this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2026
201 points (99.0% liked)

Television

2476 readers
368 users here now

Welcome to Television

This community is for discussion of anything related to television or streaming.

Other Communities

Television Communities

A community for discussion of anything related to Television via broadcast or streaming.

Rules:

  1. Be respectful and courteous to all members.
  2. Avoid offensive or discriminatory remarks.
  3. Avoid spamming or promoting unrelated products/services.
  4. Avoid personal attacks or engaging in heated arguments.
  5. Do not engage in any form of illegal activity or promote illegal content.
  6. Please mask any and all spoilers with spoiler tags.

Matrix Link

List of Best Rated TV Series as voted by the Fediverse

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Skavau@piefed.social
BoozeOrWater@piefed.social
Skavau@lemmy.world
MimicJar@lemmy.world
201
Jimmy Kimmel ‘Felt Defeated’ by Stephen Colbert’s Cancellation and Says Late-Night TV Is Not ‘Dying of Natural Causes’: ‘We’re Being Poisoned’ (variety.com)
submitted 4 days ago by Skavau@piefed.social to c/television@piefed.social
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world 23 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

I really don't like how over simplified the coverage of the late night issues are.

I love Stephen Colbert, but his show had a budget of $100m and was losing $40m a year for CBS.

It's certainly true that the right wing are attacking late night and free speech. But it is also true that US late night TV is already in major trouble, because people aren't watching and advertising funded TV in general is dying.

The real story is the big TV networks have had their day, and the movie studios are also struggling. That's how CBS/Paramount got sold in the first place - these are declining business in a world where Streaming is king, and the main players in the new world are Netflix and Youtube.

It's a classic example of incumbents declining as disruptors take over - it happened with Microsoft vs IBM/computer companies, it happened with Apple vs Nokia/phone makers, it happened with Google vs Lycos/search engines, it happened with Facebook vs MySpace, it happened with Amazon vs high street retailers. Now we're well along the road with Netflix/Youtube vs TV.

The big US TV channels are going the way of Blockbuster, Sears, Toys'R'Us and many others. We're already seen a reduction in big prime-time TV shows, cancellation of previous decades running shows like daytime soaps and daytime talk shows. Now it's hitting late night talk shows, and it won't end there.

I'm sorry for the people who worked on those shows - I think the transition is going to be disastrous for many professionals in the TV and movie industries. But comedy, political comment etc - that isn't going away, it's just changing. Once newspapers and political cartoons were the dominant form of commentary; late night TV is going their way.

[–] TheColonel@reddthat.com 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

his show had a budget of $100m and was losing $40m a year for CBS.

As far as I’m aware, these figures haven’t been verified. If it were a budget thing, why the sudden shift? You’d think that fact would’ve been broadcast, reported, the show was in peril, etc. for years.

But no, all of a sudden, around _very_specific circumstances, he’s gone. The show’s gone.

Give me a break.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So late night in general has been cost cutting for years,

What's missing is that there should be a similar headlight for Colbert. Instead it was just cancelled.

Don't get me wrong the reason it was cancelled was to appease the Trump administration as part of the Paramount/Skydance merger. That was the real reason why.

BUT! Late night is on the downward swing. It likely won't exist in its current form in 5-10 years. Podcasts and Internet talk shows are going to and in many ways already have replaced late night.

CBS is stupid and have made a stupid decision. No question. But there is enough plausible deniability that they can get away with it.

[–] TheColonel@reddthat.com 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh, I’m aware the genre is sliding, I’m just not buying the whole thing that Colbert was unprofitable.

And if it was, given that it was the #1 rated late night show… the network, and ad sales, and all similarly associated marketing and ads folks were more to blame than the show.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

There is also the intangible value, which can't be calculated.

How much "prestige" does Colbert bring CBS?

I actively watch two programs produced by CBS/Paramount, Late Show with Colbert & Star Trek. They just cancelled the first and while there are more seasons of Star Trek left to air, there is none currently in production (just post production). So if I'm not paying attention how will I ever know what they're producing?

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 7 points 3 days ago

Keep in mind, it's also a vehicle for advertising paramount movies and cbs tv shows. It may cost more than it brings in advertising but 2 guests talking about your properties 5 times a week for 40 weeks a year to millions of people brings a lot of value

[–] myrrh@ttrpg.network 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

...broadcast television has been contracting for over twenty years and hasn't cultivated the critical mass to sustain late-night talk-shows for at least half that time; they're a dying genre from a dying medium, kept on life support more by tradition than anything else...

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

his show had a budget of $100m and was losing $40m a year for CBS.

Dude the only number that isn't bullshit in television is cash and even then there are some philosophical arguments to be had (that I won't right now)

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It's not like they stopped airing a show in that time slot. They replaced it with an equivalent show with the only difference being that it avoids politics.

Byron Allen has a round table with several guests instead of a couch with a few guests. That's it. Is a round table somehow $40 million cheaper than a desk and a couch?

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Byron Allen is actually paying CBS for that time slot. It could have been infomercials for all CBS cared.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

CBS sold the time slot for $15 million to Byron Allen. They've effectively walked away from having a late night talk show and picked someone who was known in the industry for having a tame air filler show.

That said, The Late Show with Stephen Colbert was more expensive than you'd think. They had a large studio space in New York City, a team of comedy writers, and other staff increasing the cost. Conan had gone through a cost cutting measure at TBS, with his show getting cut to half an hour with a smaller stage and less staff. Jay Leno gave up a significant part of his salary to keep his staff's jobs before The Tonight Show went to Conan.

Had Taylor Tomlinson stayed on, CBS might have used her as a stick to threaten Colbert to make budget cuts and/or take a salary cut. Without her and reading the politics of Trump, CBS decided not to even entertain the idea of keeping The Late Show.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Colbert wasn't allowed to buy the Late Show for $15M yet Byron Allen was?

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Byron Allen didn't buy the Late Show, he just bought the air time.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yes but if the Late Show was cancelled because of cost they could have offered the time slot to Colbert first.

Putting an interview show in the same time slot and changing the desk for a table is pretty much the Late Show with a set change.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, they could have. However, saying to do the entire show for with profit for $15 million a year would have likely been an insultingly low offer to Colbert.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They wouldn't pay Colbert. It would be the same deal they allowed Allen.

Colbert would "buy" the time slot for $15m a year and keep all profit (if any).

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They would be paying the company that Colbert made to make the show, since Colbert would likely be a producer or have control over the producers.

And, as I said earlier, the end compensation to Colbert would likely be insultingly low.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

As was explained to me earlier in the thread, CBS isn't paying Byron Allen anything. Byron is paying them $15m to own that block of time.

So CBS could have given the same offer to Colbert. Instead of it being the Late Show with Stephen Colbert, it would have become Stephen Colbert's Late Show. He would own the show and therefore own all profit from it. Buying a business isn't an insult.

Had CBS allowed Colbert to buy it, he could have turned it down and CBS would have looked good. Or he could have taken the deal like Allen did knowing it was worth more than the $40M loss that CBS claimed.

But CBS didn't give him a choice because Colbert might have taken the deal. Trump wanted Colbert off the air.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't think CBS letting Colbert stay on for $15 million to produce the show would have been seen as anything other than firing Colbert.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They didn't give him the same business opportunity as Allen.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why are you so fixated on CBS not giving Colbert a deal he wouldn't have accepted?

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Because the fact that they didn't offer him a chance to own The Late Show means all of CBS's press releases are a lie. Trump wanted Colbert gone and CBS made it happen.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

the only one extremely quiet in all this is fallon, hes a bootlicker through and through.

[–] MrSelfDestruct@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago

looks at audience and laughs

[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 21 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Of the president, Kimmel said: “I don’t love him. I don’t hate him, either. I feel sorry for him. He obviously didn’t get hugged a lot.”

I'm not going to go looking, but I assume this provoked at least one "truthiness" from Dear Cheeto.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I feel like Jimmy Kimmel will have Colbert guest host his show at some point if Colbert is ever interested

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 3 days ago

isnt kimmel the one that has a citizenship in italy recently, he might flee there if things get bad, dont know if he will try to host a show then.

[–] 843563115848@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

No shit.