Stephen Colbert has found himself at the center of various conspiracy theories lately. This all started when it was announced that CBS would be canceling his late-night talk show.
The reasoning behind the network’s decision isn’t hard to figure out. “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” was reportedly losing around $40 million annually, and Colbert was already in the last year of his contract.
Late-night viewership as a whole has dwindled, and there’s no sign of recovery in sight. Although Colbert ranks number one in his time slot, his show incurs production costs of $100 million each year without bringing in enough audience to attract the necessary advertising revenue. So, it raises the question: in what reality would CBS keep renewing Colbert’s show while continuing to face such losses?
Colbert has a solid fanbase, particularly among Democrats and many media figures—but perhaps it’s not enough to offset the financial losses.
If regulations permit, Paramount Global, CBS’s parent company, is poised for a merger with Skydance, led by David Ellison. Interestingly, it seems that the president isn’t keen on Colbert’s mockery and is reportedly pleased about the show’s cancellation.
For those inclined toward conspiracy theories, the timing feels suspicious. Some believe that if it weren’t for Donald Trump’s influence over CBS via the FCC, the network would happily keep pouring money into Colbert’s show.
It’s a wild perspective, but it certainly plays into the political narrative, especially for some Democrats. Senator Adam Schiff, a recent guest on Colbert’s show, expressed his concerns about the cancellation, hinting that the public deserves to know if politics influenced the decision.
Schiff isn’t alone; Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders seemed to echo similar sentiments. Warren pointed out that CBS canceled the show shortly after Colbert called on Paramount to resolve a $16 million settlement related to Trump, suggesting a motive that many might view as dubious.
Sanders asked if the timing was just a coincidence—implying that it clearly wasn’t. This line of thinking took off on social platforms, sparking a discussion about free speech and alleged attacks from Trump. CNN’s Brian Stelter did touch on the dire financial situation of Colbert’s show but focused more on the narratives surrounding CBS’s choices.
In fact, the very name of Stelter’s coverage suggested an agonizing decision behind Colbert’s cancellation, diving into the effect of the potential merger on CBS’s choices. He even floated the idea of reducing costs by switching to a cheaper production model, which is more than a bit impractical, considering that similar shows have already been canceled.
How viable is it to expect Colbert to continue on such a reduced budget? Currently, reports suggest he earns anywhere from $15 million to $20 million annually, and even with that hefty budget, the show has been losing viewers and advertisers.
The Hollywood Reporter mentioned that Colbert’s typical viewer is around 68 years old, which points to a broader issue within late-night programming. When David Letterman passed the torch to Colbert in 2015, the average viewer age was 60.
All these indicators lead to one conclusion: “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” has been in trouble for a while now, part of a larger pattern affecting late-night television.
Trump even predicted that Jimmy Kimmel could be next, asserting that there’s no need for outside pressure—market trends are clearly driving the narrative here.
Colbert found success with his parody persona on Comedy Central but struggled when he shifted to present a more genuine version of himself. It’s not entirely fair to blame Trump for Colbert’s woes; it seems that many Democratic supporters have contributed to its current state.
Ultimately, many late-night hosts are facing similar challenges, and if they don’t change their approach, they might find themselves in the same situation.
