Big Broadcasters Face Off Against Newsmax Over Ownership Rules

The 39% Battle Line

America's media giants are squaring off over a number that could reshape the entire broadcasting landscape: 39%. This seemingly arbitrary figure represents the maximum share of national TV households any single broadcaster can reach—and it's about to become the center of a very public fight.

Disney (ABC), Paramount (CBS), Comcast (NBC), and other major players will face off against conservative network Newsmax in a formal debate over whether this decades-old ownership cap should finally disappear. The stakes? Nothing less than the future structure of American media.

The Majors' Case: Survival Mode

Big broadcasters aren't just asking for regulatory relief—they're pleading for it. Most major networks already bump against the 35-38% ceiling, effectively blocking any meaningful expansion while their businesses hemorrhage 10-15% annually in traditional ad revenue.

Their argument cuts straight to the heart of modern media reality: Netflix reaches over 70% of US households, YouTube has virtually unlimited access, and Amazon Prime Video faces no such restrictions. Why should traditional broadcasters wear regulatory shackles while tech giants roam free?

"We're fighting with one hand tied behind our backs," argues one network executive. The numbers back this up—streaming services have captured $50 billion in advertising that once flowed to traditional TV.

Newsmax's Counter: David vs. Goliath

Newsmax and smaller broadcasters see this differently. To them, lifting the cap means accelerating toward a media oligopoly where three or four companies control 60-70% of what Americans watch.

"Once the Big Three hit 50% market share, advertisers won't bother looking elsewhere," warns a Newsmax spokesperson. "Diversity of voices dies when economic incentives disappear." Local broadcasters, already suffering 30% revenue declines, worry they'll become irrelevant overnight.

The smaller players have history on their side—previous consolidation waves in radio and print media resulted in massive job losses and homogenized content.

Regulators Caught in the Middle

The FCC faces an impossible choice between competing visions of media's future. Support the majors, and risk creating a handful of media super-giants. Side with smaller players, and potentially handicap American broadcasters against global streaming competitors.

Political considerations complicate everything. In an era of extreme polarization, concentrated media ownership raises obvious concerns about information control. Yet fragmented, financially struggling broadcasters may lack resources for quality journalism.

The Streaming Wild Card

Here's the twist: while broadcasters debate 39% caps, streaming services operate under completely different rules. Netflix spent $17 billion on content last year—more than most broadcasters' entire annual revenue. Should traditional ownership rules apply to companies that didn't exist when these regulations were written?

Some argue the real monopoly threat comes from Google, Meta, and Amazon—platforms that control both content distribution and the advertising technology that funds it.

The answer may determine not just what we watch, but how democracy itself functions in the information age.