Colbert addressed the CBS statement head-on last night, and he pulled exactly zero punches:
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
CBS lawyers tell Colbert not to interview Texas Democratic Rep. James Talarico---and not to mention it.
- Thread starter michael hagerty
- Start date
Colbert addressed the CBS statement head-on last night, and he pulled exactly zero punches:
A reminder that this week had originally been planned as repeats for Colbert. They switched to live shows at the last minute. Why did they do that?
With Kimmel in repeats, Fallon pre-empted by Olympics, Colbert has late night all to himself.
What a perfect time to come up with a story that went viral. If CBS wanted to stop it, they could. They didn't. This is their Kimmel moment.
With Kimmel in repeats, Fallon pre-empted by Olympics, Colbert has late night all to himself.
What a perfect time to come up with a story that went viral. If CBS wanted to stop it, they could. They didn't. This is their Kimmel moment.
CBS knows everything that is going on in Sullivan. They have live feeds of the taping so if they wanted to call down to the stage and ask what was going on they could have. CBS knew damn well what Colbert was saying and they didn’t counter him when it happened. Tells me Colbert is right.
Sometimes things happen that don't fit the narrative. The narrative is that CBS is censoring Colbert. That doesn't appear to be true.
We know it’s true as his show is ending in May. They just made it worse as he has nothing to lose anymore.
He had nothing to lose the moment he found out last year that the show was ending in May.
Once again, if CBS wanted to censor him, they could have just aired the repeats, as originally planned.
As I said, this is Colbert's Kimmel moment. The ratings for this week will be an all time high.
And CBS knows it.
And that makes them look worse if they do. CBS is stuck now. Either they fire him now or let him cook and run out the clock.
No because everyone else is doing repeats this week because of the Olympics. They will get huge ratings during the February sweeps.
So
So maybe CBS was in on it. Anything for ratings.
And Classic Rock radio will play the "funky kicks" version of "Jet Airliner"
So much to shovel here.
When considering who benefits, one has to keep in mind that traditional capitalist considerations no longer tell the whole story. Leveraging connections and profiting from them are the new primary consideration. While not about broadcasting as such, the New York Times had a thoughtful analysis of the current business environment in today's editions (it was online two weeks earlier, but appeared in print only today):
A good starter quote:
Professors and pundits have invoked great-power politics and ruthless realism, as well as previous presidents and authoritarian strongmen. But there is a new theory gaining attention. It argues that Mr. Trump’s reign most closely resembles that of 16th-century royal families like the Tudors and the Hapsburgs.
A key feature of this “neoroyalist” approach is that global economic policymaking is based on personal, family and business ties rather than national interest, competitive advantage, shared prosperity or long-term growth.
{end quote}
Furthermore:
The theory has much in common with the kind of crony capitalism practiced by authoritarians like Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
Both describe a system built around a clique of business and political elites who use economic policy for personal gain.
{end quote}
In the context of this thread, it's not about Colbert's ratings nor is it about costs and revenues. It's not even much about CBS. It's about currying favor in hopes of greater profits...and control...elsewhere.
In last night's monologue from the desk, in the clip that Mike Hagerty posted, Colbert pointed out that every word is reviewed by CBS legal before it goes out on the air. So, yes, they knew about it, as you yourself admitted in the following:
Which they did in part. Replaying part of the interview with Robert Duvall was a way to fill the time left open by the excision of the Talarico interview.
It's a primary election for the US Senate. Trump is obviously spooked about the blowback to his policies, as indicated by multiple special-election results that have been upsets in favor of Democrats. He doesn't want to lose any Senate seat. The Texas Senate seat was thought to be safe for Republicans. So here comes along this guy who speaks openly about his faith, in the language that people of faith use, and talks directly and plainly about the Republicans' linkage of religion with culture-war topics to get people to vote for conservatives who entrench the kinds of economic policies that harm voters with strongly held religious beliefs. Talarico is effective at laying out his case; Crockett is a performer who's likely to rub many of those same voters the wrong way through her antics. (Moreover, Republicans are engaged in infighting of their own.) Talarico would be a more formidable opponent to any Republican than Crockett would be. That's why the Republicans and those aligned with their political project are scared of him. They don't want to lose the Senate. So they try to erase their most effective opponents.
Maybe she's just getting started. Her and Ellison's ideological project are nowhere near fully in place yet. Check back a year from now to see what CBS is like at that time.
Answer:
You're so busy trying to post a rebuttal to every post here that you don't realize when you contradict yourself.
True, CBS could have stopped it. Then there would have been an even bigger firestorm. Moreover, who would have benefited? Colbert far more than CBS. It's a lucky break for Colbert as it is. The only benefit to CBS at this point to letting Colbert go on is that it gives them a fig leaf to try to counteract arguments that they're engaging in an ideological project by slowly easing out anyone not aligned with the Republican regime.
When considering who benefits, one has to keep in mind that traditional capitalist considerations no longer tell the whole story. Leveraging connections and profiting from them are the new primary consideration. While not about broadcasting as such, the New York Times had a thoughtful analysis of the current business environment in today's editions (it was online two weeks earlier, but appeared in print only today):
A good starter quote:
Professors and pundits have invoked great-power politics and ruthless realism, as well as previous presidents and authoritarian strongmen. But there is a new theory gaining attention. It argues that Mr. Trump’s reign most closely resembles that of 16th-century royal families like the Tudors and the Hapsburgs.
A key feature of this “neoroyalist” approach is that global economic policymaking is based on personal, family and business ties rather than national interest, competitive advantage, shared prosperity or long-term growth.
{end quote}
Furthermore:
The theory has much in common with the kind of crony capitalism practiced by authoritarians like Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
Both describe a system built around a clique of business and political elites who use economic policy for personal gain.
{end quote}
In the context of this thread, it's not about Colbert's ratings nor is it about costs and revenues. It's not even much about CBS. It's about currying favor in hopes of greater profits...and control...elsewhere.
You still don't get it. They saw the opportunity, and they took it.
Maybe. Who is the real bad guy here? CBS or the FCC? It sounds like you're more focused on CBS. It should be the FCC.
When you have government based on quid pro quo, that's what happens. The companies are just playing by the new rules.
In any case, Colbert is playing this for all he can. I expect he'll talk about it again tonight. Why? Because it's working.
You can't win when you fight against something bigger who has the power to approve everything you do.
It's like a kid fighting with your parents. The government can determine if you live or die.
The only tool CBS has is to use their shows and talent to draw attention to the real enemy. That's what Kimmel did. It worked for Kimmel.
Disney has more power than Skydance, and their parent doesn’t want CBS to win to begin with.
Would Redstone have fought this 5 years ago?
It was already said.
Sumner died in 2020.
If you go back to Murrow, he eventually had to leave CBS after they cut his show.
Sheryl was running it long before then.