This   level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Media High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Mackay Radio Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments Telecommunications Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Television: Stations High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as Top-importance).

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

I need to know whether or not the BBC should be in the "Global" section. Please respond. Thank you!FOPFan300 22:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairlyoddparents1234 ( talk • contribs)

It seems that the descriptions given for BBC in the Global and Europe sections make sense. What change(s) are you proposing? DaffyBridge ( talk) 22:22, 19 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Please see my comments in Talk:Lists of television channels if you are interested in standardizing the various television station/channel pages.- dcljr 02:45, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It seems that someone has been adding infoboxes to various network pages (see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:TV_Network). Putting aside the sometimes inconsistent information that the user (or users) has put in - it can, of course, be fixed - I feel obliged to ask if television networks should be given infoboxes. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, but they haven't been used in the past, and would they really contribute to the article? - Stickguy 04:05, 1 August 2005 (UTC) reply

Okay, it seems pretty clear that no one hates them, so I'm going to produce a revised version and perhaps eventually replace the old one where it appears. Stickguy 03:38, 4 August 2005 (UTC) reply

It doesn't make sense to include Channel in the infobox... this is pretty much guaranteed to be different for everyone. Location is also dubious. I would suggest perhaps something to distinguish primary availability through US Broadcast, US Cable, DirecTV and Dish Satellite, and whatever other international options (I'm a 'merkin so I don't even know how TV works in those other countries). Actually, almost everything in that infobox is bugging me, I would recommend ditching all the info and putting in Geographical Coverage Area and perhaps # of subscribers/viewers. I'll think about this some more. - Kwh 07:00, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering, and have wondered for a long time, whether networks pay the stations to air their programs or whether affiliates pay the networks for their programming. Can anybody answer this? Thanks!

Do the major American tv networks have any editorial say over local affiliates' news? Many affiliates use the network logos with their own local news programmes, so I thought this was worth asking.. Thanks! 80.203.47.202 20:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I see that it has been suggested that Television channel and this article be merged together. Discuss here or at Talk:Television channel#Merge proposal
-- Jerome Potts ( talk) 23:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC) reply

 Not done

I came to this article for an explanation of the American English term 'network television'. I often here Americans and American media talk about network television but for non-Americans we have no idea what that means. We have TV channels and that's it. As far as we are concerned a TV channel is the same as a TV network and the same as a TV station. What is the difference and why doesn't the article tell us? I originally thought that 'network television' refered to terrestrial TV (as opposed to satellite, cable or Internet TV). Then I thought that it may refer only to nationwide TV (as opposed to local and regional TV). I have no idea. Someone please improve this article. -- 217.202.96.102 ( talk) 22:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC) reply

Yes, the article discusses only networks and their stations and not the opposite which is Independent station (North America). Jim.henderson ( talk) 14:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC) reply

I agree with (217.202.96.102). The article is already tagged as focusing on the US too much, or rather, not making clear that TV "networks" are a US phenomenon (as far as I know) and that the situation elsewhere is completely different.

I'm from Germany and (during my stays in the US) was confused with my encounters with "callsigns" that oddly all seem to begin with "W" or "K", a huge amount (literally hundreds, apparently) of local stations that somehow "carry" the programming of the stations (or whatever the correct term is, "network" I guess, or "flagship station" or something) that I had heard of (e.g. NBC, Fox and ABC), as well as odd rebroadcasts and other things that I didn't understand ;-)

It may seem completely obvious and self-explanatory to Americans, but we Europeans here would appreciate some very basic explanation. My understanding is that the network system exists pretty much for historic reasons - back in the day it wasn't possible to broadcast a single station/channel/network (whatever it is) thru the entire States (due to its size) - as well as some kind of law. It's all pretty unclear to me...

So anyway, just in case anyone is curious what the situation is like in Germany (and Europe in general): We don't differentiate between network, station, channel, or anything like that - I'll use "channel". All of our channels (ARD, ZDF, Sat 1, Pro 7...) are exactly the same, no matter where you watch them. They originate at the channels' headquarters and get distributed by various technical means (I'm not an expert, but cable, satellites, and airwaves are involved ;-)). That's it. Much simpler right? ;-) Okay, I'll admit there are in fact regional channels, but they are "original" -- simply channels that are not available throughout Germany.

Hope someone was interested in this ;-) 87.78.86.202 ( talk) 12:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Yeah, that's pretty accurate. W is normally for local stations east of the Mississippi, and K for stations west of the Mississippi (a few exceptions to this rule were made during the early years of TV and radio). Local stations in the early days were mostly small, independent companies that couldn't afford to produce all their own programs, so the idea of the network was born: a signal would be sent from one station to the next, and each station would air the same program to its audience in that area. This saved local stations the expense of producing their own programs. Back then, the federal government limited the number of local stations that any company could own, to no more than seven local stations. If a company wanted to get their signal sent beyond their seven stations (and thus make more money through a bigger advertising pool), they had to make an affiliation agreement with local station owners, who would agree to carry the signal. Some local stations remained independent, choosing not to carry network programs. The idea of a network started in radio, and later moved to television. Most programming originated from New York (later Los Angeles), piped through AT&T's coaxial cable network from station to station in what became four large TV networks stretching from coast to coast. Federal regulations, fierce competition among networks, and economic obstacles reduced the number of networks to three, and the modern era of television was born. Modern network TV is indeed mainly a relic of this system. The addition of cable and satellite complicates things somewhat. How can these facts be made more clear in this article? I'm willing to try. Firsfron of Ronchester 14:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm still confused. This article needs to be rewritten by a non-North American who knows what (s)he's talking about. I just looked at the article on Fox Broadcasting and it says that they "broadcast 19.5 hours of programmes a week". In Britain or elsewhere in Europe that would not make sense. 19.5 hours per day maybe but a week? Am I right to assume that the "network" (Fox, NBC, etc.) make the programmes (or buy them from some studio or whatever) and then they "sell" them to TV channels? Do these channels have to buy all of the Fox stuff or just what they want? Is there actually any channel in the USA therefore called "Fox", "NBC" or whatever? For most people in the rest of the world we're familiar with US TV only through the good and shit programmes that our TV channels buy (Lost, Walking Dead, etc.) and through US channels which we get on Satellite TV (Discovery, National Geographic) but am I right in thinking that they're just "channels" and not "networks"? In the UK the situation is quite simple - there are TV channels (BBC One, ITV, Sky One) and they make or pay other companies to make programmes for them or they buy them from overseas companies like Fox et all then they broadcast them. Simple as that. Someone please rescue this article.-- 85.94.113.121 ( talk) 21:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes, a network like Fox or NBC makes the programs (or contracts a studio to make them for them), but they don't sell them to TV stations. A local TV station agrees to air them in exchange for a part of the advertising profits. The local station agrees to air nearly all of the network's schedule, but sometimes a local station may refuse to air a network show (for all sorts of reasons). The network is limited by government rules in the amount of programming it can provide, so some of a local station's programs have to be obtained in other ways: local creation, or off-network syndication. The networks retain flagship stations (branded with call signs like KNBC and WNBC, WABC and KABC, etc) in some of the largest cities, which air the network's programs, but most of a network's local stations are independently-owned, because of a rule established back in the 1940s that a network could only own seven local stations. Yes, cable channels aren't networks: they don't need affiliates or call signs to be piped into people's living rooms: their signals are sent from a station through a coaxial cable (or, more recently, satellite) into homes. I might try to reword some of this article soon, hopefully clarifying some things. Firsfron of Ronchester 14:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Well the UK has its own nightmare to explain in the form of ITV. That was originally a series of companies operating in different regions (each would bid for the franchise for that region at intervals), with some nation wide content centrally generated (mainly national news and later breakfast television). Individual regional companies would either make their own programmes or commission them from independent companies or buy existing content. They would offer each other their programmes as well so shows could generate larger income and also get a national presence but it still worked on regional companies opting in rather than opting out of a national feed (with the notable exception of national news which was imposed from above with no opt out; a constant source of frustration to programme schedulers) and you could find the same programmes going out at totally different times of the week depending on where in the country you were.

Over time though more and more shows went out at the same time nationwide and there was a concious move amongst the stations to co-ordinate in ratings wars against the BBC and also to get more coverage in the national press. The term "network" has often been used in relation to ITV to describe such national scheduling. In recent years, however, a series of mergers has resulted in 11 of the 15 companies & franchises coming under the same roof of ITV plc and regional variations are largely confined to a ) regional news & special interest shows in fixed slots; and b ) the 4 companies covering the Channel Islands, Northern Ireland and most of Scotland are separate (although the two main Scottish ones have had their own merger) and do often make their own programming choices - UTV and STV maintain their own onscreen brand identities on the main channels, though I think for the digital ITV2, ITV3 and ITV4 channels they just opt to take the same feed as the rest of the UK. Timrollpickering ( talk) 14:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Reading some of the comments here, and looking around current content, I've come to the conclusion that we need some central organisation of these topics, so I've suggested a new project/page/whatever be created to sort it all out. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#WikiProject for Television organisation? - IMSoP ( talk) 02:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC) reply

I see one thing lacking in this article: a section detailing how current networks operate, that is, how the programming is transmitted across the network. The most recent system mentioned is Microwave radio relay; is this what the major networks continue to use? 69.221.153.56 ( talk) 02:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Lots of articles use this phrase, "major network", but what does it mean? If you were to link those words, which article would it go to? This one? This one? — PhilHibbs | talk 09:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Don’t cancel the Chew Donna weeks ( talk) 17:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC) reply

CLOSED

Closed: awaiting the merges by interested editor. Removing the MR Banner(s). Non-Administrative closure-- GenQuest ^"scribble" 03:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC) reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Formal request has been received for merging as follows: Reason: I propose a merger of Television Station (9k), Television Channel (9k) and Television Network (40k) in a page called Television Broadcasting (currently a redirect of Broadcasting). This will line-up to existing Radio Broadcasting which redirects its similar meaning terms, for example Radio Station. Most content on some of these three articles are unsourced and do not help reflect differing meanings across countries. On the Television Broadcasting I would use Group, affiliate/local/regional and brand as headers to clear up confusion caused by differing meanings of current three articles. User:Chocolateediter. 3 October 2020. Discuss below. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 07:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Seems reasonable on the face of it; there's a lot of overlap in the terms once you account for US vs UK, for analogue terrestrial vs cable vs digital, and so on. The risk is that the resulting article might be quite lengthy, and need splitting along different lines. Perhaps it's worth starting a draft to see what the structure could look like. - IMSoP ( talk) 10:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: The resultant article would be less than 60K in length. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 11:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC) reply

My draft is below: I’ll add references later. I am planning on taking broadcast systems from TV article. TV networks can move to Television Networks in the United States & Television Stations/ channel can be merged into article I am proposing both the latter basically explain the same and tv networks does a bit but mainly is US orientated.

user:Chocolateediter/sandbox Chocolateediter ( talk) 19:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC) reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.