(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) Profile picture
Jul 19 20 tweets 3 min read Read on X
As I barely remembered that Stephen Colbert existed until yesterday, I went looking to see what his guest list looked like. I went to 2024 because it was an election year and it was a chance to play both sides for ratings, etc., and I figured I'd see if he was really in the tank.
To look at this properly, I excluded known partisan celebrities and only included them if their work/presentation has been politics-first. This basically excludes almost all athletes and eliminates soft-liberal idiots in Hollywood.
By way of contrast, Barbra Streisand would be included; these days, she's best-known as a largely-retired actress and idiot with political opinions. Bryan Cranston, an idiot lefty if there ever was one, does not make the list because he's best-known as an actor.
This part is inherently subjective, but as I'm giving names and not just numbers, you may make your own evaluation.
So, begin with January 2024. There were a total of 28 guests. (Colbert's monologues were definitely Trump-unhappy, but I'm putting that to the side.) There were two openly political guests (Barbra Streisand and Gayle King). I thought about including Common; YMMV.
February 2024: 23 guests, 4 political (Elizabeth Warren as the sole guest, Joy-Ann Reid as the split, John Oliver solo, Chris Hayes on the split).
You might begin to suspect there's a trend here but, as Olden Demon says, stick with me to the end.
March 2024: 17 guests, 6 political (Bernie Sanders, Neil deGrasse Tyson, John Dickerson, Patton Oswalt, Stephen Breyer, Fareed Zakaria -- I included Oswalt because, c'mon, no one cares about his acting, and didn't include Yuval Harari because edge case).
April 2024: 25 guests, 5 political (Savannah Guthrie, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (kinda an edge case), AOC as a solo, Christiane Amanpour on the split, George Takei on the split, left out Doris Kearns-Goodwin as an edge case).
The trend continues: Just under a fifth to just over a fifth of the guests are various left-wing politicos, media, and activists, ranging from A-listers to "who's that again?" It's basically a long-running DNC ad but better managed.
Jen Psaki. Doug Emhoff. Seth Myers. Anthony Fauci. Jamaal Bowman(!). Adam Kinzinger. Kaitlan Collins. Hillary Clinton. More Bernie Sanders. And on and on and on through the remainder of the year.
I want to stress that this is particularly fine: This is clearly what the nakedly-political Colbert wanted and what his audience wanted. I make no bones about this. Doubtless, advertising executives wanted/tolerated this, too -- to a point.
CBS was basically running a high-production-values MSNBC late night variety show and wanted advertisers to act like it was a Magically Broadly Popular program coming off a banger prime-time lineup in 1987.
Probably the most damning thing about that lineup is how often Colbert had on his literal competition -- Oliver, Meyers, and so on. Yeah yeah, left-wing morons, whatever, but: He had on his competition, filling slots that could have gone to celebrities pushing visual products.
Just to give you an idea how seriously Colbert took his advertisers, here's August -- just after Biden drops out with a severe case of Advanced Age-Related Bidenitis -- and the DNC's month: Image
September and October are real bangers, BTW.
As I said elsewhere, I gauge as profoundly unlikely that there's some explicit or implicit quid pro quo between Trump and Paramount leading to this -- not because he's insufficiently slimey, but because I doubt he even noticed, and if he did, cared before the next shiny appeared.
The likelier answer is that Paramount -- which isn't exactly doing so hot other than Yellowstone-related products -- almost certainly looked and said, "We may have misgauged the market and also it looks like this guy's determined to keep us there AND he's losing money."
I add one coda: At some point, because of Jon Stewart's continuing degradation of our culture and the seeding of late night with his proteges and imitators, and because of the other factors that have slowly crushed broadcast television, late night has been bleak for a while.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with (((Not That Crown, Maybe)))

(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @CrownMaybe

Apr 7
A lot of people currently sure tariffs will Bring Back American Manufacturing and right some moral wrongs or other *and* sure there won't be any significant long-term impact suffer from an illness I've come to call Tea Party-itis.
The Tea Party famously began in the wake of and in response to the massive bailouts and Fed monetary easing of 2008-2009. The complaints were manifold, some good, some ... highly theoretical. I do want to note, however, what drove those bailouts.
Because most people skim the news and most people my age (and older and younger) don't understand very much about our financial system, a lot of news washed by that explained -- and I'd argue that at the time assuredly justified -- much of what came after.
Read 23 tweets
Feb 1
I can't remember if it was during or just before the pandemic (I think it was the very early stages but I may be in error) that my wife, the engineer, said something brilliant that I wish I'd noticed before.
She, who thinks our financial system has become so stupid that the response is a return to barter, looked at Disney's financials and concluded that it's a merchandise licensing and park company that generates IP in the form of movies and TV to drive those primary businesses.
This completely altered my view of ... basically everything Disney has done the last couple of decades, including letting it get itself drawn into a scrap with a sitting and very canny governor of one of its loci of economic activity.
Read 33 tweets
Dec 22, 2024
Amusing story: As the Creed developed, it did so in Greek, because the bishops (as did all educated people of the time) spoke Greek. But one word (ὁμοούσιος) was a real problem for the West because there was no equivalent concept in Latin, the language of the ... common laity.
See, by the fourth century, most Romans (of whatever ethnic group) of any education spoke Greek as the language of erudition, and in the East, Koine was the common language. But in the West, Vulgate Latin(s) was/were the lingua(e) franca(e).
This meant that at Mass/Liturgy, a large fraction of the faithful not only didn't know what they were saying, they had no idea what it could possibly mean because Latin lacked a word for the participle form of "to be" and concepts that went with it.
Read 6 tweets
Jul 5, 2024
Because we collectively have the attention span of fleas, NYT hack prattling on about the election is what caught my and most people's eyes, but consider: If he's a terrible candidate because he's mentally absent, why is Joe Biden a sufficient President?
Others have asked this but stay with me here, I figure only 20,000 other people on Twitter have teased out the logical progression here.

There are two problems here, one partisan and one national.
The partisan problem is that Joe Biden looks, if Trump can maintain silence for four months (BWAHAHAHAHA), not merely in for a loss but an epic curb-stomping in the upcoming election.
Read 18 tweets
May 28, 2024
No. Just no. A state might, out of generosity, move its electoral calendar to accommodate the entirely stupid act of a major political party; it does not, however, owe such a move to any political party. That's just dumb.

nationalreview.com/2024/05/let-jo…
Dems: We want to have our convention on this date!

Alabama and Ohio: Um, that means you'll miss our ballot deadlines.

Dems: Because we are one of the two major political parties, you owe us a change in your laws to make our lives easier!

National Review: Good point, there.
There is nothing wrong with Alabama and Ohio changing these deadlines out of a sense of national or civic obligation. There's a great deal wrong with the idea that Ohio and Alabama *must* change their laws to accommodate a major political party.
Read 4 tweets
May 22, 2024
This is one of my favorite old hobbyhorses. He's absolutely right, but the impulse of "the Dark Ages weren't actually dark" is both correct and incorrect and requires that we parse out that to which we're referring when we speak of shades of light.
Untangling the threads here is vital because literally everyone is right in some way in their staked-out position about a time that usually only vaguely and indirectly affects their day-to-day lives.
Start with Rome; or, rather, with both of them, East first. Broadly, Constantinople did fine! Its rate of technological advance slowed because despite how history tends to see these things, technological growth is local and general (and the general got bad), but still!
Read 41 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(