Famously woke TV star's very surprising take on Steven Colbert's firing after star was axed over losing $40m a year
'Also, no, I'm sorry, it does not fit the narrative, but Stephen Colbert was not fired because of Trump,' Olbermann, more than a decade after his own MSNBC ouster, said in a video posted to both X and Bluesky late Sunday.
'Do not give Trump credit for that,' he added.
'They may make it look like it is to please Trump but the economic factors are far more significant than anything else,' the ex-Countdown with Keith Olbermann anchor explained.
He said there was 'one unanswerable reason' that proved Colbert was not fired because of the conservative and CBS parent Paramount's long-in-limbo sale to Skydance Media that requires federal approval.
'We've seen this before, you've just forgotten that it happened,' Olbermann, 66, added - alluding to MSNBC's cancellation of Phil Donahue's 'Donahue' in 2002 for what ended up being low viewership.
At the time, however, an internal memo leaked to the press stating execs' desire for Donahue to be fired for his opposition to the the US invasion of Iraq, fueling speculation the newsman's firing was for other reasons.
Drawing parallels that appeared to suggest CBS is playing a PR game, Olbermann, 66, pointed to Colbert's show's astonishing lack of profitability.
THANKS, TRUMP!
THE TRUMPSTEIN SCANDAL will now never die - because you sued Rupert, you moron
And, sorry, no, there's one inarguable fact that proves Colbert WASN'T cancelled to appease Trump
GET THE NEW COUNTDOWN PODCAST: https://t.co/i7iBXBS9AC pic.twitter.com/CIvIWjPqsz
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) July 21, 2025
It was pegged this past Friday as being somewhere in the ballpark of negative $40million annually by Puck journalist Matthew Belloni, after ten years on the air.
'If they are silencing him, why have they decided to keep him on TV for the next ten months?' Olbermann asked on the Monday edition of his podcast, which bears the same name as his old MSNBC show that aired from 2003 to 2011.
'This is the Phil Donahue cancellation all over again. It works to CBS's corporate advantage to make it look like they are sucking up to the psycho,' he continued, suggesting C-Suiters back then purposely leaked the correspondence at a time where opposition to the budding was was not very popular.
'Sorry. This is the least of the reasons,' Olbermann added, putting to bed what he put as 'the almost-universally accepted premise that CBS cancelled Stephen Colbert solely to appease Trump.'
'I understand this busts the narrative and reduces our ability to suffer as martyrs,' he said Monday.
'Sorry. That's not what happened here,' he said in a separate Twitter post over the weekend. 'If it had, they wouldn't be keeping him on until next MAY.'
Olbermann offered his opinion as politicians like Senator Elizabeth Warren continue to question whether CBS's decision to cancel 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert ' was at all linked to Paramount Global's merger with Skydance Media
Colbert, 61, is one the most prominent of critics of the conservative, even amongst a crowded field of left-leaning late night hosts.
He is also at the top of that heap ratings-wise, making his ouster seemingly sudden - and to some, uncalled for.
The fact he took a swipe at his Paramount bosses on-air - for accepting what he presented as a 'big fat bribe' from the administration - just days ago further fueled the speculation.
The parties reached a $16 million settlement in a suit filed by Trump earlier this month - a sum only slightly more than the $15 million Colbert is said to earn annually.
In his piece for Puck Belloni outlined how The Late Show - which costs $100m a year to produce - has seen its advertiser revenue slump drastically even in the last three years, making it harder to pull Colbert's show out of the red.
Late night shows in general have slumped in profitability as viewers shun the format in favor of streaming services or other means of media.
Colbert was reported to be 'not angry, actually' about news of his cancelation, Puck reported - revealing how the host was chatting with his staff in a 'matter-of-fact' way before Thursday's show, shortly after finding out himself.
Moreover, Paramount co-C.E.O. George Cheeks was reportedly the one to pull the trigger on the cancellation - not Skydance CEO David Ellison or the former NBCU exec to serve as the new company's CEO once the merger is finished, Jeff Shell.
Trump, meanwhile, celebrated the news of the show's cancellation last week as it spread, furthering the idea he played a part.
'Sorry. That's not what happened here,' Olbermann wrote in a separate Twitter post over the weekend. 'If it had, they wouldn't be keeping him on until next MAY'
'I absolutely love that Colbert' got fired. His talent was even less than his ratings," he wrote in a Friday Truth Social post.
'I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next. Has even less talent than Colbert.'
Colbert holds the top spot in his hour, with an average of 2.417 million across 41 first-run episodes. Colbert took over as host in September 2015, after Letterman launched the program in 1993.
Second-best Jimmy Kimmel Live! takes in an average of 1.772 million viewers, for reference.
As for Olbermann, he left MSNBC in 2011, months after a scandal that saw him suspended for donating money to Democratic candidates who would go on to appear on his show.
The following January, Olbermann announced his departure from the network, which said in a statement that it had ended its contract with Olbermann. No further explanation was offered.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
New study reveals crippling impact of California's minimum wage hike
California 's dramatic fast food wage hike may have backfired, according to a new economic study – wiping out an estimated 18,000 jobs across the state in just one year. The research, published this month by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), analyzed the impact of Assembly Bill 1228, which mandated a $20 hourly minimum wage for fast food workers at large chains starting April 1, 2024. According to the economists behind the study, fast food employment in California dropped by 3.2 percent, while jobs in the same sector grew slightly across the rest of the U.S. 'Our median estimate translates into a loss of 18,000 jobs in California's fast–food sector relative to the counterfactual,' wrote researchers Jeffrey Clemens, Olivia Edwards, and Jonathan Meer. Before the law took effect, California's fast food industry was tracking the same employment trend as the rest of the country, the study found. But after AB 1228 was passed, the sector began to shrink. 'Following AB 1228's enactment, employment in the fast food sector in California fell substantially,' the paper states, citing declines 'even as employment in other sectors of the California economy tracked national trends'. Critics say the figures confirm what many feared: that a massive one–size–fits–all pay hike would push jobs out of reach for the workers it was meant to help. 'When it comes to central planning, history keeps the receipts: Wage controls never work,' wrote Heritage Foundation economist Rachel Greszler in a column reacting to the findings. 'That's because policymakers can set wage laws, but they can't outlaw the consequences.' She warned the law should serve as a wake–up call for other cities – especially Los Angeles, which recently voted to raise wages for hotel and airport workers to $30 an hour by 2028. 'The consequences of that wage hike on the fast–food industry should be a warning sign,' she said. The Wall Street Journal editorial board echoed that message, slamming politicians for 'magical thinking' around wage hikes. 'The Democratic Party's socialist nominee for New York mayor, Zohran Mamdani, has called for increasing the city's minimum wage to $30. Andrew Cuomo, his supposedly more moderate competitor, wants a $20 minimum,' the board wrote. 'These guys will never learn because they don't want to see the world as it really is.' But Governor Gavin Newsom's office has pushed back hard – questioning the integrity of the NBER paper and insisting California's wage law is working as intended. Tara Gallegos, Newsom's deputy director of communications, dismissed the study as politically motivated, telling Fox News Digital that it was 'linked to the Hoover Institution,' which she claimed had previously published 'false or misleading information' about the state's wage policies. She pointed to an October 2024 report in the San Francisco Chronicle, which said the early effects of AB 1228, 'defy a lot of the doom–and–gloom predictions' made when the bill was signed. Gallegos also cited a February 2025 study by a UC Berkeley professor, which looked at fast food employment trends through December and found 'no negative effects.' 'Workers covered by the policy saw wage increases of 8 to 9 percent, with no negative wage or employment effects on non–covered workers,' she said. 'No negative effects on fast–food employment.' She added: 'The number of fast–food establishments grew faster in California than in the rest of the U.S.' As for prices, the Berkeley study claimed menu costs rose by only 1.5 percent - about six cents on a $4 hamburger. The NBER paper also looked at whether the law had a knock-on effect in full-service restaurants, which weren't subject to the $20 mandate but compete for the same workers. The authors found smaller but still negative employment effects - a median drop of 2.12 percent. And while critics were quick to blame the law for economic pain, the researchers warned against cherry-picking isolated data.
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
There was no love on Love Island but there's an awful reason viewers have lapped up the most toxic season yet
It's billed as the island to find love if you are willing to get grafting and put all your eggs in one basket. But season 7 of dating show Love Island USA was more like 'Toxic Island' by the time the finale rolled around on July 13 as there were no official couples in the top four and two contestants had been removed from the show after their previous disgusting social media posts resurfaced. The toxicity and poor communication skills floating around the reality TV show villa created an environment in which it was impossible to foster real connections – not unlike today's real life dating scene, according to psychologists. Daily Mail spoke to psychologists and relationship experts who revealed why, despite the car crash relationships that played out on screens, the show proved so popular and drew in more viewers than ever this season and saw hundreds of watch parties pop-up at bars and restaurants across the country. Dr. Marni Feuerman, a licensed psychotherapist and relationship expert, explained that, when people are suffering publicly - like after a car crash on the side of the road, people can't help but watch. 'They're wanting to see it for themselves,' Feuerman said. When we see other people posting about drama and turmoil, we want to experience it too, hence why more and more people were tuning into Love Island this year. Feuerman explained that the toxicity viewers witnessed on Love Island is not all that different to what's going on in modern dating in the real world. She said: 'There's a lot of very hot and cold behaviors – almost like ghosting.' The premise of the show sees a group of hot singles willingly trapped in a villa for weeks to explore romantic connections with each other as the audience can help vote contestants off the show to make way for new ones. At the end, one lucky couple who wins the public vote scores $100,000 and guaranteed social media stardom. Feuerman described how the premise of the show is similar to 'swiping mentality' that has become common with the rise of dating apps. 'I think there's a bit of a swiping culture mentality – we see the contestants quickly couple up and uncouple and recouple. There's this sort of disposable nature,' she told Daily Mail. She likened some of the behaviors exhibited by islanders to 'love bombing', saying, 'There's very rapid intensification early on. Some couples are saying they love each other right away, but really it's infatuation. And then, when the dust settles, there's a lot of instability and stress,' which is also common in real life dating experiences, Feuerman says. Earlier this month Peacock revealed that Season 7 has officially become the platform's most-watched entertainment series on mobile devices, with nearly 30 percent of viewership happening on phones and tablets. And since relaunching the app in May ahead of Season 7, it has averaged more than 100,000 new unique users per day and latest figures as of July 8 show it had surpassed 5.5 million unique users in total. On July 25th, it was announced that Season 7 was Peacock's most-watched original ever, with a total of 18.4 billion minutes viewed. Peacock also reported that 49 percent of the audience were first-time watchers. Psychologists say that what kept viewers watching this year was the relentless drama and the fact that the audience had chance to direct the narrative with brutal public voting. In episode 12, the public voted to interfere with a couple, consisting of Jeremiah Brown and Huda Mustafa, by choosing him to 're–couple' with a 'bombshell' new contestant. Viewers knew that this would cause Huda great distress because of her intense attachment to Jeremiah at that point in the show, yet they did it anyway. Therapist Jennifer Ochiagha explained that viewers want to have power over the show. Once it was a trending opinion online that Jeremiah was a victim in his relationship, fans wanted to give him an 'out', Ochiagha said. Ochiagha explained that audience members become attached to certain characters because they want to relate their own lives to the contestants. 'People want to see themselves in somebody,' she said. Ochiagha went on to divulge that many issues in the villa stemmed from islanders' unresolved attachment styles, and how those styles showed up under pressure. 'We saw a lot of avoidant and anxious behaviors play out in real time. Some islanders would shut down when things got too real, while others clung harder for reassurance, and I think that's a clear example of how unhealed attachment can impact communication and trust,' the therapist said. 'Anxiety and avoidance playing out in real time was the most common theme I saw,' she continued. This season was also marred with controversy. Within the first two days, contestant Yulissa Escobar was kicked out of the villa after a video of her saying a racial slur re–surfaced. The revelation of this clip begged the question: how thoroughly are Love Island producers vetting their contestants. This question would come up time and time again throughout the season. One X user wrote, 'i think this season of love island usa's downfall was a combination of the producers not doing basic background checks and the fans being psychotic.' Another posted, 'How some of these Love Island USA contestants only getting caught making racist comments? Who did background checks this year? This is crazy!' 'So this season of Love Island USA they just didn't do background checks,' said another. Towards the end of the season, producers had to force the exit of another contestant – Cierra Ortega. An old social media post of Ortega using a slur circulated online. Internet users called for the producer's removal of Cierra, and when they did, what awaited her on the outside was a concerning mountain of online hate. Her family had to release a statement begging viewers to ease off. Once Ortega, 25, was shipped back from Fiji to California, she shared some of the messages cluttering her inbox that were verbally abusing her. This raises the question of how well islanders are taken care off after they leave the island. According to Vogue, there is a full team supporting cast members before, during and after filming. Islanders have access to – on top of producers, managers and HR – a duty of care representative, two on–site licensed psychologists and a full–time welfare manager who oversees the daily care of participants. Before selection, potential islanders go through multiple rounds of assessments with a psychologist to get a full understanding of their background and mental health. Each contestant is required to get a letter from their doctors giving them the okay to go on the show, according to a TikTok made by season 4 contestant Deb Chubb. Then, once officially picked for the show, islanders are assigned a psychologist who is there for them throughout their time in the villa. After leaving the villa, islanders go through an offboarding process – which consists of two meetings with a psychologist before going home, and follow–ups at least once a month for up to six months. When Huda – who is a 24–year–old single mother – started exhibiting worrying behaviors on the show, viewers once again wondered if the pre–filming examinations were rigorous enough. These concerns were confirmed when, after coming out of the villa, Huda revealed on Alex Cooper's Call Her Daddy podcast that she had an 'extremely abusive' childhood. 'When I was in middle school, there was a point where I wanted to take my own life. I did not want to live anymore,' she told Cooper. The 24–year–old explained that, because of those traumatic early experiences, many things in the villa 'triggered' her. Ochiagha says it's extremely important for islanders to have access to a mental health professional - or even reality TV support groups - after the show to 'handle the new hate', and prepare for seeing themselves back on camera in the same way millions of eyes saw them. The importance of continued support for islanders after the show is especially pertinent given the three suicides of cast members from Love Island UK. Contestants Sophie Gradon and Mike Thalassitis have both taken their lives since being on the show, as has the former host, Caroline Flack. Daily Mail reached out to Love Island USA for further comment.
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
FBI chief warns he has uncovered things which 'shocked me down to my core' amid Epstein files scandal
Embattled FBI deputy director Dan Bongino shared a cryptic message to his social media in which he vowed to uncover 'the truth' amid mounting criticism of his handling of the Epstein files. In a post to X, Bongino said that in his short time in office he has discovered matters that has 'shocked me down to my core'. He added: 'We cannot run a Republic like this. I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned. 'We are going to conduct these righteous and proper investigations by the book and in accordance with the law. We are going to get the answers WE ALL DESERVE. 'As with any investigation, I cannot predict where it will land, but I can promise you an honest and dignified effort at truth. Not 'my truth,' or 'your truth,' but THE TRUTH.' Bongino alluded in his statement to recent discoveries surrounding government corruption and weaponization. He did not provide a timeline for when the general public might learn about what he is talking about, adding that 'things are happening'. Bongino and FBI Director Kash Patel have both been feeling the heat recently over their handling of the files relating to pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bongino, a longtime leading proponent of theories surrounding Epstein's so-called client list, threatened to quit earlier this month over the botched handling. He failed to show up on one Friday after a DOJ memo was released that said Epstein had died by suicide nd that no other people named in the files would be charged. It also said there was no 'Epstein client list'. By Monday morning, officials were starting to squirm and feared that Bongino would be a no-show yet again, but he arrived in the office a few hours later than expected. It was reported at the time that Trump was furious that one of his hand-picked appointees would be so publicly against him. A source inside the DOJ told Daily Mail that Bongino was ready to stand down if Attorney General Pam Bondi didn't. The fallout of that memo continues, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that Bondi told Trump in May that his name appeared in the Epstein files. Bondi also allegedly acknowledged that the administration should withhold the files due to them containing images of child sexual abuse. The president associated with Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell in the 1980s and 1990s. Maxwell was questioned this week by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. She is serving 20 years behind bars for his involvement in Epstein's crimes. The 63-year-old made it clear earlier this month that she was willing to speak in front of Congress about the case. Trump has not been implicated in any crimes and just because a name appears in the files does not mean imply they were involved in Epstein's child sex trafficking. Many believe Maxwell appears to be angling for a pardon from President Donald Trump after she 'didn't hold back' during questioning.
