How Many Signups Did Peacock Just Get? Will Rob Manfred Really End Up Playing Ball Again with Bally? Is ‘Better Call Saul’ Really Chopped Liver? And Does the ‘L.A. Times’ Have Anyone Left to Lay Off?

“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better," said Theodore Roosevelt, in a famous 1910 speech delivered at Sorbonne University, in Paris. “The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

On this day, Next TV writers Daniel Frankel and David Bloom honor those cold and timid souls. 

DANIEL FRANKEL: Well hello Big D. We just put behind us another action-packed week in technology/media/telecom, highlighted by Diamond Sports Group’s declaration that it has found a way to avoid liquidation, with help from Amazon. Now, if you have been tracking this bankruptcy story as closely as I have — and it's been chaos out of control for the last 10 months — you know that up until just recently, this outcome seemed very unlikely. Nobody envisioned Diamond existing after next baseball season. But there it was on Wednesday morning — “Game on!” declared our sibling pub, Broadcasting & Cable. I’m not so sure. 

I heard from several folks close to Diamond, its creditors and Sinclair that the sports leagues will all fall into line, because they really have no economic choice. Diamond’s lawyers seem to think Big Baseball will act out of business rationality. I don't know that I'd assume that in this case. They can’t replace the Bally Sports revenue on their own. But I’ve been listening to Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred all along, and he wants nothing to do with Diamond, its now quasi-estranged parent company, Sinclair Broadcasting Group, or Sinclair’s executive chairman, David Smith. Just refer back to the bankruptcy court testimony from May, when Manfred recounts the horrible blood that exists between himself and Smith. I think it’s personal for Manfred. And I know the commissioner works for the owners … And the owners need local TV money that’s hard to replace in broadcast and streaming … But my instinct tells me Manfred doesn’t want to cave here. I could be wrong. I probably am. But I could be right. 

DAVID BLOOM: I read this story’s latest developments as less about Sinclair (and your antipathy for its CEO’s politics), and more about Amazon. Remember that Amazon already was a minority partner in the YES deal that Sinclair did with the Yankees back when it acquired the Fox RSNs from Disney. YES is probably the most profitable of the remaining RSNs out there. Now Amazon has a piece of the local sports distribution networks of 40-something non-NFL major sports teams, for a bargain price. They didn’t have to go through a bankruptcy auction, endless delays, lobbying with government regulators, annoying competitors, or any other muss and fuss. It was just: here’s Andy Jassy and the gang with a surprisingly small bag of well-timed cash. 

Also read: Yankees Return to Amazon Prime Video for ’23 Season

Amazon won’t have immediate ability to carry those games, but they will get lots of information about local viewership while building new relationships with a bunch of NHL, NBA and MLB teams. That seems valuable. MLB’s Manfred may be grumpy about Sinclair, but the teams, who are his bosses, don’t have great alternatives as broadcast and cable slowly collapse. Broadcasters (Sinclair again, in some markets) would love to take over, but they’re not configured to replace that cash in teams’ pockets. Who is? Um, Amazon. When it comes time to figure out the next carriage deals for these teams, Amazon will be in a very good position. It might even be able to offer a hybrid arrangement that includes whatever’s left of cable and broadcast as well as this new streaming thing, which I’ve heard may be big someday. Consider this deal a honking big camel’s nose shoved under the tent, sniffing around to see if it wants to wear the whole thing. 

Amazon is doing this while trimming, again, its MGM and Prime Studios operations, and easing back spending on programming there. Meanwhile, the media companies have a much bigger problem as they stumble into an election year that’s supposed to fix all the revenue problems. Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount Global and NBCUniversal all saw Q3 ad revenues drop more than 8%. Fox, despite its heavy reliance on sports, dropped 1.6% in the quarter. Disney saw declines in its O&O stations and on ABC, while sports-driven advertising on ESPN and elsewhere climbed only modestly. And it’s not getting better. “It’s becoming increasingly clear now that much like 2023, 2024 will have its share of complexity, particularly as it relates to the possibility of continued sluggish advertising trends,” WBD chief financial officer Gunnar Wiedenfels said at a November event. “We don’t see when this is going to turn.” If Weeds is glum, what’s it like everywhere else? Will the epic spending on Trump-Biden III be enough to salvage linear bottom lines? 

FRANKEL: It’s like a spring day in Wrigley Field out there in TMT, with the stock market surging and Amazon and Google laying off folks sometime the same day. Here in Los Angeles, it's Groundhog Day, with Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong giving the ol’ “we’ll have to do more with less” speech to staff last week. This time, the journalists have a union, and they’re pushing back with a lockout. 

Over in Baltimore, David Simon is pouring eulogistic whiskey into the cold, dead ground where the Baltimore Sun once stood. Meanwhile, over at Sports Illustrated, folks seem shocked about the staff getting gutted … which surprised me, because the original gutting of the classic sports pub we all know and love already happened back in 2019 when Meredith Corp., which acquired SI from longtime owner Time Inc., unloaded it on Authentic Brands. Everywhere you look, the widget factories are still managed by dolts whose first impulse to make ends meet is always to get rid of the widget makers, then use the fumes of the brand to somehow keep going with meaningless awards and trade events. But when does that ever end? We now have examples (The New York Times, Bloomberg, Apple, Penske Media Group) of media companies that understand that communications is a service that consumers want, and they’ll pay for it. So why is it 2009 all over again at the L.A. Times?

BLOOM: Quite a roster of woe there: L.A. Times, SI, Bal’mer Sun, old(er)-media corners of Amazon and Alphabet about to be turned inside out by artificial intelligence. The through line is older, general-service media doing, mostly, what it’s done for decades. It isn’t economically sustainable. None of these look like TikTok or YouTube or Netflix. What’s succeeding, for now? Specialized media for highly focused audiences, like the various NYTimes standalone services, Bloomberg’s business news, Penske’s FYC awards largesse. The L.A. Times is not wildly different from 2009 in content, nor differentiated from its bottomless competition. The more interesting shift right now is at CNN, where Mark Thompson just issued a big manifesto that focuses on being more digital and nimble. It’s admittedly light on details, but that shift is going to be vital for long-term relevance. Any thoughts on that old-media dinaosaur lumbering toward the light? 

FRANKEL: Only that to succeed in the business still called “cable news,” I now think you need to be “specialized” for a partisan audience. I’m not saying that’s good journalism. And in terms of ethics, John Malone and David Zaslav were probably right to reorient what Jeff Zucker had done to the place and adopt a more centrist footing. I think that being “digital” and “nimble” — and more The New York Times-like in general — will help CNN.

But I also think, right or wrong, good or bad, its core news-consuming audience, at least in the near term, wants the partisan brand lens. I know the ratings were terrible when the regime change occurred, but I think they should have leaned more anti-MAGA, not less, to gird up for this election year. They ended up alienating everybody. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next election. The "tonnage" of messaging on CNN and on social (the erstwhile Twitter) in 2020 provided an offset to Fox News. Take those two cannons out of the battle -- and turn one of them around, even -- and you have a highly forgetful 77-year-old candidate flying from a criminal court hearing to accept the Republican nomination. But who has time for politics when Comcast is about to release data on Peacock signups during its earnings call Wednesday. Or will they?

BLOOM: Speaking of turning the cannons around, it can’t be good for the republic that one of Thompson’s easy ratings boosters is running more unfiltered rants from the presumptive Republican nominee, carried live from courthouse steps, rallies, in his toilet/document-management center/social-media spew HQ. But the election is 10 months away. What could go wrong? 

I’m less anxious about the Comcast release (or not) of those Peacock signups. It’s definitely something, but what perhaps matters more is how long those signups stick around. Wall Street cares about average revenue per user, so what does Peacock extract from them before cancelling? How many will stick around past the first month, to enjoy whatever else Peacock has on offer (admittedly, Peacock is a skinny bird). Speaking of skinny birds, Disney’s Bob Iger netted $31.6 million in pay last year, somehow, and Nelson Peltz finally formally kicked off his rather odd proxy battle for the future of Disney, or Ike & Jay’s Excellent Revenge, or something. Peltz hasn’t offered much in the way of substantive fixes beyond what Iger has already done, but he does evoke a quaint nostalgia for the halcyon days of media domination back in 2015 or so. Pretty much all of Hollywood wants that. But wishing doesn’t make it so. 

FRANKEL: Hollywood can want what it wants, but your friend Jessica Reif Ehrlich said it best when she declared Netflix the "winner" of the streaming wars last week. And if your business model accounts for Netflix controlling distribution, consumer data and a big chunk of revenue sharing on advertising for shows and movies you make, that's fine, but you're never again going to enjoy those 2015 margins again. I got called a "shill" by multiple internet tough guys on Twitter last weekend for supporting Brian Rorberts' big Peacock exclusive deal with the NFL. But man, I think he looks good, like he's standing tall in the pocket at Arrowhead with the -4-degree wind gust in his face, and just chucking it downfield (insert a trademark Chris Collinsworth hyperbolic praise moment for Patrick Mahomes here). 

Dude is still playing, while Zaz and Bakish sit on their helmets, trying to build scale and get to the rock into the end zone. Sure, Comcast just lost another $3 billion on Peacock. But nice things cost money. And having your own scaled platform, that truly competes with Netflix head-on, will be a nice thing for someone. Speaking of Peacock, I was driving past the Peacock Theater here in L.A. the other night, and could have sworn a I heard a Who. "We're here, we're here!," screamed Emmy's tiny audience, its tiniest ever. Listen, I kid Emmy, and I take no glee in that. The strike postponement, and decision to go up against NFL Wild Card postseason action, were bummers. What happens in nine months when the TV Academy tries to get back on schedule and does another awards show?

Also read: Emmys Endure Another Record TV Audience Low, Average Only 4.3 Million Viewers on Fox

BLOOM: Comcast -- with its sturdy stock price, low debt and range of businesses (NBCU, broadband, mobile, parks, sports) -- can play a long game, especially if it picks up Warner Bros. Discovery or most of Fox (especially Tubi and sports) to fill out Peacock with true Must See TV. But as Reif Ehrlich rightly pointed out, one team has indeed raced ahead of others in the streaming game, and that’s Netflix. It’s of global scale, not burdened with legacy businesses or heavy debt, and growing ad-supported operations in a measured way. For the foreseeable future, it will keep winning, one reason its share price is up 43% the past year. As for the Emmys, only a tiny fraction of the 600 original shows of 2022-23 seemed like they were even eligible, given the concentrated voting. The effort to honor TV’s history was certainly lovely and well intentioned. But it made for a nostalgia-cast with virtually no relevance to viewers under 35, unless they’d watched a lot of reruns, probably on Netflix. I might also ask what to reasonably expect for a broadcast awards show, which gave out virtually no broadcast awards, but was watched only by broadcast audiences who didn’t care about football. Basically, the TV Academy is lucky anyone watched who wasn’t related to the casts of Succession, Beef or The Bear.

FRANKEL: I'll just wrap it on this: How does a show like Better Call Saul, with its masterful depth of character and nuance, take 50 nominations and never win an Emmy? I mean, you want to talk about "caring" about the characters? Normally, I'll admit, I think people who care too much about TV shows are ... well, dorks. But I dreaded Nacho's end, and Kim and Jimmy's comeuppances. Now, I've binged through 11 episodes of The Bear on Hulu since Tuesday. And it is a fine show. I really like it. A little preening and manipulative, but good. But it's not even in the same league as Saul. How? Why? Fifty? Chopped liver? Nothin'?

BLOOM: Such conversations are best held over strong drinks with Susan Lucci (17 Emmy losses without a win), Bill Maher (32 losses over 17 years, without a win) and the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings and Buffalo Bills (four Super Bowls each without a win). Some people, shows and teams are good enough to get to the base station near the pinnacle, but never quite reach the top. And now, Saul joins that august company, the biggest and best losers. One minor note, however. A show filled with excellent performances and writing focused on a set of unremittingly awful, conniving and occasionally murderous people, running on an increasingly inconsequential minor cable network, is hardly the slingshot to fame and industry honors. Now, hoist one for Saul.