'Go f--k yourself!': What Stephen Colbert and other late-night hosts had to say after Late Show cancellation
Thursday's announcement was met with shock as well as harsh criticism with many suggesting it was another concession to U.S. President Donald Trump by the network and its parent company, Paramount Global. claims that its current affairs program 60 Minutes selectively edited an interview with his 2024 election rival Kamala Harris.
Colbert has been highly critical of Trump for years and panned Paramount for agreeing to a $16-million US settlement with the president earlier this month over his lawsuit against CBS alleging its current affairs program 60 Minutes selectively edited an interview with his 2024 election rival Kamala Harris. The settlement came as a surprise to many legal experts, who saw the suit as having little chance of success in court.
Trump said the settlement was paid to him Tuesday, though the money is to be allocated to his future presidential library.
Both CBS and Colbert announced the news of the Late Show's cancellation on Thursday, but Colbert took the opportunity in Monday night's opening monologue to question the motivation for the decision.
He joked that "cancel culture had gone too far" but said he could now share his "unvarnished" opinions of Trump.
"I don't care for him," Colbert joked about the president, who was a Late Show guest during his first election campaign in 2015, which was also Colbert's inaugural year on the program.
The host addressed his own "blistering" critique of the settlement, which he had made on air days before the cancellation was announced. Though he didn't explicitly tie the two events together, he questioned how it could possibly be a "financial decision" when his program was the top rated in the late-night category. (Although outlets such as the Wall Street Journal have pointed out that despite its high ratings, the show is no longer profitable.)
Colbert acknowledged the network's potential constraints — especially following the multimillion-dollar payout — but also mentioned how Trump, in a post on Truth Social, celebrated the show's cancellation.
"I absolutely love that Colbert got fired," Trump wrote. "His talent was even less than his ratings. I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next. Has even less talent than Colbert! Greg Gutfeld is better than all of them combined, including the moron on NBC who ruined the once-great Tonight Show."
Colbert's response to Trump on Monday night: "Go f--k yourself."
WATCH | Colbert addresses CBS 'killing off' his show in opening monologue:
Stewart savages CBS, Trump
Aside from Colbert, The Daily Show's Jon Stewart had the harshest comments for CBS.
He admitted late-night TV was struggling: "We're all basically operating a Blockbuster kiosk inside of a Tower Records," he joked.
But he said CBS "lost the benefit of the doubt" after the settlement, which others at the network and across the industry have criticized and tied to Paramount Global's pending merger with movie and TV studio Skydance, which needs the approval of the Federal Communications Commission.
"Was this purely financial or maybe the path of least resistance to your $8-billion [US] merger?" said Stewart, adding that Paramount Global also owns the network he works for, Comedy Central.
WATCH | Stewart slams CBS in Daily Show monologue (Contains profanity):
"But understand this. Truly, the shows that you now seek to cancel, censor and control — a not-insignificant portion of that $8-billion value came from those f--king shows," he said before leading a chorus of "go f--k yourself" aimed at companies, advertisers and law firms that "bend the knee" to Trump.
WATCH | Questions swirl around cancellation of Late Show:
A little love from Letterman?
Colbert first dipped his toes into the late-night waters alongside Stewart on The Daily Show from 1999 to 2005, before launching his own Comedy Central show, The Colbert Report, which ran for 10 years. He eventually landed his current gig after the original Late Show host, David Letterman, retired.
Though Letterman has not made any official statement, he appeared to take a stance on Monday.
A 20-minute video appeared on his YouTube channel, with a montage of clips featuring him mocking CBS on Late Show with David Letterman over the years.
Letterman launched the venerable talk show in 1993, moving to CBS from NBC, where he had hosted Late Night with David Letterman, airing after The Tonight Show for 11 years.
WATCH | Letterman mocks CBS over the years:
Over at NBC, Jimmy Fallon joked Monday night that he was still the host of The Tonight Show, "at least for tonight."
Fallon applauded Colbert's run as Late Show host, but took a lighter tone, joking that boycotts could cause CBS to lose millions of viewers, as well as "tens of hundreds watching on Paramount Plus."
Host Jimmy Kimmel is currently on summer break from his show on ABC, although he reacted to the situation on Instagram last week, saying, "F--k you and all your Sheldons CBS," referencing the character Sheldon Cooper on the CBS sitcoms The Big Bang Theory and Young Sheldon.
Colbert got no love, however, from one top-rated late-night (late-evening, really) host: Fox News Channel's Greg Gutfeld, whom Trump praised in his post celebrating the Colbert cancellation, and who hosts the show Gutfeld!
Gutfeld dismissed claims that Colbert was being censored, saying CBS is "free to fire someone who's stinking up a market like they took a dump in the produce section."
He also touted that his show draws higher ratings than Colbert's (though this could also be because his show airs about an hour and a half before the major late-night programs).
It should come as little surprise that Gutfeld, a right-wing comedian and commentator, took swipes at Colbert, as Fox News Channel is generally favourable to Trump.
But as Stewart noted in his rant, Trump is also suing Rupert Murdoch, whose News Corp owns both Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, over the latter publication's story about a letter the president purportedly wrote in 2003 to the now-deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
WATCH | How will late-night TV change with Colbert's show cancellation?:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
a few seconds ago
- Chicago Tribune
What to expect, and what not to, at the UN meeting on an Israel-Palestinian two-state solution
UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly is bringing high-level officials together this week to promote a two-state solution to the decades-old Israel-Palestinian conflict that would place their peoples side by side, living in peace in independent nations. Israel and its close ally the United States are boycotting the two-day meeting, which starts Monday and will be co-chaired by the foreign ministers of France and Saudi Arabia. Israel's right-wing government opposes a two-state solution, and the United States has called the meeting 'counterproductive' to its efforts to end the war in Gaza. France and Saudi Arabia want the meeting to put a spotlight on the two-state solution, which they view as the only viable road map to peace, and to start addressing the steps to get there. The meeting was postponed from late June and downgraded from a four-day meeting of world leaders amid surging tensions in the Middle East, including Israel's 12-day war against Iran and the war in Gaza. 'It was absolutely necessary to restart a political process, the two-state solution process, that is today threatened, more threatened than it has ever been,' French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said Sunday on CBS News' 'Face the Nation.' Here's what's useful to know about the upcoming gathering. The idea of dividing the Holy Land goes back decades. When the British mandate over Palestine ended, the U.N. partition plan in 1947 envisioned dividing the territory into Jewish and Arab states. Israel accepted the plan, but upon Israel's declaration of independence the following year, its Arab neighbors declared war and the plan was never implemented. Under a 1949 armistice, Jordan held control over the West Bank and east Jerusalem and Egypt over Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians seek those lands for a future independent state alongside Israel, and this idea of a two-state solution based on Israel's pre-1967 boundaries has been the basis of peace talks dating back to the 1990s. The two-state solution has wide international support. The logic behind it is that the populations of Israel, east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza are divided equally between Jews and Palestinians. As President Donald Trump shows off his golf courses for Britain's leader, crisis in Gaza loomsThe establishment of an independent Palestine would leave Israel as a democratic country with a solid Jewish majority and grant the Palestinians their dream of self-determination. France and Saudi Arabia have said they want to put a spotlight on the two-state solution as the only viable path to peace in the Middle East — and they want to see a road map with specific steps, first ending the war in Gaza. Israeli strikes kill at least 36 people in Gaza, officials say, as some aid restrictions are easedThe co-chairs said in a document sent to U.N. members in May that the primary goal of the meeting is to identify actions by 'all relevant actors' to implement the two-state solution — and 'to urgently mobilize the necessary efforts and resources to achieve this aim, through concrete and time-bound commitments.' Saudi diplomat Manal Radwan, who led the country's delegation to the preparatory conference, said the meeting must 'chart a course for action, not reflection.' It must be 'anchored in a credible and irreversible political plan that addresses the root cause of the conflict and offers a real path to peace, dignity and mutual security,' she said. French President Emmanuel Macron has pushed for a broader movement toward a two-state solution in parallel with a recognition of Israel's right to defend itself. He announced late Thursday that France will recognize the state of Palestine officially at the annual gathering of world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly in late September. About 145 countries have recognized the state of Palestine. But Macron's announcement, ahead of Monday's meeting and amid increasing global anger over desperately hungry people in Gaza starting to die from starvation, makes France the most important Western power to do so. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects the two-state solution on both nationalistic and security grounds. Netanyahu's religious and nationalist base views the West Bank as the biblical and historical homeland of the Jewish people, while Israeli Jews overwhelmingly consider Jerusalem their eternal capital. The city's eastern side is home to Judaism's holiest site, along with major Christian and Muslim holy places. Hard-line Israelis like Netanyahu believe the Palestinians don't want peace, citing the second Palestinian uprising of the early 2000s, and more recently the Hamas takeover of Gaza two years after Israel withdrew from the territory in 2005. The Hamas takeover led to five wars, including the current and ongoing 21-month conflict. At the same time, Israel also opposes a one-state solution in which Jews could lose their majority. Netanyahu's preference seems to be the status quo, where Israel maintains overall control and Israelis have fuller rights than Palestinians, Israel deepens its control by expanding settlements, and the Palestinian Authority has limited autonomy in pockets of the West Bank. Netanyahu condemned Macron's announcement of Palestinian recognition, saying it 'rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became.' The Palestinians, who label the current arrangement 'apartheid,' accuse Israel of undermining repeated peace initiatives by deepening settlement construction in the West Bank and threatening annexation. That would harm the prospect of a contiguous Palestinian state and their prospects for independence. Ahmed Majdalani, a member of the PLO Executive Committee and close associate of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said the meeting will serve as preparation for a presidential summit expected in September. It will take place either in France or at the U.N. on the sidelines of the high-level meeting, U.N. diplomats said. Majdalani said the Palestinians have several goals, first a 'serious international political process leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state.' The Palestinians also want additional international recognition of their state by major countries including Britain. But expect that to happen in September, not at Monday's meeting, Majdalani said. And he said they want economic and financial support for the Palestinian Authority and international support for the reconstruction and recovery of the Gaza Strip. All 193 U.N. member nations have been invited to attend the meeting and a French diplomat said about 40 ministers are expected. The United States and Israel are the only countries who are boycotting. The co-chairs have circulated an outcome document which could be adopted, and there could be some announcements of intentions to recognize a Palestinian state. But with Israel and the United States boycotting, there is no prospect of a breakthrough and the resumption of long-stalled negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on an end to their conflict. Secretary-General António Guterres urged participants after the meeting was announced 'to keep the two-state solution alive.' And he said the international community must not only support a solution where independent states of Palestine and Israel live side-by-side in peace but 'materialize the conditions to make it happen.'
San Francisco Chronicle
a few seconds ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump wants to ‘Make Indians Great Again' — by bringing back slurs to a school gymnasium near you
In 2014, a group of Native parents, including myself, launched the #NotYourMascot hashtag the night before the Super Bowl. Despite our minority status, representing barely 1.5% of the U.S. population, we were determined to find a way to be heard in the (relatively) new public square of social media. No, the Washington NFL team was not playing. But the Super Bowl was the most opportune moment to get our message out. We informed only our closest associates and a select few Twitter accounts with large followings about our plan — and treated our new hashtag like a state secret, afraid it would get swamped by an army of bots. We devised a list of ready-made tweets to educate the general public about the harm caused by Native mascotry to the most vulnerable population in America — Native Americans have the highest suicide, poverty, murder and rape rates in the country. The plan worked. 'Not Your Mascot' immediately trended — a powerful testament to the impact of collective action. It was probably the first American Indian hashtag to trend in the United States. Now, nearly 12 years later, the president of the United States is trying to undo our work. It's safe to say he did not read any of our tweets. On July 20, President Donald Trump posted on social media: 'The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team.' The leader of the free world then threatened to derail the team's return to the Robert F. Kennedy Stadium in Washington, D.C., after three decades in Maryland. The Commanders' owners are negotiating a nearly $4 billion deal with the D.C. City Council to make the move in 2030. 'I may put a restriction on them,' the president wrote, 'that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington…Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians.' Trump may have written 'The Art of the Deal,' but if he had read our 140-character talking points, he would know that an Emory University study found that teams with American Indian mascots were off-putting to fans and the franchises were worth less than they would be without a race-based mascot. Suzan Harjo, a Cheyenne elder who began suing the franchise in 1992, challenging the former owner Dan Snyder's trademarking of the slur 'R*dskins,' noted in her response to Trump that the 'Harjo curse' (the team's poor performance began the year she started her lawsuit) was only lifted after the team changed its name. 'It's a good example of how long it takes to shake really bad karma.' Commanders managing partner Josh Harris had this to say in February: 'Now, in this building, the name Commanders means something. It's about players who love football, are great at football, hit hard, mentally tough, great teammates.' Even the Washington Post, which conducted a flawed survey in 2016 that showed support for the former name (I addressed this in an article in The Nation at the time), found that its most recent survey showed 62% of fans prefer the new name following the team's most successful season in decades. That, of course, should be that. But Trump's involvement in the mascot controversy goes beyond his recent social media posts or potential distractions from Jeffrey Epstein. In May, Trump's secretary of education, Linda McMahon, announced on a visit to Massapequa High School on Long Island, N.Y., that the state could lose federal funding if they do not allow Native mascots. In June, her department announced that its investigation into the New York Department of Education and the New York State Board of Regents' ban on 'mascots and logos that celebrate Native American history' was being handed over to the Department of Justice for enforcement. Under Trump, the department's civil rights office found the state ban discriminatory because mascotting other racial/ethnic groups, like 'Dutchmen' and the 'Huguenots,' is still allowed. After arguing with R*dskins trolls online in 2013-2014, I am familiar with this view. We'd often hear, 'What about the Vikings or 'Fighting Irish'?' Well, Vikings don't exist anymore, and going 'a Viking' was an activity, a job like being an oiler or packer. And it is not the sole way we know these groups. For so many Americans, American Indians are no more than the stereotypes demonstrated at games: Tomahawk chops and Pocahottie outfits. White Americans, even descendants of Vikings, the Irish, Dutch, and Huguenots, are allowed an individuality that cannot be diminished by obnoxious stereotypes promoted by the mascotry of their ancestors. 'The Trump administration will not stand idly by as state leaders attempt to eliminate the history and culture of Native American tribes,' McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, assured Massapequa High School students, parents and alumni. The school is refusing to comply with New York state law and eliminate its Native American mascot. After Trump's post on July 20, Kerry Wachter, the school board president of Massapequa, asked the president to sign an executive order allowing the school to retain its mascot. She claimed that banning mascots of Native people 'would erase this heritage, tear down this history and silence this legacy' in her Long Island town, which is 92.3% white, according to the U.S. Census. Massapequa says it would cost the school $1 million to change its mascot. One million invested in a mascot? If true, that certainly informs you about the types of resources being dubiously invested in the American educational system. Money that would be better spent on genuine education and assistance to poor reservation schools. Even to tribal colleges, many of which have had their budgets practically cut to zero by Trump. As we tweeted years ago, studies show that Native youth exposed to Native mascots have lower self-esteem. Not only that, but their ability to imagine themselves achieving their dreams decreases. And this is because, confronted with the dominant society's inability to see them as human and not a mascot, they retreat from the world and no longer have confidence in being a place where they can thrive. That's why, as Native parents, NotYourMascot sought to educate through tweets. That's why we chose Not Your Mascot, which was an improvement on Change the Name, an earlier messaging effort. We were taking our identity back for ourselves — and we were encouraging Americans of all backgrounds to engage with real Native people, cultures and lives, not mascots. Jacqueline Keeler is a Diné/Dakota writer living in Portland, Ore., and the author of 'Standing Rock, the Bundy Movement, and the American Story of Sacred Lands.'
%3Amax_bytes(150000)%3Astrip_icc()%2Ftal-gingham-summer-trend-tout-053716850cc94921bf6ab9ff12d77a44.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Travel + Leisure
a few seconds ago
- Travel + Leisure
15 Stylish Ways to Try the Gingham Print Trend This Summer—Shop Everlane, Quince, and More, From $10
Reminiscent of backyard barbecues and parkside picnics, the gingham print trend taking social media by storm embodies all of my favorite parts of summer. Excited to hop on the gingham trend myself, I took a risk on a $10 pair of red gingham shorts from Amazon (see photos below)—and now, I'm on the hunt for even more budget-friendly gingham styles I can stuff my summer travel wardrobe with. If you, too, have been obsessed with the gingham trend this season, keep scrolling. Ahead, I've gathered 15 gingham shorts, dresses, skirts, tops, and accessories that you'll want to pack for all of your summer adventures. Handpicked from some of my go-to travel clothing brands, including Everlane, Quince, and Factory, these styles are lightweight, comfortable, seriously cute, and well under $100 each—all important qualities to consider when shopping for new clothes, in my opinion. Behold—my new favorite summer shorts! These red gingham shorts from Anrabess are lightweight, comfy, and absolutely adorable to boot. I was skeptical at first about how well they'd fit; I'm 5-foot-9, have large thighs, and I float between a size 14 and 16, so buying clothes on Amazon can be a gamble. Multiple positive five-star reviews from other curvy gals convinced me to buy them anyway in my regular XL shorts size, and I'm so glad I did. These gingham shorts are long enough to fully cover my derriere, while still showing off my legs. Now that I've tried these trendy $10 shorts out for myself, I've already repurchased them in three other colors. These adorable gingham ballet flats are practically begging to be worn with a flowy, white sundress. Made with a breathable mesh material and a roomy, rounded toe box, these flats will keep you cool and comfortable on warm, sunny days. Choosing between the red gingham and blue gingham prints might be difficult, but I've got great news: They're on major sale right now, up to 65 percent off. That means you can buy both the blue and red styles for $26 less than the original price of one pair. You're welcome! $44 $27 at Statement bags are a great way to dip your foot into a trend without fully committing your outfit to them. This mini shoulder bag from Baggu has an adjustable strap, a full zipper opening, and is crafted with a recycled ripstop nylon fabric that's durable, machine-washable, and easy to wipe clean. On sale for just $27, this minty-green gingham bag offers a fun, funky break away from the more common gingham colors of red, blue, black, and yellow. is a treasure trove of classic Americana designs, so it's no surprise that the brand has a variety of high-quality gingham staples to choose from. One of my favorite styles from the bunch is this long-sleeved button-down shirt, which is on sale right now for under $50. Carried up to a size 3XL, this breezy shirt is made with 100 percent cotton and has a timeless silhouette that will stand the test of time. Tuck it into linen trousers, or layer it on over a tank top and shorts—however you decide to style it, you can't go wrong with this gingham button-down. Available in 10 summery pastel gingham prints—including light pink, sky blue, and butter yellow—this stretchy, flowy sundress may just be the comfiest way to hop on the gingham dress bandwagon. Amazon shoppers of all heights, shapes, and sizes have given this dress a five-star rating for fit, thanks to its size range, stretchy bodice, and midi length. One reviewer wrote that the smocked chest was accommodating for her large bust, and another reviewer shared that the tiered skirt was a flattering shape for her apple-shaped figure. One reviewer who was 32 weeks pregnant even wrote that it was both petite- and baby bump-friendly. Gingham is a print typically reserved for casual summer affairs, but these wide-leg gingham pants from Everlane have a polished silhouette that can be dressed up or down for any occasion. Made with a unique blend of European flax linen, viscose, and elastane, these roomy pants tout even more comfort thanks to their stretchy fabric. Previously $158, these flowy gingham pants are on sale for just $79. $60 $30 at Featuring billowy bubble sleeves, a scoop neckline, and an ultra-stretchy waist, this darling smocked blouse is the easiest way to dress up a pair of denim cutoffs. Currently on sale for 50 percent off, this top comes in three gingham prints—blue, red, and black—and has a cropped length that looks chic against high-waist pants, skirts, and shorts. $128 $30 at Whether you're strolling through cobblestone streets abroad or heading to a neighborhood cookout, this navy maxi skirt is bound to catch a few compliments. Made with a lightweight linen fabric, this ankle-length gingham dress is functional and comfortable, too, thanks to deep side pockets and an elastic, adjustable drawstring waistband. Previously $128, this Max Studio gingham skirt is an absolute steal right now at 76 percent off, marking its final price down to just $30. This fitted tank top combines two of my favorite qualities of Quince clothes: High-quality fabrics and simple designs. Made with 100 percent European linen, this wear-everywhere tank top has a flattering square neckline and a smocked panel at the back that stretches with you while you move. 'This top is perfect for mixing and matching all summer long,' wrote one five-star reviewer. 'I've worn it with skirts and shorts, and it instantly dresses up my style.' $92 $55 at This Wishlist midi dress combines two of my favorite trends of the year: Milkmaid dresses and gingham prints. On sale for $55, this dress has a corset-like middle that won't actually cut off your airflow thanks to a large, stretchy smock panel on the back. The structured bodice, tie-front detail, and A-line skirt add even more delicate touches to this romantic milkmaid style. $188 $50 at Love a great deal? Sign up for our T+L Recommends newsletter and we'll send you our favorite travel products each week.
