this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
354 points (99.4% liked)

Television

1253 readers
864 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

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 56 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

The show was losing around $40m a year, and its audience was down over 30% over 5 years. In recent years late-night’s profits have “shrunk toward non-existent” [Bill Carter, author of The War for Late Night].

It used to be that they were a cheap but profitable way to keep viewers watching the local news. As news access has shifted online and real-time, the business case for late night has become more shaky. Even the brief respite of a decade ago with vitalised YouTube clips has gone, with Google reducing the amount paid for views far below the rates for broadcast. Guests, too, now prefer the more relaxed and convenient podcast appearance.

So NBC has cut output from 5 nights to 4, and got rid of Seth Meyers’ house band. CBS scrapped the post-Colbert slot entirely earlier this season. There may be strong political conveniences at play, but the business case is also valid.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The only thing that was suspicious was the timing.

I fully believe that it was a massive money loser. Colbert's wages alone were high. He apparently started at $6m per year and then got a new contract at $15m per year.

That might seem high, but at his peak Johnny Carson was making $25m per year. That was in 1991. So, $25m per year would be worth $55m today. But, that was in a 3-channel world where there weren't many options.

"Carson at his peak averaged 9 million viewers nightly; Stephen Colbert now leads a crowded field with about 3 million."

And these late night shows cost about $1.7 million per week to make, or about $75m per year.

So, it makes a lot of sense that it would be losing a lot of money. It also makes sense that they would be thinking about cancelling it.

But, it was also the #1 late night talk show. And that has been a really prestigious thing for the networks for decades. I think even if it was a money loser, I think CBS would likely have wanted to hold on to the #1 late night show for a long time, just for bragging rights. Being #1 in late night is also useful for cross-promotion. Colbert always interviews the stars of major CBS shows: Tracker, Ghosts, Matlock, NCIS, etc. And being the #1 show means it's the first place that Hollywood stars stop to promote their movies, etc.

I think it's more likely they would have tried some cost cutting, and they would have tried to outlast the other late night shows rather than being the first network to give up on late night talk shows.

The cancellation of Late Night isn't suspicious. But the timing of the cancellation of Late Night is very suspicious.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think even if it was a money loser, I think CBS would likely have wanted to hold on to the #1 late night show for a long time, just for bragging rights. Being #1 in late night is also useful for cross-promotion. Colbert always interviews the stars of major CBS shows: Tracker, Ghosts, Matlock, NCIS, etc. And being the #1 show means it's the first place that Hollywood stars stop to promote their movies, etc.

Sounds like you don't have an MBA and don't like to ruin everything like they do because of it!

The numbers people can't even comprehend what you said sometimes.

Give it a few years and they'll be baffled by reductions everywhere else.

[–] ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"There may be strong political conveniences at play,"

Not may... there are and they exist.

"but the business case is also valid."

No it isn't. Those statistics intentionally include the Covid pandemic era numbers to skew the data.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 2 points 1 day ago

Colbert lost 10% of its viewers in the first few months of 2024. It’s not covid.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 2 days ago

Interesting background. Thanks for sharing.

[–] cymbal_king@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Maybe CBS could get better value for on-demand streaming if they improved the shitty Paramount+ UI

[–] mitch@piefed.mitch.science 5 points 1 day ago

I am a huge fan of his show and watch every night, but I agree, the format is pretty dated. Even the idea of a house band barely makes any sense. I miss 'The Soup' and Joel McHale.