Him and Stewart both called it quits just before the streaming era really kicked off. Oliver proved out that a weekly show can work, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't go that route.
There are problems with late night network TV as a business -- it has lost most of its audience about twice in the last decade, it has struggled to hold its audience in between the really bad years, and only a very small fraction of the audience it retains is in the born 1985 or later demographic cohort that advertisers want to reach. The high-priced talent it has not let go is still a losing proposition. Whoever is planning on leading the new organization after the merger probably suggested that the pre-merger management should take the black eye of firing Colbert with them when they ride off into the sunset. Of course, Trump will figure that he got his way because he is so clever, but the network managers are probably tickled pink that Trump gave them an excuse for doing what they already saw as no-brainer cost cutting.
This is what Keith Olbermann said. He personally detests Colbert for wrecking Letterman's set and more, but would've brought up if it was for political reasons if it were. Network TV/cable operations, especially expensive shows like Colbert, are dinosaur businesses.
Generally, the demos for network TV is 70-80+ years and not much else.
A big thing that put me off about Colbert and other similar shows is that it’s all way too one sided. There was so much comedy gold being provided by the Biden administration and they refused to cover any of it.
All of them other than Gutfeld are fighting over their personal slice of less than half of the pie. No wonder they are all struggling to turn a profit.
The title I submitted is exactly the one from the article, shortened to meet HN's limitations. I challenge you to explain how changing the word "cancellation" to "cancelled" is altering the meaning of the title.
Also, the article you linked is about the cancellation, not the merger approval that just happened today after what many see as actions to placate and/or bribe the government.
He will make more money rejoining Stewart as his original character.
Him and Stewart both called it quits just before the streaming era really kicked off. Oliver proved out that a weekly show can work, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't go that route.
Seeing a revived Colbert Report once or twice a week, with occasional interplay with Stewart over at TDS, could be comedy gold.
I don't think the character makes sense in the current political environment.
So is HBO waiting for any regulatory approvals ?
There are problems with late night network TV as a business -- it has lost most of its audience about twice in the last decade, it has struggled to hold its audience in between the really bad years, and only a very small fraction of the audience it retains is in the born 1985 or later demographic cohort that advertisers want to reach. The high-priced talent it has not let go is still a losing proposition. Whoever is planning on leading the new organization after the merger probably suggested that the pre-merger management should take the black eye of firing Colbert with them when they ride off into the sunset. Of course, Trump will figure that he got his way because he is so clever, but the network managers are probably tickled pink that Trump gave them an excuse for doing what they already saw as no-brainer cost cutting.
This is what Keith Olbermann said. He personally detests Colbert for wrecking Letterman's set and more, but would've brought up if it was for political reasons if it were. Network TV/cable operations, especially expensive shows like Colbert, are dinosaur businesses.
Generally, the demos for network TV is 70-80+ years and not much else.
A big thing that put me off about Colbert and other similar shows is that it’s all way too one sided. There was so much comedy gold being provided by the Biden administration and they refused to cover any of it.
All of them other than Gutfeld are fighting over their personal slice of less than half of the pie. No wonder they are all struggling to turn a profit.
There are two reasons why I don’t believe Colbert’s cancellation had anything to do with the merger.
1.) His show was losing $40 million dollars a year. I fully expect many of the other late night comedy shows to follow, since it is a dying format.
2.) They’re letting him stay on the air for a whole additional year. If the goal was to silence him, why not cancel him immediately.
WRT Colbert (82 points, 7 days ago, 70 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44600437
.. but the title edit doesn't help
The title I submitted is exactly the one from the article, shortened to meet HN's limitations. I challenge you to explain how changing the word "cancellation" to "cancelled" is altering the meaning of the title.
Also, the article you linked is about the cancellation, not the merger approval that just happened today after what many see as actions to placate and/or bribe the government.