Sports Leagues, PBS Could Help One Another

Sports Leagues, PBS Could Help One Another

President Donald Trump signed legislation cutting ~$1.1 billion in federal funding paid to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the nonprofit that helps to financially support PBS (and NPR), in late July. That entity has since announced it will shut down.

~70% of those dollars have historically gone directly to PBS’ 330 independently operated outlets (and 246 NPR stations). On average, it has represented ~15% of their respective budgets.

PBS CEO Paula Kerger acknowledged the reduced financial aid will be damaging and force stations operators to make ‘hard decisions’ in the weeks and months ahead–unless they can find a new source of revenue. A pair of well-respected media veterans wonder if pro sports could be a part of the solution.

“There’s a way to continue with the mission of PBS while adding in all these different [leagues] that want [broad] distribution and to make content discovery easier,” Patrick Crakes (principal, Crakes Media) said. 

PBS’ reach is on par with the over-the-air broadcast networks. FCC mandated ‘must carry’ rules ensure the channels are included in every pay TV bundle. 

So, “that's 66 million homes,” Crakes said. “Then you've got 18 million [more receiving access] over the air with potential upside as PBS’ OTA broadcast signal covers the near geographic entirety of the country.”

Why not leverage the powerful distribution platform to grow challenger and emerging leagues? 

It’s not as if PBS’ member stations are currently captivating viewers with must-watch programming outside of weekday primetime, and sports rights owners or their partners would likely be willing to pay for the reach.

“A really efficient, branded, established and ubiquitous distribution system is out there under changing market conditions,” Fox Sports Co-Founder George Krieger said.

It’s worth noting that PBS has aired some sports programming in the past. It broadcast Olympic highlights and documentaries in the 1970s and early 1980s, and has carried equestrian and other niche sports tied to broader cultural or educational themes throughout the years (think: fencing, rowing).

The budget cuts to PBS and NPR were an inevitable once Trump won the ’24 election.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting “has been considered in some corners a vanity funded project [and] increasingly some of the political beliefs being subsidized are not popular with [a large portion] of the general public,” Crakes said. “So, it’s not surprising that the people who felt they were being disadvantaged by [the platform] decided to defund it.” 

But that doesn’t make them any less damaging. The income streams available to public broadcasters are limited. 

PBS’ bylaws and mission are structured around providing educational, cultural, and civic content free of commercial pressure. Non-commercial entertainment licenses, like the one it operates under, prohibit traditional advertising activities (think: price promotions, calls to action).

Krieger sees the “system needing meaningful change, in [terms of] governance and FCC regulations, [for PBS to gain] the flexibility required to maneuver in a more commercial world.” 

But he doesn’t envision that being a problem. One would assume if the federal government is going to severely reduce public funding given to public broadcasters that it might also be willing to eliminate some, if not all, of the restrictions on them. 

“Congress changed their rules about PBS’ funding, so PBS and its stations deserve real regulation modernization so they can compete for audience,” Krieger said.

A change in regulations would help PBS to purchase new programming –including live sports rights– and pivot away from its political coverage. It would also essentially turn the collection of stations into a fifth OTA network.

As it stands, “there's really only four fully distributed terrestrial networks,” Krieger said. 

For context, each of those stations reaches ~10 million more TV households than cable networks inside the pay TV bundle. They also receive higher circulation inside the bundle, which explains the lift in viewership when rights move from pay TV to broadcast television.

The NFL is unlikely to appear on PBS anytime soon, at least not without FCC intervention (think: transmission fees) and a restructuring of the organization. The league already plays the bulk of its games on broadcast television and PBS isn’t going to be able to generate a positive ROI on NFL rights without commercial capabilities.

But “there are plenty of sports that would still provide value to viewers, align with its mission as a public broadcaster, and work commercial free or within sponsorship guidelines,” Crakes said.

It’s not difficult to envision a rights owner or one of their sponsors spending $300,000 on the production and promotion of a live sporting event so that it can run ‘commercial free’ on PBS. 

“I would covet [the] distribution system, particularly if I was an Olympic [or tier two or three] sport [that is currently DTC and] trying to get some better exposure,” Krieger said. 

ABC, NBC, CBS & FOX have largely invested their resources in properties at the top of the value chain.

Streamers that have aggregated sports rights could find PBS’ discoverability attractive too. 

“The guys at NBC are [talking about creating] this [new cable] channel and it’s going to be tiered,” Crakes said. “They could [instead] just go to PBS and buy all these good channel positions in every pay TV system in America. And with streaming, Peacock would be full reach.”

Don’t be surprised if PBS turns into a sports-heavy network. Carrying games could save the public broadcaster and accelerate the growth of some of these underserved leagues.