Ask yourself - who benefits from media consolidation? And the answer is, among others, the established political insiders. So you can expect that this will be a very popular merger among the political class.
Very, very true.
Remember how every TV and radio station, pre-"consolidation era" (i.e. Telecommunications Act of 1996) had some amount of news and/or public service on their airwaves? Remember how, even when the public service stuff was often relegated to 5am Sunday Morning, the news content was mostly pretty decent... Even on stations where the person just read AP news wire copy, there was still decent news programming.
NOW, if you don't seek out news programming on the radio, you mostly won't find it outside of talk stations, news/talk stations, and all-news stations. Besides that, and NPR? Nope. Music station listeners who haven't sought out radio news in the last 15 years probably think the last event of mass importance was 9/11, because that was the last time "music" stations had any significant amount of news programming on them--even earlier in the smaller markets.
It's a damn shame, but also the exact desired outcome--because it isn't "efficient" for owners of hundreds of news stations to pay to have "news departments" and "news programming" on every station, they just don't do it anymore and pocket the funds that would have been spent on it. As a bonus to the political class, the information-level available to your average citizen just dropped another few ticks, and people who used to be occasionally exposed to news programming supplemented with wingnut news online, now only hear the wingnut view and get no "mainstream" (i.e. not-made-up from whole cloth) news.