The End Of A Late-Night Franchise: The Late Show with Stephen Colbert’s Cancellation

Editorial Assistant Siya Pujari discusses the cancellation of  The Late Night Show with Stephen Colbert and the political and economic reasons behind it.

The Late Show with Stephen Colbert has been cancelled by CBS’ parent company Paramount with this change attributed to being a “purely financial decision”^[1]  in a statement provided by Paramount executives. They further iterated that this decision was made with distinction to the show’s “performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.”^[2] Political context appears to have a role in this sudden axing of a staple news medium in the American digital terrain. 

It is difficult to avoid the state of American politics that has encircled the cancellation of The Late Show and Paramount’s involvement in it. Colbert has been an active instigator in using his political-satire platform to criticise US President Donald Trump and his administration’s policies. In October 2024, Trump argued that CBS, under Paramount, suggestively edited an interview held by 60 Minutes with presidential candidate and former Vice President Kamala Harris, allegedly interfering with the presidential election. On this basis, Trump embarked on a lawsuit against Paramount. 

Through the period of this lawsuit, Shari Redstone, Paramount’s controlling shareholder, was in the midst of closing a USD$8 billion deal to merge Paramount with fellow media company Skydance, which was awaiting approval from the US Federal Communications Commission.^[3] The lawsuit was later settled for USD$16 million in damages  awarded to Trump, which Stephen Colbert eagerly criticised as a “big fat bribe.” David Ellison, Skydance CEO, then participated in a meeting with FCC administration, preceding the announcement of The Late Show’s cancellation by exactly two days.^[4] Subsequently, the FCC approved the merger between the two companies. 

The timeline lends itself to a hypothesis that Trump is attempting to monopolise the discussions between considerably privileged men who have the cultural power to criticise him on their own platforms, which could contribute towards a road of hesitant media expression. Further apprehension could be validated with the Trump administration’s proposed plans to remove federal funding for the US Corporation for Public Broadcasting, even though they are “private non-profits with statutory protections that forbid political interference.”^[5]

Considerations should also be made for the lack of preventative action CBS took to reduce the high cost of production for The Late Show. While fellow late-night host and political comedy satirist Jon Stewart commented that “late-night TV is a struggling financial model, we are all basically operating a Blockbuster kiosk inside a Tower Records,”^[6] precedent shows that other late-night shows have actively reduced expenses, with the example of Seth Meyers’ show removing their live band and Jimmy Fallon’s show being broadcast one night less per week. Furthermore, Bill Carter, executive producer of the CNN docuseries The Story of Late Night, mentioned that Colbert’s show had somewhat excessive elements. During a conversation with a former producer for David Letterman’s show, in response to Colbert thanking the 200 individuals working for The Late Show during the announcement of the cancellation, the producer asked with a confused inflection: “They have 200 people on their show?”^[7]

The absence of effort to reduce costs may be explained through an understanding of the potential unease present in CBS’ commercial perspective. The previous CBS show, The Late Late Show with James Corden, did not get revamped with a new host and instead was discontinued with Corden’s exit. 

Nate Silver, political analyst and author, also asserts that Paramount as a large media institution would not view monetary loss as an innate dealbreaker, and the extent to which this loss would be tolerated is determined by a combination of external and internal political factors; opinions from investors and political investments from higher-ups being more relevant in a conversation about ending a program. Silver argues that Paramount might have been able to tolerate The Late Show’s consistent explicit political pieces against the Trump administration, or The Late Show being a loss for the company, but ultimately not both.^[8]

Insiders in the media space have questioned the pronouncement of the death of late-night media, with one commenting that “if you went to any network and said, ‘I can guarantee you two and a half million people a night, 260 nights a year, they would jump at that,” when discussing the consistent audience of Colbert’s show.^[9] The insider further asserts that the studio not uploading the show to a streaming platform simultaneously as it is airing on television is a flaw that could have helped stimulate real-time interest instead of allowing the news to become partly obsolete when uploading it the next day or days after. 

The supposed loss of  USD$40 million that The Late Show was sustaining is a number that has seemingly emerged from thin air with a lack of confirmation from CBS over its validity. Liz Hynes, late-night writer, states that networks typically do not focus on the financial profits or losses of a late-night show and instead prioritise the show’s ratings and popularity. She questioned the inaction to reduce costs by CBS before completely cancelling the show by asking, “what kind of negotiation is just handing down a sentence to a show without giving them an opportunity to trim costs?”^[10]

However, the general decline in interest towards the medium of late-night television, with the shift towards short-form media and streaming culture, is relevant in the context of The Late Show’s cancellation. In 2024, only 59 per cent of Americans were actively watching ‘linear television’ that included broadcast television, cable and satellite shows, paralleling the decline in Colbert’s ratings from 3.1 million viewers in 2017-2018 to 1.9 million in 2024.^[11] This deterioration of cultural potency could cause advertisers to become less interested in the show’s scope, potentially leading to the publicised USD$40 million loss. 

In terms of the repercussions of The Late Show’s cancellation, this shift could open the doors for less vivid and blatant criticism of the political administration in power due to a hesitancy to rock the boat, trading favour with the politicians-in-charge for freedom of expression. Particularly, for comedians with a political cache to discuss politics like Colbert, this reflects a narrowing of the space for late-night show hosts to publicise their opinions in the mainstream who are ultimately reduced to handling political concerns with solely diplomatic tact. These fears emerge from those inside the industry with an insider stating: “as long as you keep giving in, they will keep taking.”^[12]

ENDNOTES 

[1] Geraets, Nell. “Stephen Colbert’s Late Show has been axed. But what did a $12b merger have to do with it?” The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 Jul. 2025, https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/stephen-colbert-s-late-show-has-been-axed-but-what-did-a-12b-merger-have-to-do-with-it-20250724-p5mhfb.html. 

[2] Geraets, Nell. “Stephen Colbert’s Late Show has been axed. But what did a $12b merger have to do with it?” The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 Jul. 2025, https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/stephen-colbert-s-late-show-has-been-axed-but-what-did-a-12b-merger-have-to-do-with-it-20250724-p5mhfb.html. 

[3] Geraets, Nell. “Stephen Colbert’s Late Show has been axed. But what did a $12b merger have to do with it?” The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 Jul. 2025, https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/stephen-colbert-s-late-show-has-been-axed-but-what-did-a-12b-merger-have-to-do-with-it-20250724-p5mhfb.html. 

[4] Bradley, Laura. “Inside the Fiery Backlash Against Paramount’s Late Show Cancellation.” Vanity Fair, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/colbert-cancellation-comedy-writers-fiery-backlash?srsltid=AfmBOopbwiFnCf7iwfDkz31I06uUSq8jexVlkLtOTSQn5xMdByDZFsuw. 

[5]  Geraets, Nell. “Stephen Colbert’s Late Show has been axed. But what did a $12b merger have to do with it?” The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 Jul. 2025, https://www.smh.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/stephen-colbert-s-late-show-has-been-axed-but-what-did-a-12b-merger-have-to-do-with-it-20250724-p5mhfb.html. 

[6] Smith, David. “A warning signal’: is this the beginning of the end for late-night comedy?” The Guardian, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/jul/29/late-night-tv-stephen-colbert-canceled-trump. 

[7] Smith, David. “A warning signal’: is this the beginning of the end for late-night comedy?” The Guardian, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/jul/29/late-night-tv-stephen-colbert-canceled-trump. 

[8] Silver, Nate. “Why Colbert got canceled.” Silver Bulletin, 22 Jul. 2025, https://www.natesilver.net/p/why-colbert-got-canceled. 

[9] Bradley, Laura. “Inside the Fiery Backlash Against Paramount’s Late Show Cancellation.” Vanity Fair, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/colbert-cancellation-comedy-writers-fiery-backlash?srsltid=AfmBOopbwiFnCf7iwfDkz31I06uUSq8jexVlkLtOTSQn5xMdByDZFsuw. 

[10] Bradley, Laura. “Inside the Fiery Backlash Against Paramount’s Late Show Cancellation.” Vanity Fair, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/colbert-cancellation-comedy-writers-fiery-backlash?srsltid=AfmBOopbwiFnCf7iwfDkz31I06uUSq8jexVlkLtOTSQn5xMdByDZFsuw. 

[11] McArdle, Megan. “Why the ‘Late Show’ cancellation worries me about the American public.” The Washington Post, 23 Jul. 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/23/stephen-colbert-late-show-cancellation/. 

[12] Bradley, Laura. “Inside the Fiery Backlash Against Paramount’s Late Show Cancellation.” Vanity Fair, 29 Jul. 2025, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/colbert-cancellation-comedy-writers-fiery-backlash?srsltid=AfmBOopbwiFnCf7iwfDkz31I06uUSq8jexVlkLtOTSQn5xMdByDZFsuw.