The merger of Comcast and NBCUniversal serves as a significant case study, showcasing the diverse and intricate ways media companies conduct their business. The economic dynamics of television, print publishing, radio broadcasting, music, and film are all unique, yet they can be broadly categorized into three models: monopoly, oligopoly, and monopolistic competition.

Of these three basic media business models, most people have familiarity with the concept of a monopoly. A monopoly occurs when one company controls a product or service, for example, a small town with only one major newspaper. While pure monopolies are rare and often subject to antitrust scrutiny, we still see near-monopolies or dominant players in specific niches, such as Google’s overwhelming share of the search engine market or Meta’s dominance in social networking.

Oligopoly, or the control of a product or service by just a few companies, commonly occurs across various modern media sectors. In publishing, a handful of major houses still put out most best-selling books, and relatively few companies control many of the nation’s highest-circulating magazines. Television broadcasting operates in much the same way, with the major networks—Comcast’s NBC, Disney’s ABC, Paramount Global’s CBS, and Fox Corporation’s Fox—owning nearly all broadcast and many prominent cable outlets. This extends to the burgeoning streaming landscape, where a few dominant players like Netflix, Disney+, and Max (formerly HBO Max) control a significant portion of the subscription video-on-demand market. Similarly, the music industry is essentially an oligopoly, with Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group controlling the vast majority of recorded music distribution.

Finally, monopolistic competition takes place when multiple companies offer essentially the same product or service but differentiate themselves through branding, features, or niche appeal. For example, the 2010 merger of longtime competitors Ticketmaster and Live Nation, both of which provided event-management services for music and other live entertainment industries, created a powerful entity that still operates within a broader market of event ticketing and promotion, where smaller, specialized companies compete by offering unique services or targeting specific genres. In the digital realm, this model is evident in the myriad of independent online news sites, podcasts, and niche content platforms, all vying for audience attention by offering distinct perspectives or specialized content.

The last few decades have seen an increasing conglomeration of media ownership, allowing for economies of scale that previous companies could not achieve. Instead of individual local radio stations competing for advertising revenue among a range of local companies, large corporations like iHeartMedia can now buy wholesale advertising for any or all of their brands on dozens of different radio stations in a single media market. The economics of mass media have indeed become a matter of macroeconomic proportions, with diversified conglomerates owning everything from theme parks and film studios to news networks and streaming services. The implications of this go beyond advertising; because major corporations now own nearly every major media outlet, ongoing concerns about corporate control of media messaging, editorial independence, and the diversity of voices have intensified.

However, critics often channel these fears into productive enterprises, fostering an ongoing countercurrent to provide diversity that is usually lacking in corporate-owned models. Independent radio stations, such as those affiliated with nonprofit organizations and colleges, continue to play a crucial role in providing news and in-depth analysis, as well as a variety of musical and entertainment programs that corporate stations would not air. This alternative perspective is a valuable contribution to the media landscape, and its reach has been dramatically expanded by the rise of the “creator economy.”

Consider the phenomenon of MrBeast on YouTube. While traditional media companies operate within the structures of monopolies, oligopolies, and monopolistic competition, individual creators like MrBeast have built media empires from the ground up, directly challenging established norms. MrBeast, with hundreds of millions of subscribers across his channels, commands an audience size that rivals, and often surpasses, that of major television networks and traditional media outlets. His content, characterized by elaborate stunts, philanthropic gestures, and high production values, is funded directly through ad revenue from YouTube and sponsorships, bypassing traditional media gatekeepers entirely. Furthermore, he has successfully diversified into physical products, such as his “Feastables” snack brand and “MrBeast Burger” virtual restaurant chain, demonstrating a powerful vertical integration of content creation with direct-to-consumer product sales. This multi-faceted model allows creators to build a direct, loyal relationship with their audience, which can be monetized through various channels beyond traditional advertising. This exemplifies how a single independent creator, through sheer innovation and direct audience engagement, can achieve unprecedented scale and influence. His success, and that of countless other YouTubers, TikTokers, and podcasters, underscores a profound shift: the power to produce and distribute compelling content is no longer solely the domain of massive corporations. This new breed of independent media provides a crucial alternative perspective and a diversity of content that corporate-owned models, despite their scale, often struggle to replicate, offering a compelling testament to the evolving economics of mass communication.

Raising Revenue

Companies employ many different ways to raise revenue for their services, but all boil down to two fundamental ideas: funding either comes from consumers or advertising. In practice, many outlets combine the two to give themselves a flexible stream of income. Equally, consumers may feel more willing to pay slightly more for fewer ads or to sit through more advertising in exchange for free content.

Traditional book publishers, for instance, still make practically all of their money by selling their products directly to consumers, now encompassing robust digital sales of e-books and audiobooks, often through subscription services or individual purchases. On the other end of the spectrum, broadcast television traditionally offered the clearest example of advertising-driven income, as no one paid subscription fees for these channels. Because this lack of direct fees increases the potential audience for the network, these networks could sell their advertising time at a premium. However, the media landscape has dramatically diversified.

Cable companies, such as Comcast, continue to use a hybrid model, deriving substantial revenue from both subscription fees and advertising. Yet, the traditional “bundled package” model for cable television has faced significant pressure from “cord-cutting” as consumers increasingly shift to streaming. In response, many cable providers have strategically pivoted to emphasize their broadband internet services, with television packages often becoming an add-on or a secondary offering. Furthermore, these companies now actively operate their streaming services, like Comcast’s Peacock, to retain control over their content and capture a share of the burgeoning digital video market, thereby blurring the lines between traditional cable and digital distribution.

Magazines and newspapers, which historically occupied a middle ground with a mix of subscription and advertising revenue, have been profoundly impacted by the digital age. The loss of traditional classified advertising to online platforms decades ago forced a significant evolution. To adapt, modern digital news and magazine outlets have implemented sophisticated digital subscription models and paywalls, requiring readers to pay for premium online content. They also diversify their income through native advertising, where sponsored content is seamlessly integrated with editorial, and increasingly through e-commerce integration, selling products directly or via affiliate links within their articles. Many also host virtual and in-person events, and some even rely on donations or grant funding, particularly in the nonprofit journalism sector.

Broadcast television networks themselves have embraced the digital shift by launching their ad-supported video-on-demand (AVOD) and Free Ad-supported Streaming Television (FAST) channels. Services such as Peacock (from Comcast/NBCUniversal), Paramount+ (from Paramount Global/CBS), and Tubi (from Fox Corporation) now offer extensive libraries of content, including live sports and news, all supported by advertising. This enables them to reach audiences who have moved away from traditional linear television, effectively extending their advertising reach into the digital realm where viewership continues to grow.

Beyond these established media structures, the “creator economy” has introduced entirely new revenue dynamics. Individual content creators, exemplified by figures like Mark Rober, have built massive, highly engaged audiences primarily through platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. Mark Rober, an engineer and inventor turned science communicator, commands an audience of tens of millions across his channels, often rivaling or surpassing the viewership of traditional media. His content, characterized by elaborate science experiments, engineering challenges, and engaging explanations, is funded not just through YouTube’s ad revenue sharing program (based on views and engagement). Crucially, he also leverages brand sponsorships within his videos, often integrating products or services in a way that aligns with his educational and entertaining content. Furthermore, Rober has successfully diversified into physical products and educational ventures, such as his “CrunchLabs” subscription box service, which provides hands-on STEM learning experiences. This model allows creators to build a direct relationship with their audience, fostering loyalty that can be monetized through various channels beyond traditional advertising.

Across all media types, the collection and analysis of user data have become paramount, representing a significant innovation in revenue generation. This data allows advertisers to target specific demographics and interests with far greater precision, making ad inventory more valuable and enabling personalized advertising experiences. For subscription services, data helps personalize content recommendations, improving user experience and reducing churn. This data-driven approach optimizes both advertising effectiveness and consumer engagement, directly impacting revenue. Moreover, the increasing integration of e-commerce functionalities across content platforms, from social media to news sites, allows consumers to discover products within content and make purchases without leaving the platform, creating seamless shopping experiences and opening entirely new revenue streams for media companies and creators alike. In essence, while the fundamental revenue ideas persist, the methods of implementation have become vastly more complex, diversified, and digitally driven, reflecting a dynamic media ecosystem where content, advertising, and consumer engagement are intricately intertwined.

Print Media

Print media can be categorized into three primary types: books, newspapers, and magazines. The book publishing industry continues to operate primarily as an oligopoly. While precise, consistently updated public figures on market share for the “Big Five” (Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, Macmillan, and Hachette Book Group) are often proprietary, these few major publishers still dominate the trade book market, accounting for a significant majority of best-selling titles and overall revenue. Their influence extends across print, e-book, and audiobook formats.

Newspapers often function as local monopolies or oligopolies, as relatively few local news sources have direct local competition. In the past, classified advertising made up a substantial portion of newspaper revenue. However, the advent of the Internet—particularly free classified services like Craigslist and the rise of specialized online job boards and marketplaces—has severely impacted the newspaper industry through declining classified advertising revenues. Additionally, lucrative display advertising clients have largely abandoned the print medium, shifting their budgets to digital platforms where targeting and analytics are more sophisticated.

To counter these profound shifts, modern newspapers have diversified their revenue streams significantly. While print circulation and its associated advertising still contribute, especially in local markets and among older demographics, digital strategies are now paramount. This includes the widespread adoption of digital subscription models and paywalls, where readers pay for premium online content. Many newspapers also generate income through native advertising (sponsored content designed to blend with editorial), hosting events (both virtual and in-person), and leveraging their data for more targeted digital advertising. Some even explore donations or grant funding, particularly for nonprofit journalism initiatives, to support their public service mission.

Magazines, too, have evolved their revenue models beyond traditional print subscriptions and display ads. While print editions still exist, digital magazines increasingly rely on a mix of strategies. This includes digital subscriptions and memberships that offer exclusive content or perks. They also heavily utilize affiliate marketing, earning commissions from products recommended within their content, and e-commerce integration, allowing readers to purchase items featured in articles directly. Sponsored content remains a key advertising revenue stream, often presented in a way that aligns with the magazine’s editorial style. Furthermore, many magazines now host their events and sell branded merchandise, leveraging their brand loyalty into new consumer-driven income sources. The shift from print to digital has necessitated a more complex and diversified approach to revenue generation across the entire print media landscape.

Newspapers

Journalistic and editorial expenditures continue to be a significant cost for newspaper companies, often outweighing the expenses associated with newsprint and physical distribution, especially as the industry shifts further into the digital realm. While the transition from the labor-intensive process of mechanical typesetting to modern electronic printing and digital publishing significantly reduced the marginal costs of producing individual copies, the price of newsprint still fluctuates, presenting a challenge for print operations.

The highest costs of publishing a paper remain the editorial and administrative overheads, particularly the salaries of journalists, editors, and support staff who produce original content. Newspaper publishers often combine back-office activities such as administration, finance, and even content production if they own more than one paper, seeking efficiencies through consolidation. Unlike historical restrictions on broadcast media that limited the number of stations a single network could own, print media have faced no such federal ownership limits. Because of this, large media conglomerates have acquired vast portfolios of newspapers. For example, Gannett, a prominent player, owns not only the national newspaper USA Today but also hundreds of local newspapers across the United States and operates Newsquest in the United Kingdom (Columbia Journalism Review, 2008). Similarly, McClatchy, after emerging from bankruptcy in 2020, continues to manage a network of nearly 30 daily newspapers across 14 U.S. states, and recently merged with A360 Media to diversify its content offerings.

These large ownership groups leverage their scale to reduce costs. They often centralize functions like design, copy editing, and even some reporting for multiple papers. Additionally, companies like McClatchy continue to operate their news agencies or rely heavily on wire services like the Associated Press. These services provide a cost-effective means of delivering national and international journalism to multiple local markets, allowing individual papers to maintain a broader news scope without the expense of deploying their reporters globally. While news wire services primarily distribute press releases for a fee today, they still serve as a vital source of aggregated news content for many newsrooms, enabling them to supplement their local reporting with broader coverage and reduce their overall content production costs.

However, the ongoing decline in print advertising and circulation has led many of these large newspaper chains to implement significant cost-cutting measures, including staff reductions and a focus on digital transformation. Their strategy now heavily emphasizes growing digital subscriptions and diversifying revenue streams beyond traditional advertising to ensure long-term sustainability.

Magazines

Like newspapers, a few large companies own most magazines. However, many magazine chains are now part of even larger media conglomerates. For instance, while Time Warner (now Warner Bros. Discovery) once held a significant share of the magazine market, many of its former flagship titles like Time and Fortune have since been sold to other entities, such as Marc Benioff (co-founder of Salesforce) acquiring Time and Sports Illustrated being acquired by Authentic Brands Group, with publishing rights licensed to Minute Media. This reflects a dynamic landscape where ownership shifts and consolidations continue. However, the overall market remains concentrated among a few major players like Dotdash Meredith (which owns People, Better Homes & Gardens, and many former Time Inc. titles) and Hearst Communications (Cosmopolitan, Elle, Good Housekeeping). These large entities leverage their diverse portfolios to maximize advertising revenue and cross-promote content across various platforms.

However, many smaller publishers continue to produce niche publications, many of which do not aspire to a broader mass market. In recent years, the magazine industry has undergone a significant transformation rather than a simple decline. While there was a net loss of publications in the past, the industry is now adapting by focusing heavily on digital transformation. The global magazine publishing market is projected to see growth, driven by increasing demand for specialized content and the rise of digital subscriptions and advertising models. Print magazines are increasingly seen as premium or collectible items, while the core growth is in digital formats. This includes robust digital subscriptions, native advertising, e-commerce integration, and revenue from events, enabling both large conglomerates and smaller, independent publishers to find new ways to engage audiences and raise revenue in a rapidly evolving media landscape.

Television and Radio

As discussed in Chapter 9, “Television,” large media conglomerates own nearly all television networks. These conglomerates typically own both national networks and local affiliates. For instance, Comcast/NBCUniversal owns NBC and Telemundo; The Walt Disney Company owns ABC; Paramount Global owns CBS; and Fox Corporation owns Fox. Stations such as Fox-owned WNYW in New York or CBS-owned KCNC in Denver can mix local content with national reporting and programming, much as large newspaper companies do.

In the local market, the landscape of television service has dramatically shifted. While historically one cable company, such as Comcast, often dominated the local service market, the rise of streaming services has profoundly impacted this dynamic. As of early 2025, a significant majority of U.S. adults (83%) watch streaming TV, while far fewer (36%) subscribe to traditional cable or satellite TV. This “cord-cutting” trend has led to a steady decline in cable TV subscriptions, with projections indicating a continued decrease in conventional pay-TV households. Satellite companies like Dish Network and DirecTV still offer competition. Still, the primary challenge to traditional cable now comes from a vast array of streaming options, including live TV streaming services (e.g., YouTube TV, Hulu + Live TV) and on-demand platforms (e.g., Netflix, Max, Disney+). This shift means that while cable companies still generate substantial revenue from subscriptions and advertising, their focus increasingly includes broadband internet services and their streaming ventures.

Even as television distribution has fragmented, radio has become heavily consolidated. Since the 1990s, massive radio networks, such as iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Channel Communications), have acquired many local stations to control a significant number of radio stations in various media markets. iHeartMedia, for example, operates hundreds of stations across the U.S. and generates substantial revenue from broadcast advertising, with local radio ad revenue projected to reach $13.6 billion in 2024. They also see significant growth in their digital audio group, with digital revenue for radio crossing the $2 billion threshold in 2024. However, the FCC has designated the lower part of the FM radio band for noncommercial purposes, including nonprofit programming such as educational, religious, or public radio stations, and continues to hold public discussions on frequency allocations. These practices help retain a certain level of programming diversity in the face of increased homogenization, primarily because advertisers do not financially support such stations. Because they acquire funding from donations, listener pledges, and nonprofit institutions, these stations benefit economically by catering to a minority of listeners who may directly support the station, rather than a larger majority that has other entertainment options.

Video Games

The video game industry has evolved into a colossal economic force, projected to generate nearly $190 billion in global market revenue in 2024. This impressive figure far surpasses the combined revenues of the global recorded music and box office industries, highlighting the diverse and innovative ways video games generate income.

Traditionally, video game revenue was straightforward: players purchased a full-priced game, and that was the primary transaction. This “buy-to-play” model still exists, particularly for central console and PC releases, where a one-time purchase grants access to the core game. However, even these titles often integrate additional monetization strategies. Another long-standing model, particularly for massively multiplayer online (MMO) games, has been the subscription fee, where players pay a recurring charge, for instance, monthly, to access the game’s servers and ongoing content. Services like World of Warcraft exemplify this, ensuring a steady revenue stream to support continuous development and maintenance.

The most significant shift in video game revenue generation over the past decade has been the rise of “free-to-play” (F2P) games and the “games as a service” (GaaS) model. F2P games, often prevalent on mobile platforms but increasingly popular on PC and console, offer the core game experience for free, removing the initial barrier to entry. Their revenue is almost entirely derived from post-purchase monetization strategies, primarily microtransactions, also known as in-app purchases or IAPs. These small, incremental purchases allow players to buy a wide array of digital goods, including cosmetic items such as character skins and emotes, in-game currency, power-ups, or time-savers. In 2024, microtransactions alone accounted for a substantial 58% of PC gaming revenue, illustrating their dominance. This model thrives on engaging players over long periods, encouraging them to spend small amounts repeatedly.

A crucial component of the F2P and GaaS models is in-game advertising. This revenue stream allows developers to monetize their games without requiring direct player payment, making the content accessible to a broader audience. In-game advertising manifests in several forms. Display ads are static or animated banners that appear within the game environment, often at natural transition points or on loading screens, similar to traditional web advertising. Native ads are more seamlessly integrated into the game’s world, appearing as billboards, product placements, or branded content that feels organic to the game’s setting. Rewarded video ads, ubiquitous in mobile games, offer players in-game rewards, for example, extra lives, currency, or boosts, in exchange for watching a short video advertisement. This opt-in model is highly effective as it provides value to the player while generating revenue for the developer.

Beyond microtransactions and in-game advertising, other significant revenue streams for modern video games include downloadable content (DLC) and expansions. These are paid additions that extend the game’s storyline, add new characters, levels, or features. Battle passes are a popular GaaS model, offering tiers of rewards, both free and paid, that players unlock by playing the game over a specific season, incentivizing continued engagement. Game pass and subscription services, such as Xbox Game Pass, PlayStation Plus, and Nintendo Switch Online, offer access to a rotating library of games for a recurring fee, often bundling online multiplayer access and exclusive discounts. Successful game franchises also usually generate significant revenue through the sale of physical merchandise like toys and apparel, and by licensing their intellectual property for other media such as movies and TV shows. Furthermore, the burgeoning professional competitive gaming scene, known as esports, generates revenue through sponsorships, advertising, ticket sales for events, and prize pools.

The shift towards GaaS and F2P models, heavily reliant on microtransactions and in-game advertising, has transformed the industry, allowing games to become long-term interactive experiences that continuously generate revenue long after their initial release. This diversification ensures that the video game industry remains a dynamic and highly profitable sector of the global entertainment economy.

Music and Film

Because both the music and film industries face unique business opportunities and challenges, each operates on an economic model distinct from that of print or broadcast media. Just like those forms of media, however, music and film have undergone significant changes due to consolidation and shifts in technology and consumer preferences in recent years.

Music and the “Big Three”

The music industry closely resembles the radio industry, and the two have a high degree of codependence. Without music, radio would not feature nearly as lively or popular content; without radio, music becomes more difficult for listeners to discover, potentially limiting its scope to a local consumer base.

As radio companies have consolidated, so has the music industry. A total of three record companies, commonly referred to as the “Big Three” within the industry, now dominate the recorded music business and thus most mainstream radio airwaves. These are Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group. The EMI Group, once part of the “Big Four,” was acquired mainly by Universal and Sony, further consolidating the market. Because a conglomerate such as iHeartMedia would find it impractical to monitor and broadcast music and concerts catered to a purely local market—and because they find it easier to manage programming across a large regional area than on a station-by-station basis—the Big Three record companies tend to focus on national and international acts. After all, if a label can convince a single radio conglomerate to play a particular act’s music, that performer instantly gains access to a broad national market.

Popular music, therefore, operates widely as an oligopoly, despite the presence of numerous small, independent companies. A handful of major record labels with similar corporate structures dominate the market. Universal Music Group is primarily owned by the Bolloré family and Tencent, with Pershing Square Holdings also holding a significant stake. The eponymous Japanese technology giant, Sony Group Corporation, wholly owns Sony Music Entertainment. Warner Music Group, although now an entity after being spun off from Time Warner, is primarily owned by Access Industries, a private industrial group.

While the Big Three dominate the recorded music industry, they have surprisingly little to do with live performances. Traditionally, musicians have toured to promote their albums—and sell enough copies to recoup their advances—and live shows have presented both self-promotion and income opportunities. An artist’s record company provided financial support, but a concert ticket generated significantly more income per sale than a CD. Since the merger of ticketing companies Ticketmaster and Live Nation, the ticketing services for large venues have been practically monopolized. For example, Madison Square Garden, one of the largest venues in New York City, does not handle its booking in-house, and with good reason; the technology to manage tens of thousands of fans trying to buy tickets to a soon-to-be-sold-out concert the day they go on sale would likely break the system. Instead, Ticketmaster handles all ticketing for Madison Square Garden, adding a 10 percent to 20 percent fee to the face value of the ticket for its exclusive service, depending on the venue and the price of the show.

This dominance has led to significant public battles between artists and Ticketmaster. The ticketing process for Taylor Swift’s “Eras Tour” in late 2022 became a highly publicized debacle, drawing widespread criticism and leading to legal and governmental scrutiny. Millions of fans registered for Ticketmaster’s Verified Fan presale, but when tickets went on sale on November 15, 2022, the website experienced severe technical issues, including crashes, frozen queues, and error messages. Ticketmaster attributed the chaos to “historically unprecedented demand” and a “staggering number of bot attacks,” leading them to cancel the general public sale due to “insufficient remaining ticket inventory.” Taylor Swift herself publicly expressed her frustration, stating it was “excruciating for me just to watch mistakes happen with no recourse.” Fans filed multiple lawsuits against Live Nation Entertainment (Ticketmaster’s parent company), alleging fraud, misrepresentation, and antitrust violations. The controversy also prompted a U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in January 2023, where senators from both parties criticized Ticketmaster’s market dominance. In May 2024, the U.S. federal government, joined by 29 states, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation-Ticketmaster, seeking to dissolve their merger, citing unlawful business practices that harm the live music industry.

In early 2023, The Cure’s frontman, Robert Smith, took a very public stand against Ticketmaster’s fees for their “Shows of a Lost World” North American tour. The band had intentionally priced tickets low and opted out of dynamic pricing and platinum tickets to keep them affordable for fans. However, when tickets went on sale through Ticketmaster’s Verified Fan program, fans reported exorbitant service fees that sometimes doubled the face value of the ticket. Robert Smith publicly expressed his outrage on Twitter, stating he was “as sickened as you all are by today’s Ticketmaster ‘fees’ debacle” and questioned how the fees were justified, emphasizing that “the artist has no way to limit them.” Following his direct intervention and conversations with Ticketmaster representatives, the company agreed to issue partial refunds to fans: $10 per ticket for the lowest-priced transactions and $5 per ticket for all other price tiers across all shows. Smith also confirmed that future ticket sales for the tour would incur lower fees. This rare concession from Ticketmaster was hailed as a significant win for fans and highlighted the power an artist can wield when taking a firm stance against ticketing practices.

Film

Because of the nature of film, the economics of the medium slightly differ from those of music. The absence of film in traditional linear broadcasting (though films are widely available on streaming platforms), the lack of a live performance aspect comparable to a concert, and the exponentially higher budgets for major productions represent some of its unique facets. As with music, however, large companies tend to dominate the market. These massive studios have now formed intricate corporate partnerships with other media outlets, reflecting a highly integrated entertainment ecosystem. For example, Sony Pictures is owned by the eponymous Japanese technology giant, Sony Group Corporation, which also controls Sony Music Entertainment. Universal Pictures is part of NBCUniversal, which is a subsidiary of Comcast, a major telecommunications and media conglomerate. The Walt Disney Studios, a powerhouse in film production, is part of The Walt Disney Company, which controls major television broadcast and cable networks like ABC and Disney Channels, alongside its vast streaming services and theme parks. Similarly, Warner Bros. Pictures Group is a division of Warner Bros. Discovery, a global media and entertainment conglomerate with extensive holdings in television networks (e.g., HBO, Discovery Channel) and streaming platforms. Paramount Pictures is owned by Paramount Global, which also has significant television and streaming assets.

Just as record labels do with radio conglomerates, film distribution companies tend to sell to large cinema chains, which have a national and often international reach; these chains operate thousands of screens, providing a wide theatrical footprint for major studio releases. For instance, in 2024, the largest cinema chains in the U.S. by screen count include AMC Theatres with over 7,300 screens, Regal with over 5,700 screens, and Cinemark USA with over 4,300 screens. These large chains play a crucial role in the initial theatrical release window, which remains a significant, though increasingly shorter, revenue stream for films.

However, the film industry’s revenue landscape has been profoundly reshaped by the rise of streaming services. While theatrical box office performance was traditionally the primary measure of a film’s success, followed by home video (DVD/Blu-ray sales and rentals), the emergence of platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Disney+, Max, and Peacock has diversified and accelerated revenue streams. Many films now have significantly shortened theatrical release windows, with some even debuting simultaneously in cinemas and on streaming platforms, or going straight to streaming. This shift has led to a decline in physical home video sales, with digital rentals and purchases, along with subscription and ad-supported streaming models, becoming dominant.

Independent filmmakers still provide limited competition to these larger studios, but their revenue generation models have also adapted. While some independent films secure traditional theatrical distribution, many rely heavily on film festivals for exposure and then pursue distribution deals with streaming services, or utilize direct-to-consumer platforms for video-on-demand (VOD) sales and rentals. Beyond these distribution channels, films generate revenue through various ancillary markets, including licensing for television broadcasts, in-flight entertainment, and educational use. Furthermore, successful film franchises can generate substantial income through merchandising, brand partnerships, and the creation of related content such as video games, interactive experiences, and even live events or theme park attractions. This multi-platform approach is essential for studios and independent filmmakers alike to maximize a film’s earning potential in today’s complex media environment.

New Media, Old Models

The rise of digital platforms has fundamentally reshaped the media landscape, yet in many ways, the core dynamics of revenue generation persist, albeit with new complexities. While the internet certainly “changed the game,” major media conglomerates continue to exert significant influence, owning and controlling access to a vast amount of online information and popular content sites. For example, YouTube is owned by Alphabet Inc. (Google’s parent company), Hulu is now wholly owned by Disney, and Twitch is an Amazon subsidiary. Even newer, highly influential platforms like TikTok are owned by large global tech companies. This demonstrates that while the distribution channels have proliferated, the underlying ownership often remains concentrated.

The role of content creators, including bloggers, influencers, YouTubers, and podcasters, has evolved dramatically. Early pioneers like The Drudge Report primarily gained traffic by aggregating and commenting on news from established outlets, while the modern creator economy is far more sophisticated. Today’s creators are not merely reposting; many are generating original content, conducting their investigations, developing niche expertise, and building highly engaged communities. Their revenue models are diverse and increasingly professionalized, moving beyond simple ad revenue from platforms. These include direct sponsorships and brand partnerships, where companies pay creators to integrate products or messages into their content. Many creators also leverage affiliate marketing, earning commissions on sales driven through their unique links. Subscriptions, often facilitated by platforms like Patreon or Substack, allow loyal followers to support creators in exchange for exclusive content or direct access. Furthermore, creators usually sell their merchandise, digital products like e-books or online courses, and even offer personalized services or public appearances. Platforms themselves have also introduced creator funds and monetization tools, recognizing the value these individuals bring to their ecosystems.

The economic complications introduced by the internet, particularly the drastic increase in readily available free content, have permanently altered the media calculus. This shift from content scarcity to abundance has intensified competition for audience attention, giving rise to what is often termed the “attention economy.” In this environment, human attention itself becomes the primary currency, monetized through various means. For online news and media sites, while advertising remains a significant revenue stream, digital subscriptions and memberships have become a top priority for publishers in 2024. Many news organizations are implementing sophisticated paywall strategies, offering bundled subscriptions with additional features, or experimenting with “lite” versions to attract younger audiences. Events, both in-person and online, also represent a growing “other” revenue stream for publishers.

Digital advertising itself has become incredibly sophisticated, with programmatic advertising, native ads, and video ads driving substantial revenue. Social media advertising, in particular, has seen significant growth, with platforms leveraging advanced ad tech and artificial intelligence to match advertisers with highly targeted audiences. This allows tech giants to offer free access to their platforms while generating billions in ad revenue. For instance, Meta (Facebook and Instagram’s parent company) and Alphabet (Google and YouTube’s parent company) are significant beneficiaries of this model, earning tens of billions annually from advertising.

In essence, while the internet initially presented a challenge to traditional media’s revenue models by making content abundant and often free, the industry has adapted by embracing new forms of monetization. This includes a complex interplay of advertising, direct consumer payments through subscriptions and micro-transactions, and the burgeoning creator economy, all vying for the finite resource of audience attention in an increasingly digital and interconnected world.