I'm not sure there is a cross advantage that appears as it should. Several wild card questions remain: What disadvantages of tying branding to a news radio station, if the number one TV news station in the market is, say...KING? Over the years, other than historical nostalgic aspects, has the tie between KOMO TV News and KOMO 1000 News created a competitive advantage for either? Answer: No, not really. There's something to be said about audience polarization. 'I don't care for KOMO-TV News, so am not interested in getting my news from KOMO radio.' Time will tell, but some separation may actually be an advantage for both. Spots for KOMO-TV on AM 1000 may be good enough. It will take the fight to their direct competitor, KIRO Radio, rather than hiding behind TV. AM 1000 and the new owners, will have to put up it's fist's and fight the good fight, or potentially get their asses kicked
If the content is delivered by the same team or same type of format (ABC news for example) I can't imagine it not helping both entities to some degree. News viewers are program loyal, if you like the newscasters on channel 4, you'll like them on AM 1000 and vice- versa. I understand Sinclair not wanting to 'automatically include' the calls in their fire sale deal (since no one knew who was buying the frequency or what they would do with it), however, once the agreement to share content/ reporters was in place, it would only benefit them to have a radio station on air saying their name 24 hours a day. As far as hiding behind the calls, when I talk to people outside of the business about KIRO TV or Radio most of them think they have the same owner. So one could argue THEY are now the ones hiding behind the TV station.