Logo

LA Times

Why Trump’s Candidacy Has TV Stations Worried

Apr 14, 2016  •  Post A Comment

“GOP bigwigs aren’t the only ones worried about Donald Trump winning the Republican presidential nomination,” the Los Angeles Times reports. “Trump has emerged as the candidate to beat while spending far less than his rivals — a potentially troubling development for local TV stations, which rely heavily on revenue from political ads.”

The report quotes Bill Day of the consulting firm Frank N. Magid Associates saying: “In an environment like this where somebody is proving a disruptive model — Trump is saying, ‘I’m a reality TV star and I know how to move things without using television advertising’ — it’s a scary space.”

But while Trump brings an element of unpredictability to election spending, he could also help stimulate spending in House and Senate races, the report notes. The GOP has been concerned that a Trump-led ticket could have a negative impact on the party’s candidates for other offices, the report notes.

Said Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia: “The Republicans know they are in trouble. One of the recommendations from the party to candidates running for Senate and House seats is to spend, spend, spend.”

2 Comments

  1. Finally a mainstream “news” outlet is acknowledging that what is good for the country might not be good for media! It is about time the media get back to doing journalism and stop the partisan leaning in virtually everything they do. Every place I look I see politicians and hangers on worried about their personal situation and not about the security, stamina and future of our country. If the country fails – so do you!

  2. “Trump has emerged as the candidate to beat while spending far less than his rivals …” Like the GOP, the stations and the networks have only themselves to blame for the Trump situation. Had they not fallen over each other to grant him a COUPLE BILLION DOLLARS of free air time, maybe he would have spent more money? But NO! His repeated appearances were good for ratings, while, like many large corporations, they concentrated on short term profits and ignored the long term effects/results. (Just like when you remove a leader of a Mid-East country without giving a thought to what will fill the vaccuum.)

Leave a Reply to Reality Check Cancel Reply

Email (will not be published)