Fox and CBS are in early-stage discussions to exchange a select number of affiliated TV stations, a move that could significantly reshape local broadcast markets if approved. The talks hinge on a crucial factor: whether the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will permit such realignments under its current media ownership rules.
The FCC enforces regulations designed to prevent excessive concentration of media ownership in single markets — a framework originally intended to preserve diversity and localism in broadcasting. Any proposed transaction involving major station groups requires thorough scrutiny for compliance.
At the heart of this potential deal lie high-stakes considerations: network footprint, advertising reach, and dominance in key NFL markets. By optimizing station portfolios, both networks aim to reinforce their broadcast rights leverage and streamline distribution for live sports content.
Should the FCC approve these swaps, ripple effects could extend well beyond local markets — potentially affecting national sports programming, viewer access, and the future of network affiliations. How could this change your weekend game lineup? Stay tuned.
In 2024, linear television operates in a vastly altered environment. Viewer habits, once built around fixed schedules and appointment viewing, now revolve around personalization and convenience. Prime-time—long considered the sacred window for advertisers and networks—has fractured under pressure from streaming platforms and digital-first consumption. Nielsen data from Q1 2024 shows that traditional TV usage fell to 48.5% of total video viewing, while streaming captured 37.5%, with the remainder split between YouTube and gaming platforms.
That decline in linear dominance isn't just numerical; it's cultural. Appointment-based viewing has given way to binge-watching, delayed consumption, and algorithm-driven content curation. Yet even as traditional models falter, not all is lost for terrestrial broadcasters.
The cord-cutting curve hasn’t plateaued. According to Leichtman Research Group, in 2023 alone, U.S. pay-TV providers lost about 5.8 million subscribers—roughly 7.1% of the total market. The gap continues to widen, with only 49% of U.S. households still paying for traditional cable or satellite TV. However, 87% of households still consume over-the-air broadcast content at least occasionally, whether through smart TVs, digital antennas, or streaming hybrid models like YouTube TV.
This makes broadcast TV paradoxically both endangered and indispensable. With fewer viewers tuning in nightly via antenna or cable, the value of distribution networks has shifted from being a primary destination to a crucial component of a multi-platform spread.
Despite tectonic shifts in media consumption, broadcast TV holds an irreplaceable role when it comes to live programming. Nowhere is this more evident than in live sports. In 2023, 93 of the top 100 most-watched broadcast events in the U.S. were live sports, with the NFL making up 82 of them, according to Sports Business Journal. Fox and CBS have maintained strong brand equity through their respective ties to the NFL, college football, and NCAA basketball tournament coverage.
These massive, real-time viewing events continue to deliver what streaming platforms struggle to replicate: simultaneous national attention. They attract premium ad dollars and sustain affiliate value, especially at the local station level where live games anchor weekend schedules and drive secondary programming engagement.
In this rapidly evolving media ecosystem, CBS and Fox occupy distinct and complementary positions. CBS affiliates dominate in major urban markets, driven by a blend of national programming and consistent viewership among older demographics. Fox, meanwhile, leans into younger, sports-focused audiences with a localized edge—its O&O (owned-and-operated) portfolio often includes major cities with NFL teams, such as New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago.
The two networks command a combined footprint that touches virtually every major DMA (designated market area) in the U.S., wielding influence not just through national content but through tight integration with local newsrooms, advertising inventory, and community touchpoints. In evaluating potential station swaps or acquisitions, both parties would be leveraging this foundational broadcast power for strategic flexibility in an unstable market.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) enforces a set of media ownership rules aimed at preserving competition, promoting localism, and ensuring a diversity of viewpoints. Central among them is the Local Television Ownership Rule, which limits how many stations a single entity can own within the same Designated Market Area (DMA). Currently, one company may own two television stations in the same market only if:
Additionally, the National Television Ownership Rule caps the audience reach of a single broadcaster to no more than 39% of U.S. TV households. This cap is calculated using a UHF discount formula, which counts UHF stations as reaching only half the number of homes, a policy critics argue is outdated in the digital broadcast era.
The FCC has shown signs of reevaluating these longstanding frameworks. In 2021 and 2022, under Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, the commission began soliciting public comment for its Quadrennial Review of Media Ownership Rules, a process mandated by Congress. While the 2017 deregulatory wave under Chairman Ajit Pai relaxed restrictions—eliminating the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule and easing TV/radio cross-ownership rules—progress since then has frozen amid political gridlock and court challenges.
However, a full FCC commission now seated may unstick pending decisions, including ones that could affect the Top-Four restriction or revisit national cap methodology. Pro-business advocates within the broadcasting industry argue that current frameworks are out of sync with modern media consumption patterns dominated by streaming, digital news, and social platforms. Any shift, especially concerning the Top-Four rule, would unlock the ability for major networks like Fox and CBS to acquire or swap higher-performing local affiliates.
Momentum to ease ownership caps stems from broadcasters' arguments that linear television's fragmentation demands larger scale for survival. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) continues to push for a revised audience reach calculation, greater flexibility in local market consolidations, and the removal of what they term “legacy restrictions.” In contrast, media advocacy groups emphasize the need to maintain limits on consolidation to protect community-focused journalism and local content production.
For example, Free Press and Common Cause oppose any modification of the UHF discount or caps, citing research that shows station ownership diversity decreases in highly consolidated markets. These groups challenge the notion that deregulation serves the public, pointing to corporate practices that replace local programming with syndicated national content and strip newsrooms of editorial independence.
Regulatory shifts have a record of jumpstarting high-profile deals. When the FCC relaxed the fin-syn rules in the '90s and later removed most financial interest and syndication restrictions, it created the conditions for media giants to vertically integrate operations—leading to Disney’s 1995 acquisition of Capital Cities/ABC. Similarly, in 2017, the FCC's reversal of the main studio rule, combined with the greenlighting of the Sinclair/Tribune merger (later blocked by the FCC due to market concentration issues), signaled a deregulatory tone that emboldened broadcasters.
Then, as now, small adjustments in regulatory language can spread ripples across the broadcast landscape. If the FCC tilts toward leniency once again, Fox and CBS will meet a regulatory environment increasingly aligned with their strategic ambitions.
CBS continues to double down on a hybrid model—leveraging its expanding streaming presence through Paramount+ while safeguarding its traditional reach through owned-and-operated (O&O) stations. The network currently holds O&O stations in 14 U.S. markets, including pivotal metros like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. This geographic distribution gives CBS a direct line to approximately 38% of American households—a powerful bargaining chip in both content syndication and political advertising.
As Paramount Global leans further into digital subscriptions and global content distribution, retaining a robust linear footprint ensures CBS does not forfeit influence in local advertising markets. Every transaction involving CBS stations reflects a broader calculus: retaining cultural penetration in mass-market live programming, from Sunday NFL games to big-ticket events like the Grammy Awards.
Fox, in contrast, remains firmly committed to its identity as a broadcast-first powerhouse, deliberately steering away from a direct-to-consumer streaming race. Fox Corporation—formally separate from its former entertainment assets sold to Disney in 2019—has concentrated its post-sale blueprint around three pillars: live sports, local news, and unscripted television.
This strategy reflects in its O&O investments. Fox owns and operates stations covering over 37% of the U.S. TV market, including major affiliate powerhouses in Dallas, Atlanta, and San Francisco. These stations feed into and amplify Fox's crown jewels—the NFL on Fox, MLB broadcasts, and college football—while providing distribution for Fox News at the local level during key election cycles.
Divergent core strengths define the strategic DNA of both networks. Fox leans heavily on sports broadcasting for ratings dominance and live ad dollars. In the 2023-2024 NFL season, Fox’s Sunday window averaged over 19 million viewers weekly, outpacing scripted network programming and demonstrating the persistent magnetism of major sports.
CBS, meanwhile, maintains a legacy in scripted drama and live events. Series like NCIS and FBI regularly lead Nielsen charts, while events like the Tony Awards and CBS Sunday Morning bolster high-value brand equity. These programming differences shape how each network values station ownership—CBS tends to view it as essential for driving direct tuning, while Fox uses it to amplify flagship events with broader reach and advertising synergy.
Underpinning both strategies are historical ownership legacies. CBS, now part of Paramount Global (formerly ViacomCBS), emerged from a long lineage of corporate mergers. This consolidated structure provides CBS with cross-platform synergy but also mandates compliance with ownership limits tied to national reach and duopoly regulations.
Fox operates outside such legacy structures following the 2019 Disney divestiture. As a slimmer, more agile media enterprise, Fox Corporation is not saddled with a streaming arm and can redirect capital into acquirable assets—including potential O&O stations—should market conditions align with FCC regulatory openings.
Station acquisition is more than a real estate play—it signals the next move on a highly competitive broadcast chessboard. Which stations trade hands will reflect not just regulatory freedom, but long-range calculations about content strategy, advertiser alignment, and affiliate influence.
Streaming giants continue their relentless ascent, yet local TV stations still anchor vast segments of media consumption. Nielsen’s Local Watch Report showed that as of Q1 2023, broadcast stations reached 87% of adults weekly across local markets. That sustained reach translates into unmatched immediacy for delivering breaking news, weather updates, and regional content—components that national platforms cannot replicate with the same granularity.
While cord-cutting has impacted cable subscriptions, local broadcast television remains free-to-air, capturing audiences unaffected by paywall restrictions. Homes equipped with digital antennas—numbering over 18 million in the U.S. according to Parks Associates—continue to contribute to steady over-the-air viewership. Local stations, therefore, serve as both cultural cornerstones and reliable audience retainers.
Local stations generate substantial recurring income through retransmission consent fees. According to S&P Global Market Intelligence, U.S. broadcasters earned approximately $13.6 billion from retransmission fees in 2022. This figure has grown consistently each year since 2006, revealing a dependable revenue pillar for networks that own or affiliate with local outlets.
Advertising revenue fortifies this stream further, especially in election years or during tentpole sporting events. BIA Advisory Services projected $21 billion in local television ad revenue for 2024. Political advertising alone accounts for a considerable share, often doubling or tripling in presidential election years. That economic footprint underscores why strategically placed station ownership translates into cash-flow stability for both CBS and Fox.
Local affiliates play a vital role in national sports broadcasting. Through them, networks deliver NFL games, MLB broadcasts, and NCAA tournaments directly to regional fanbases. The NFL alone accounted for over 80 of the top 100 most-watched TV broadcasts in 2023, according to Nielsen. Those ratings are driven by carriage on local stations, not purely by national streamers or cable sports networks.
When political seasons ramp up, local stations carry candidate debates, live results coverage, and region-specific campaign advertising. Networks rely on these platforms to amplify national coverage with localized nuance—critical for shaping narratives and audience trust. Their influence during primaries and general elections reinforces their indispensability.
Affiliating with high-performing local stations extends the network’s audience reach and buttresses national ratings, especially during night programming. CBS and Fox both structure their programming strategies around prime-time delivery, where affiliate reach directly impacts ad pricing power and Nielsen share.
Consider the impact of time zone alignment—having a powerful affiliate in a major market like Dallas or Phoenix means better control over timing, audience flow, and ultimately, competitive ratings. This alignment multiplies user engagement not just locally, but nationwide, shaping both perception and revenue at the network level.
For CBS and Fox, the calculus is clear: controlling more local stations enhances national performance. That’s why any FCC policy shift will function not just as an ownership decision—but as a reshuffling of strategic broadcasting leverage.
The U.S. broadcast sector continues to compress. Over the past five years, consolidation has reshaped the competitive landscape. According to S&P Global Market Intelligence, the broadcast segment saw over $34 billion in media M&A activity between 2019 and 2023. This includes Sinclair Broadcast Group’s $9.6 billion acquisition of 21 regional sports networks from Disney and Gray Television’s $2.7 billion merger with Quincy Media and Meredith’s local TV portfolio.
These transactions didn’t just shuffle ownership — they redefined market influence. Groups that once operated in single or dual-state footprints now control dozens of stations spanning entire regions. The proposed collaboration between Fox and CBS represents another calculated move to respond to this aggressive transformation.
So far in 2024, the media and telecom sector has accounted for 8.3% of global M&A activity, according to Refinitiv. The average transaction size has climbed by 17% year-over-year, driven largely by core asset swaps and geography-based restructuring. A potential Fox-CBS station deal slides directly into this pattern: optimize reach, reduce regulatory friction, and strengthen market foothold ahead of streaming disruption and political ad windfalls in an election cycle.
Unlike traditional takeovers, a swap allows both companies to recalibrate without overreaching. If CBS and Fox exchange stations in overlapping or strategically misaligned markets, both networks can extend influence without triggering full-scale acquisitions that demand intensive regulatory scrutiny. For instance, realigning ownership in duopoly markets like Philadelphia or Phoenix enables more precise ad targeting and more aligned local news strategies without toppling FCC ownership caps.
It’s not about expanding indiscriminately; it’s about planting flags in the right cities. A Fox station gain in a red-state metropolis could open new political ad revenue, while CBS might consolidate strength in states where affiliate penetration lags. Each trade shifts leverage.
The maneuver echoes Disney’s $71.3 billion acquisition of 21st Century Fox’s entertainment assets in 2019. That transaction, which included minority stakes in Hulu and various TV production studios, wasn’t simply a play for size — it was about market architecture. Disney built vertical reach from content creation to direct-to-consumer distribution.
Similarly, Fox and CBS aren’t trying to outgrow each other. They're targeting precise benefits: stronger ad revenues, narrower competition, and scalable content synergies across owned-and-operated networks. Just as Disney used Fox’s IP assets to solidify its grip on streaming and theatrical, CBS and Fox are leveraging geography to insulate their core business from fragmentation.
Network affiliations define where viewers find their favorite primetime shows, local newscasts, and sports coverage. These partnerships between national networks like CBS and Fox, and independently owned local stations, dictate brand presence and audience loyalty across designated market areas (DMAs). Affiliates carry network programming, typically during primetime slots, and in exchange receive national content, advertising inventory, and technical support.
Ownership changes can disrupt these established ties. When a company acquires a station affiliated with a competitor’s network, affiliation agreements come under review. If the new owner favors aligning with its in-house network (as could occur if CBS or Fox gains majority ownership of rival-affiliated stations), the station may drop its existing partner. This reshuffling creates ripples across local advertising markets and viewer habits.
A shift in affiliation can redraw the TV landscape in a region overnight. Viewers accustomed to watching CBS programming on channel 5, for instance, might suddenly find it moved to channel 12 under new ownership terms. While the transition often receives some promotion during the changeover, confusion, channel scanning, and temporary disruptions in ratings regularly follow.
Local news also shifts dramatically. A CBS-affiliated evening news broadcast, tied to the network's identity, may be replaced with a Fox-branded format that emphasizes different content pacing and tone. These changes aren't cosmetic — they reorient how communities receive weather alerts, political coverage, and regional reporting.
When consolidation leads to fewer owners controlling more affiliate stations, programming variety narrows. A station formerly independent in editorial approach may adopt parent company content standards, reducing local newsroom autonomy. This dynamic tightens content pipelines; fewer decision-makers guide what millions consume nightly.
In markets where CBS and Fox jockey for position, losing an affiliate can mean more than just shifting shows — it signals a drop in ideological plurality. With one corporate voice replacing another, the range of perspectives on civic issues, public policy, and regional elections often contracts. The effects are more pronounced in small or mid-sized markets, where station options are limited to begin with.
Each of these case studies underscores a pattern: affiliation swaps don’t just impact the corporations—they reshape viewer access, redefine regional news identities, and recalibrate competitive strategy in local markets.
Legacy broadcasters no longer operate in a closed ecosystem. Over the last decade, streaming giants like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video have pulled significant audience share away from traditional TV. According to Nielsen’s August 2023 “The Gauge” report, streaming captured 38.3% of total TV usage, surpassing broadcast's 20.4%. Among younger demographics, the gap is even wider, with platforms such as YouTube heavily influencing content consumption habits.
In parallel, digital-native networks—Roku, Pluto TV, and Tubi (owned by Fox Corporation)—have gained traction by offering ad-supported video on demand (AVOD). These platforms combine the reach of traditional broadcasting with the content personalization of digital, eroding the once-monolithic position of network TV.
As CBS and Fox examine potential local station acquisitions, the endgame extends beyond simple cost-efficiency. These deals would create regional leverage—control over distribution channels, local advertising rates, and the ability to assign or reassign network affiliations to suit broader corporate priorities.
For example, adding high-performing stations in key markets gives a network the power to elevate the reach of their news divisions, bundle broader advertising buys, and retain negotiating strength against pay-TV and digital distributors. CBS-owned stations in large markets like Philadelphia or Dallas give the network a deliberate edge in syndicating content across both traditional and streaming properties.
Local market dynamics vary sharply. In Los Angeles, the second-largest designated market area (DMA), competition spans broadcast (KABC, KTTV, KCBS), digital local news, and Spanish-language titans like Univision and Telemundo. Controlling a major broadcast station in this city doesn't just impact ratings—it moves the needle on national revenue.
In Chicago, where WFLD (Fox) and WBBM (CBS) operate in a tight ratings race, even minor shifts in market share during sweeps months alter network prestige. Expanding ownership in mid-tier but demographically vital DMAs like Phoenix, Charlotte, or Sacramento gives networks strategic footholds to influence not only viewership patterns but also political ad spending in election cycles.
The fight for audience attention no longer peaks strictly at 8 p.m. While prime-time blocks still draw the highest CPMs (cost per mille), other dayparts—early morning and late-night—have grown in importance. Live news, sports, and local programming between 5–9 a.m. and 11 p.m.–1 a.m. increasingly define viewer habits and loyalty.
Networks leverage owned and operated (O&O) stations to carve out dominance in specific slots. Fox, for instance, uses its local stations to amplify sports coverage in late night blocks, merging local identity with national brand momentum. Similarly, CBS can elevate 'CBS Mornings' by integrating local news transitions pre-broadcast, ensuring viewers stay within its ecosystem longer.
In this fragmented and platform-agnostic market, every station deal becomes a high-stakes chess move. Who controls the board?
At the core of the Fox and CBS station acquisition deliberations lies a conflict between economic ambition and democratic principles. Supporters of consolidation argue that scale drives sustainability. In their view, merging station groups under major networks allows for stronger investment in content production, technology upgrades, and local advertising capabilities. They point to competitive threats from digital platforms like YouTube and Netflix—and claim that without consolidation, traditional broadcasters will lose the scale they need to compete.
But critics see something else entirely: a shrinking space for diverse perspectives. They push back on the idea that fewer owners means more efficiency. Instead, they focus on the dangers to editorial independence and the homogenization of news content. Advocacy groups including Free Press and Common Cause warn that concentrated ownership narrows the lens through which communities understand civic issues. Monolithic control, they argue, leads to preference for national stories over hyperlocal reporting, eroding the informational bedrock of local democracy.
Independent station owners stand on precarious ground. Any uptick in consolidation strengthens the leverage of conglomerates in content negotiations, advertising pricing, and syndication rights. Smaller broadcasters, particularly those operating single-market stations, find it harder to negotiate favorable affiliate deals or secure prime-time network content. They also tend to lack the economic cushion to weather downturns, especially in competitive metropolitan markets like Los Angeles, Dallas, or Boston.
For ethnic media and stations serving minority audiences, the stakes are even higher. FCC research from 2021 highlighted how ownership diversity is already low—fewer than 6% of commercial TV stations were owned by people of color at that time. Increased consolidation risks pushing those numbers even lower, diminishing representation of underserved communities in the broadcast landscape.
Central to the debate is the Federal Communications Commission's dual identity—regulatory watchdog and market facilitator. Current FCC rules cap national ownership reach at 39% of U.S. TV households, though companies have maneuvered around this through loopholes like the UHF discount, which counts certain stations at half their actual audience size.
Should the FCC approve deals between Fox and CBS under these conditions, it won’t just be a rubber stamp. It’ll be a policy signal. Analysts, lawmakers, and media reform groups will interpret such a decision as a definitive stance on the acceptability of broadcast consolidation going forward. Every waiver issued or rule interpreted in favor of expansion becomes precedent, shaping how future mergers get evaluated—and who gets left behind in the process.
Is media plurality protected when two giants like Fox and CBS gain greater control of America's TV stations? Or does the public interest get sacrificed to scale? The outcome of this debate depends not just on paperwork and policy but on how regulators interpret their mandate in an age of platform dominance and political polarization.
Fox and CBS aren't merely exploring acquisitions; they're evaluating strategic partnerships that blur traditional lines of station control. Rather than absorbing stations outright, both networks are weighing models that allow them to increase influence without full ownership. This structural shift reflects a broader trend in broadcast media—deploying hybrid partnership models to expand reach while navigating regulatory ceilings.
In the toolkit of modern broadcasting strategy, three acronyms stand out: joint sales agreements (JSAs), shared services agreements (SSAs), and local marketing agreements (LMAs). Each enables degrees of operational control without triggering FCC thresholds for ownership caps.
These agreements allow broadcasters to scale without triggering direct scrutiny. If the FCC adjusts limitations—as currently under review—such deals may rapidly crystallize into permanent ownership changes.
What drives these strategic setups isn't short-term market share but enduring revenue optimization and audience expansion. Stations operating under combined sales and services often exhibit improved margins due to reduced redundancy in administrative and content production costs. In markets like St. Louis and Phoenix, past SSAs have yielded double-digit percentage increases in operating efficiencies within the first two years.
Moreover, these structures let parent companies test market compatibility, advertiser performance, and audience loyalty before committing capital to full acquisitions. CBS, for instance, has used this approach in smaller DMAs to pilot programming formats and sales models, then rolled successful tactics out network-wide.
These aren't speculative ideas—they're grounded in a series of precedent-setting deals that have changed broadcasting's landscape:
Each example showcases how flexible legal frameworks have enabled strategic positioning. CBS and Fox are now applying similar logic—seeking the operational benefits of a larger footprint, minus the regulatory hurdles of outright ownership, unless the FCC clears the path.
©2025 American TV. All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: All rights reserved. AmericanTV.com is a website for research and comparison as such, falls under "Fair Use". AmericanTV.com does not provide directly phone, TV, and internet service. All trademarks, logos, etc. remain the property of their respective owners and are used by AmericanTV.com only to describe products and services offered by each respective trademark holder. The use of any third party trademarks on this site in no way indicates any relationship between AmericanTV.com and the holders of said trademarks, nor any endorsement of AmericanTV.com by the holders of said trademarks.
We are here 24/7 to answer all of your TV + Internet Questions:
1-855-690-9884
1-855-690-9884