How a Conservative TV Giant Is Ridding Itself of Regulation

It’s very relevant for the older demographics that they serve. That same demographic also votes at a higher rate than the general population.

>Do you, or anyone you know, still use OTA broadcasting?

I don't, only because I live in probably the one geographic area of the country where there's basically nothing available OTA. I do know a lot of people who do, though, in bigger cities. Typically it's for sports content and not everyday watching (football, NBA finals, so on).

I would say that I am probably on the periphery of this tech bubble and I still consume some OTA broadcasting, pretty much PBS stations in the Austin area. I will sometimes tune into NBC or CBS for late-night host commentary, when I am unable to catch these on YT.

I do, just for the local sports and other live events. Programs that can be gotten by streaming would be my first choice. OTA tends to be of higher quality since it's not re-compressed as it would be through cable. It's an extra $15/mo I can keep in my pocket as well.

Free sports!

TV is still extremely relevant, many families leave their TV on all evening as background audio they tune in and out of. Rural/older demographics also heavily skew towards TV/radio.

EVERYONE I know who is over 40 still uses OTA broadcasting. You might be in a bubble.

Essentially everyone that lives outside of the range of cable (read anyone not in a city) is still using OTA antennas if not just to supplement their satellite TV. There are add-on packages for local stations through your dish which many people also have but quite a few would rather forgoe the extra charge and get them for free in arguably higher quality.