• 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

Late Show ending May 2026

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay. I'll confess to never having watched Gutfeld. I'm familiar with him because I saw The Five.

So..deep breath...I'm watching now. Last night's show. And I'll just kinda live blog.

What passes for a monologue is Greg sitting in a chair telling a string of "jokes".
Two questions:

1) From which middle-school boys' P.E. locker room did this program originate?

2) How many drinks did it take for you to recover?
 
Indulge your Johnny Paycheck fantasy all you want, but calling out a network for settling a lawsuit widely viewed as frivolous and characterizing it as a bribe to a sitting president of the United States is not exactly what I would characterize as "restraint". Keep in mind that was before Thursday's announcement.

Beyond that, while Colbert has a transgressive streak, one that translated a lot better to Comedy Central than to legacy network late-night television, he also doesn't come across to me as a person who would take out his revenge on CBS by going out of his way to provoke controversy. There's plenty already. He also has a staff to think about.
I honestly don't think any semblance of norms matter anymore. And it's likely he wants out ASAP. Could you blame him?

He and the network would be best served with a contract buyout in the next week or so before this has the chance to get uglier than it already is.
 
Best way to deflect criticism of what I believe to be a politically-motivated decision, if you are CBS, is to leak difficult-to-verify data about "how much money Late Night with Stephen Colbert" is losing.

I cannot help but be skeptical regarding the alleged financial underperformance of the show.

Nonetheless, there are plenty of measures that could have been undertaken to reformat the show to reduce cost:
- Move it out of the Ed Sullivan Theater
- Change the format to an irreverent news commentary program, ditching (most) celebrity interviews and musical performances. Send the house band packing. Expenses spent on guests would be drastically reduced.
- Consider shortening the program to one-half hour. This would allow a massive reduction in creative staff.

CBS also seems clueless with regard to how to present & monetize content from Colbert's show in the digital space. That is not the fault of the talent (Colbert).

I suspect Colbert will be fine in the long run. He will reappear on a different platform and won't be hamstrung by CBS's stupidity.
 
He and the network would be best served with a contract buyout in the next week or so before this has the chance to get uglier than it already is.
I don't think that's likely, but I'll never say never.

A financial adviser once told me that one of my financial goals should be to accumulate enough of what she called (cleaned up) "Fornicate You" money. I had a job (not in radio) once where I had to execute just such a maneuver. It wasn't fun, to say the least. Yes, Colbert's definitely in that position but, as I mentioned before, he has a staff to think of, too.
 
Kimmel makes noises about retirement every year, but if he gets an infusion of eyeballs from Colbert's departure (he has 1.7 million viewers now) and ABC is supportive, I can see him renewing just to be a thorn in Trump's side.

Since I do watch at least Kimmel's monologues, I heartily agree. He takes great delight in irritating POTUS and has about a zillion nicknames for him, none flattering.

Besides, I think he would love to be the "last man standing" in what used to be the war over late nights.
 
Interesting thought; it’s much like what was done north of the border with Hockey Night in Canada. A longtime CBC staple, the rights went to Rogers Sportsnet some years back, but continued as a partnership on CBC and the various Sportsnet outlets. Very little was changed about the actual broadcasts, so familiar feel.
Someone call WBD and Zaslav right now and tell them the nba on tnt can still exist 😆
 
And the difference between Letterman and Colbert is.....


Dave jumped. Stephen's being pushed. So Dave got to control the amount and timing of the notice.

That is true. But everybody should also consider the fact that Letterman had likely been planning his exit from Late Night television since 2012 when his contract had been extended until 2015 but had started to finalize those plans when Leno had left the Tonight Show a second time (This time for good) and carried it out in April (After the hype following Leno's exit had completely subsided). The point is that Letterman was able to go out on his own terms.

Nonetheless, there are plenty of measures that could have been undertaken to reformat the show to reduce cost:
- Move it out of the Ed Sullivan Theater
- Change the format to an irreverent news commentary program, ditching (most) celebrity interviews and musical performances. Send the house band packing. Expenses spent on guests would be drastically reduced.
- Consider shortening the program to one-half hour. This would allow a massive reduction in creative staff.

Other measures that could have been taken would have been.

1. - Colbert takes a pay cut.
2. - CBS replaces Colbert with someone who would work for way less money.


Moving the show out of the Ed Sullivan Theater if that was done would have given CBS an opportunity to sell the building and in the long term eliminate all expenses regarding The cost of Utilities, Property Taxes (If applicable), Maintenance costs for example.
 
Other measures that could have been taken would have been.

1. - Colbert takes a pay cut.
2. - CBS replaces Colbert with someone who would work for way less money.

Corporate bean counters: "That will still cost us money when ad revenue is declining."

Moving the show out of the Ed Sullivan Theater if that was done would have given CBS an opportunity to sell the building and in the long term eliminate all expenses regarding The cost of Utilities, Property Taxes (If applicable), Maintenance costs for example.

Then subtract from "all expenses" the new expenses of whatever venue they used as a replacement. Does CBS have any studio facilities in NYC that are capable of handling The Late Show?

[sarcasm mode on]
I love when simplistic "solutions" are proposed without consideration for the factors that are causing the original problem, because there are always more problems created by the solutions.
[sarcasm mode off]
 
Then subtract from "all expenses" the new expenses of whatever venue they used as a replacement. Does CBS have any studio facilities in NYC that are capable of handling The Late Show?

One of the points is the replacement venue doesn't necessarily need the ability of requiring a Studio Audience which would make any replacement venue more financially viable and even then CBS should not be required under any and all circumstances to have any obligation at all to produce "The Late Show" in NYC which if it can be done would allow the so called "New Expenses" be much more lower than continuing to production of the show in NYC.
 
Who could have seen that coming? Oh wait, everyone who understands fascism.
Or, maybe, just maybe, this had to do with the $40 million dollar annual loss from that show at a time when all traditional network TV is in decline?

Sure, the timing may be linked to the need to keep the ownership transaction on the move, but something had to happen here. I suspect that, now that this dam has broken, we will see more and more cuts in costs and cancellations.

Among discussions is to eliminate the third hour of "prime" to allow local stations to move the late news to 10 PM in most time zones. I mention this as another cost-cutting move, since the production of network shows is increasing while viewership is on the decline, That is just one example of what the networks are trying to deal with as they adapt to an on-demand model.
 
One of the points is the replacement venue doesn't necessarily need the ability of requiring a Studio Audience which would make any replacement venue more financially viable and even then CBS should not be required under any and all circumstances to have any obligation at all to produce "The Late Show" in NYC which if it can be done would allow the so called "New Expenses" be much more lower than continuing to production of the show in NYC.
You just won the "nonstop sentence of the week" award.

Is your point that the show could be moved to another city? It would have to be one where guests are accessible.

Or do you mean that the show can be done in a "virtual studio" from the cheapest location possible? Would this preserve the "one on one" feel of the host and their guests?

And unless we see some accounting numbers for the show, we don't know what the major costs are. Obviously, the host and staff are a big part. Do guests have transportation and lodging paid for? What is the difference in technical staff NYC union rates vs. let's say, LA?

Having had at least a "sidebar" part in the move of a TV and radio operation off Manhattan to New Jersey, I know the costs in The City are horrendous. Even things like key staff parking are very much in the outrageous range.
 
Seems to me a scaled back late night show could be filmed at W. 57th St at the CBS Broadcast Center, if so desired.

The Daily Show is filmed at the corner of 52nd St. and 11th Ave., so we know Comedy Central (same ownership as CBS) has studio space in Manhattan.

And it goes without saying that filming in Los Angeles County would likely be an option.

I just hope NCIS reruns or infomercials don't land in the time slot.
 
You just won the "nonstop sentence of the week" award.

Is your point that the show could be moved to another city? It would have to be one where guests are accessible.

Or do you mean that the show can be done in a "virtual studio" from the cheapest location possible? Would this preserve the "one on one" feel of the host and their guests?

And unless we see some accounting numbers for the show, we don't know what the major costs are. Obviously, the host and staff are a big part. Do guests have transportation and lodging paid for? What is the difference in technical staff NYC union rates vs. let's say, LA?

Having had at least a "sidebar" part in the move of a TV and radio operation off Manhattan to New Jersey, I know the costs in The City are horrendous. Even things like key staff parking are very much in the outrageous range.
Radio chains can and do originate shows for national distribution from smaller markets like Indianapolis. That might work for TV as well if big-name guests weren't a must.
 
Broadcast news is nothing but a bunch of lies and garbage and has been for years long before Trump took office. CBS News was once THE respectable news division. Now it is a joke and has been for years. They are all jokes.

From my personal perspective, I find that blanket statement of opinion to be without merit.

I am a daily viewer of ABC's World News Tonight and find they do a more than adequate summary of the day's news, without bias. I do not feel the same about This Week with George Stephanopoulos. But then, I gave up on the other two network's Sunday morning shows long ago.

I hope your head doesn't explode from the idea of me liking and disliking ABC at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom