
What the End of The Late Show Really Means
Ten years on, CBS has snatched the crown off its head. The network appears to have grown so dismayed with the state of late-night television that it has unceremoniously canceled one of the genre's most successful stalwarts: In a statement Thursday night, CBS announced that not only will this season of The Late Show —set to air through May 2026—be the program's last, but the franchise will also be retired entirely. ('We consider Stephen Colbert irreplaceable,' the statement offers as explanation.) The decision quickly prompted plenty of speculation among industry observers, given Colbert's recent, unvarnished scorn for CBS's parent company, Paramount, after it settled a lawsuit with Donald Trump; the president had accused 60 Minutes, the network's venerated TV news magazine, of deceptively editing an election-season interview with Kamala Harris. (CBS News, which produces 60 Minutes, denied the claim.) But whether or not there was some political motivation behind the cancellation (the network called the reason purely financial), the underlying point is clear: The Late Show is no longer valuable enough for CBS to bother protecting it.
As the business of television changes, late-night talk shows have found themselves in a particularly awkward spot. For one, people have stopped flocking to linear television as their evenings wind down. If they do turn the TV on, it's often to check out what's new to stream rather than to put up with a somewhat staid format interrupted by many commercial breaks. The customary celebrity chats and musical performances typically appear online not long after they air, and said celebrities now have many other outlets for plugging their projects: video podcasts, YouTube shows. The cost of producing one of those alternatives is also far smaller than the budget for a glitzy affair like The Late Show.
These arguments always get trotted out as nightly programs drop off the map—like when The Late Show 's lead-out, The Late Late Show, didn't survive its host James Corden's departure; and when its follow-up, the Taylor Tomlinson–hosted variety show At Midnight, lasted just over a year before the comedian decided to return to performing stand-up full time. Questions about the genre's relevance are also why Late Night With Seth Meyers had to get rid of its house band to survive, and why Comedy Central chose not to replace The Daily Show 's former host Trevor Noah. Instead, the cable channel was satisfied with bringing back Noah's predecessor Jon Stewart for one night a week, rotating the other episodes amongst the current cast.
And yet: Even though Puck reported that Colbert's program was losing more than $40 million a year for CBS, there's something quite shocking about a network simply giving up a foothold as established as The Late Show. Brand names are hard to come by in television, and The Late Show was a big one: Letterman built it up over the course of the 1990s, after NBC passed him over as Johnny Carson's successor to The Tonight Show. Colbert then inherited a program defined by its past host's curmudgeonly brand of snark and fundamentally remade it into a much more thoughtful and authentic show. He's proved capable of deep, empathetic interviews with guests and spiky, aggressive political joke-making (by broadcast TV's rigid standards).
Still, Colbert would never be able to achieve the ubiquity that Carson and Letterman enjoyed before the advent of streaming. The occasional clip might go viral, and entertainment sites will write up the best parts of the monologue; the talk-show desk, however, no longer comes with a seat of cultural power. Colbert was once the most irreverent member of his late-night brethren (people forget what a bomb-thrower his satirical The Colbert Report character could be), but he has since become more of a fatherly figure—one I value as part of the TV firmament but who doesn't exactly scream 'cutting edge.'
Then again, 'cutting edge' is not something CBS has sought in a long time. It's hard to know what could possibly take over for The Late Show when it vanishes in mid-2026. Sitcom reruns? Movies you could just as easily catch on Netflix? The point of network television is to offer something that has a live jolt to it—sports, stand-up, the occasional drama or comedy shows that become appointment viewing. As the medium dissolves from relevance, its owners instead seem content not to create anything of cultural importance. The Late Show is not the juggernaut it once was, sure. But what's most tragic is to think of it being replaced by nothing at all.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
21 minutes ago
- New York Post
Ric Flair reveals ‘anxiety' after Hulk Hogan's death: ‘I could be next'
The wrestling world is still mourning the death of Hulk Hogan following his passing last Thursday at the age of 71. The death has led to introspection for some, including WWE legend Ric Flair, who believed Hogan had 'just got tired' following a number of medical procedures he underwent. Hogan, whose real name is Terry Bollea, died last week after he suffered cardiac arrest at his residence in Clearwater, Florida. Advertisement 3 Ric Flair spoke about Hulk Hogan during 'The Ariel Helwani Show.' The Ariel Helwani Show/YouTube Flair discussed Hogan's passing on Monday during an appearance on 'The Ariel Helwani Show.' 'I had just talked to Jimmy Hart the day before and I didn't actually speak with Hulk, but everything was fine. I knew that he had health issues, but I thought that they were being embellished by that radio disc jockey, [Bubba the Love Sponge]. I talked to Jimmy, I talked to his friend and he seemed to be fine,' Flair said. 'I think he just got tired. I mean, 11 back operations, hip replacements, now a neck surgery. I mean, how much can your body take? We've all put ourselves in a ridiculous position in the business.' Advertisement Flair has been dealing with health issues of his own. He revealed in June that he had skin cancer and Flair, 75, seemed to wrestle with his own mortality during the conversation. Advertisement 3 Hulk Hogan died at the age of 71 last week. 'But here I am, and I'm five years older than Hulk, and I don't hurt at all,' Flair said. 'I've had some serious health issues, but I don't have an ache or pain in my body. It bothers me, and of course, it gives me anxiety that I could be next.' A 911 call was made regarding Hogan at 9:51 a.m. on Thursday and medics arrived on the scene minutes later. 3 Hulk Hogan appears at Wrestlemania 30 at the Superdome on April 6, 2014 in New Orleans. MediaPunch/Shutterstock Advertisement Hogan, the biggest star pro wrestling has produced, was transported to Morton Plant Hospital in Clearwater at 10:32 a.m. and died less than an hour later. WWE paid tribute to the wrestling icon on Friday night during SmackDown in an emotional show and Hogan's son described his father as his 'hero' and 'best friend' in a post on social media.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Bill Maher admits he was wrong about Trump on tariffs, doesn't ‘see a country in a depression at all'
Liberal comedian Bill Maher admitted that he was wrong about President Donald Trump on tariffs in a podcast posted Monday, and he's 'got to own it' because the economy is thriving. Maher made the admission on his 'Club Random' podcast as he explained that he's always truthful with his audience during a conversation with progressive YouTube host Brian Tyler Cohen. Advertisement 'Just to take an example, tariffs. Now I remember that I, along with probably most people, was saying at the beginning, 'Oh, you know, by the 4th of July… the economy was going to be tanked by then,' and I was kind of like, 'Well, that seems right to me,'' Maher said. 'But, that didn't happen,' Maher said. 'It could happen tomorrow. I'm just saying, that's reality, so let's work first from the reality of that, not from 'I just hate Donald Trump,' because that's boring and doesn't get us anywhere and leads you to dishonesty.' 3 Maher made the admission on his podcast during a conversation with progressive YouTube host Brian Tyler Cohen. YouTube/Club Random Podcast Maher added, 'The truth is, I don't know what his strategy is but, look, the stock market is at record highs… I also drive around. I don't see a country in a depression at all. I see people just out there living their lives. Advertisement 'I would have thought, and I've got to own it, that these tariffs were going to f—–g sink this economy by this time, and they didn't. How do we deal with that fact? Because that's the fact.' Cohen responded that the tariff saga is an example of why he stopped making bold predictions. 3 'I don't see a country in a depression at all. I see people just out there living their lives,' Maher said. POOL/AFP via Getty Images 'If I was good at predicting things, Hillary [Clinton] would have been the president in 2016,' Cohen said. Advertisement In April, Maher took a swipe at Trump over his 'completely a– backwards' approach to China and suggested he was rooting for a recession to get him to reverse course. 'I just feel like he picked a fight with the wrong bully,' Maher said at the time. Trump has slapped a slew of tariffs on countries across the globe since taking office, aiming to rebalance what he calls unfair trade deals that take advantage of the United States. 3 In April, Maher took a swipe at Trump over his 'completely a– backwards' approach to China. YouTube/Club Random Podcast Advertisement Maher challenged one of Trump's central tariff arguments in March. 'I have one basic question: Why do we want to bring back manufacturing?' Maher asked his 'Real Time' panel. 'It's so 70s, you know? I mean, that ship has sailed. You know, there are countries that make jeans for $11. We're never going to be that country again.' 'China's moving into the AI age, and he wants to go back to manufacturing, which, by the way, if you create new jobs, who's going to take them? Robots,' Maher continued. 'That's who's going to take them anyway! He acts like progress itself is woke.' Averting a protracted trade war, Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a trade deal between the U.S. and European Union on Sunday that set a 15-percent tariff on most EU goods imported into the U.S. Fox News Digital's Joseph A. Wulfsohn contributed to this report.

Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
I tried Martha Stewart's one-pan pasta and had dinner on the table in 20 minutes
Martha Stewart told me she loves making her one-pan pasta when she only has 20 minutes. Stewart's dish barely takes five minutes of prep and leaves almost zero mess. Her one-pan pasta is very light and simple. I'd make it again, with a few changes. Meghan Markle made headlines after making one-pan pasta on her Netflix show "With Love, Meghan," but she wasn't the first to bring it to the masses. That honor goes to another very famous woman. Martha Stewart told me that her magazine was the first to include one-pan pasta, and it's a recipe she swears by when she's short on time. "It's delicious, and you can do so many different kinds of pasta and so many different flavorings," she said. "Add tomatoes, the spaghetti and basil, and a little bit of salt and water, the cheese at the end. It cooks in 20 minutes and you're done!" Martha Stewart's one-pan pasta has made headlines in the past. Stewart released the recipe in 2014 and demonstrated how to make it on her PBS show, "Martha Stewart's Cooking School." "Here is the recipe that's taken the internet by storm," Stewart says in a clip posted on her official YouTube channel that year. "This is an odd dish because you'll never believe you can cook pasta in so little with all the other ingredients." "It's fragrant and well-cooked and just ready to eat," she added. "Can you imagine? This is it!" The dish requires just a few basic ingredients. And there's very minimal prep. Then, I thinly sliced my onion and a few cloves of garlic. You know that scene in "Goodfellas," when the mobsters are all in jail together and make that beautiful Italian feast? That is exactly how I felt as I carefully sliced through my onion and garlic, watching as they nestled together just as they had in Martin Scorsese's famous shot. I didn't use a razor like Paulie, but I was still pretty proud of my handiwork. Plus, my prep was already finished. Unlike most pasta recipes, you don't bring the water to a boil before throwing the noodles into the pan. Stewart's recipe requires that you throw everything into the pan at once for maximum ease. I accidentally put the 4 ½ cups of water into the pan first instead of last, as Stewart does in her cooking demo. Thankfully, it didn't make a difference. Then, I added my linguine, cherry tomatoes, onion, and garlic. I topped it off with Stewart's required seasonings. I added two basil leaves, two tablespoons of extra-virgin olive oil, ½ teaspoon of red pepper flakes, two teaspoons of salt, and a few twists from my pepper grinder. The tomatoes and basil popped brightly against the yellow of the linguine, reminding me of spring. I wondered if the dish would taste as fresh as it looked. Then, I turned on the stove and struggled to mix everything. Stewart's recipe instructs you to stir and turn the pasta "frequently with tongs," which was a challenge at the start. I didn't want to break the pieces of linguine, so after a few failed attempts, I decided to let the pasta soften a little in the water. After a few minutes had passed, the pasta was fully submerged. The pan almost looked like a clear chicken noodle soup, or an Italian spin on pho. It felt weirdly therapeutic to watch the pasta move around in that clear broth as I delicately turned the linguine with my tongs. And it wasn't long before the water started to really boil. The top of the pan was covered in little bubbles as I continued to flip the pasta. It was around this time that the entire kitchen filled with an incredibly fresh aroma, just as Stewart had promised. I frequently checked to see if the pasta was al dente, per Stewart's instructions. I used my tongs to grab a noodle from the pan and drop it into my ladle, splashing some cold water on it before taking a bite to see if the pasta was ready. The second time I tested a noodle, around the 14-minute mark, I could tell that the flavors from the tomatoes, basil, and seasonings had infused into the linguine. Overall, it took 20 minutes for Stewart's pasta to cook. While Stewart's website said the pasta should take "about nine minutes," the recipe also states that the water will be "nearly evaporated" when the dish is ready. It wasn't until the 20-minute mark that I could see a significant drop in the pan's water level, and it took just as long for the noodles to cook. Since Stewart herself had told me that the pasta is usually ready in about 20 minutes, I wasn't too worried about waiting it out. After plating the noodles, I topped my pasta with plenty of freshly grated Parmesan cheese. Stewart's one-pan pasta is really light, but the dish has a hint of richness thanks to the olive oil and tomatoes, which had a nice blistered texture. While the dish tasted fresh — and paired great with my glass of rosé — I thought it was just a tad plain. I got a lot more flavor out of the noodles once I added extra pepper and crushed red pepper flakes. I would make Stewart's one-pan pasta again — with a few changes. Next time, I'll add more basil, which I think could have really brightened up the flavors, as well as more tomatoes — my favorite part of the dish. I saw in the comments on Stewart's recipe that some had tried the dish with chicken stock instead of water, which I think is a great idea. Others discussed sautéing the onions and garlic first. While that technically defeats the purpose of a one-pan recipe, I do think it's a modification worth trying. Overall, I still enjoyed cooking Stewart's one-pan pasta, which surprised me given my ongoing case of kitchen fatigue. It was soothing to watch all those ingredients spin around one pan as my kitchen filled with delicious smells.