to add content from the NBCUniversal programming library and the company's various television networks as well as use it to upsell its free/subscription hybrid service Peacock, akin to ViacomCBS's utilization of Pluto TV to offer content from its cable networks following the former Viacom's purchase of the rival streamer in the Spring of 2019."

 

They control what we can see......