A state lawmaker from Ohio has introduced a bill to prohibit streaming providers from airing Ohio State games.

In recent years, the landscape of sports broadcasting has undergone significant transformations, primarily due to the rise of streaming platforms that offer exclusive content to attract subscribers. This shift has not been without controversy, particularly among fans who feel alienated by the necessity to subscribe to multiple services to access their favorite teams’ games. A notable instance of this sentiment is reflected in recent legislative actions in Ohio, where State Senator Bill DeMora introduced a bill aimed at preventing public universities, notably Ohio State University (OSU), from entering into exclusive broadcasting agreements with streaming services.

Background

Senator Bill DeMora, a Democrat representing Columbus, has been an ardent supporter of OSU sports. His commitment is evident through his personal adornments, including Ohio State-themed watches, ties, and lapel pins. However, his enthusiasm faced a setback during the 2023 OSU-Purdue football game, which was aired exclusively on Peacock, a streaming service. This exclusivity meant that fans without Peacock subscriptions were unable to watch the game through traditional broadcasting channels. DeMora expressed his frustration, stating, “It was the first time in over 20 years that I couldn’t watch an Ohio State football game on a regular channel.” He further remarked, “I refuse to pay all these streaming networks to watch Ohio State and other sports. … Streaming television is not good for sports.”

Legislative Proposal

In response to this growing concern among constituents, Senator DeMora introduced Senate Bill 94 in early March 2025. The proposed legislation seeks to:

1. Ban Exclusive Streaming Contracts: Prohibit public universities in Ohio from entering into or renewing contracts that grant exclusive media rights to streaming services. This measure aims to ensure that games remain accessible to all fans without the need for multiple subscriptions.
2. Ensure Free Access for Students: Mandate that universities provide enrolled students with free access to watch athletic events broadcasted under such contracts. This provision acknowledges the financial burdens on students and ensures they can support their teams without additional costs.

DeMora highlighted the economic challenges faced by small businesses, particularly bars and restaurants, which often bear substantial costs to air exclusive games. He noted that some establishments paid thousands of dollars for a single game, a practice he deemed unreasonable. He attributed this issue to public institutions prioritizing profit over fan accessibility, stating, “The greed of the Big Ten and multinational streaming corporations is placing an unreasonable burden on Ohio’s small businesses, which rely on their ability to air games.” citeturn0search1

Industry Perspective

The sports broadcasting industry has evolved with technological advancements and changing consumer preferences. Streaming platforms have become significant players, offering viewers flexibility and a broader range of content. Major sports leagues and conferences have partnered with platforms like Peacock, Amazon Prime Video, and Netflix to distribute games, aiming to reach younger, tech-savvy audiences. These deals are financially lucrative, providing substantial revenue streams for universities and athletic programs.

However, the shift to streaming exclusivity has not been universally embraced. Fans accustomed to traditional broadcasting methods face challenges in adapting to new platforms, often requiring additional subscriptions and technological know-how. This transition has sparked debates about accessibility, equity, and the commercialization of collegiate sports.

Potential Implications of the Bill

If enacted, Senate Bill 94 could have several far-reaching implications:

1. Financial Impact on Universities: Exclusive streaming deals are often financially beneficial for universities, providing significant revenue that supports athletic programs and scholarships. Banning such contracts could lead to budgetary constraints, necessitating alternative funding strategies.
2. Broadcasting Landscape Shift: The bill would compel a reevaluation of broadcasting strategies, potentially leading to more games being aired on traditional television. This shift could affect partnerships with streaming platforms and alter the competitive dynamics within the sports media industry.
3. Legal and Political Considerations: The legislation may face legal challenges, particularly concerning contractual obligations and interstate commerce regulations. It also raises questions about the role of government in regulating media rights and the balance between public interest and institutional autonomy.

Broader Context

Ohio’s legislative initiative mirrors a broader national conversation about the future of sports broadcasting. As streaming becomes increasingly dominant, stakeholders must address concerns about access, affordability, and the preservation of traditional viewing experiences. The debate encapsulates tensions between technological progress and inclusivity, commercial interests and fan loyalty.

Senator Bill DeMora’s proposed bill represents a critical juncture in the ongoing discourse about sports media rights and fan accessibility. It underscores the challenges faced by fans in the evolving digital landscape and prompts essential conversations about the values that should underpin sports broadcasting. As the legislative process unfolds, it will be crucial to balance innovation with tradition, profit with public interest, ensuring that the love of the game remains accessible to all.

For a more in-depth understanding of the proposed bill and its potential impact, you may find the following news segment informative: