3 ms·

Late night TV shows as a format are way, way past their sell-by date. I think they'd do well to experiment with other formats and delivery channels, before they

Late night TV shows as a format are way, way past their sell-by date. I think they'd do well to experiment with other formats and delivery channels, before they get canceled altogether. https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2022/09/30/how-late-night-talk-ratings-cratered-during-trevor-noahs-daily-show-era/?sh=67e3816c6c15 https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2022/09/30/how-l... >Noah’s premiere episode as The Daily Show host in September 2015 garnered 3.47 million viewers, directly on par with Jon Stewart’s final episode a month prior. > That year, The Daily Show averaged 1.1 million viewers, lagging somewhat behind broadcast shows like NBC’s The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon (3.78 million), CBS’ The Late Show With Stephen Colbert (3.17 million) and ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live! (2.53 million), according to Variety. https://archive.ph/7HBWK https://archive.ph/7HBWK Meantime, Joe Rogan averages 11 million listeners per episode: https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-what-joe-rogan-s-viewership-numbers https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-what-joe-rogan-s-viewer... I suspect Fresh Air (Terry Gross) also beats them all, although that number seems a little harder to get specifically: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/audio-and-podcasting/ https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/audio-and-... "Those are not comparable!" you say? Exactly. Rogan and Gross are people who have one guest at a time and actually talk to them. It's pretty clear that audiences are starting to prefer that.

crazygringo 3y ago
Does that bother you for some reason? All of TV audiences have plummeted for individual shows, because we're all watching different things now. But I think the majority of late night viewing may be on YouTube the next day. It certainly seems to be thriving there. At least when there isn't a writer's strike. I don't know why you personally want talk shows shut down. Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, then what does it matter to you? It's not like 12:00 am is a super coveted slot that they're taking away from something else that would be more popular at that time.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  > Does that bother you for some reason? No, does it bother you to see late night shows attacked? Apparently it does since you keep replying. This was originally a comment about the late night shows shutting down for lack of writers. If TV executives are considering dropping them altogether and turning the time slot back to local stations, that must mean they're really doing worse than the other shows. This sentence doesn't even parse: > Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, whose bills? the "millions" who enjoy them? > It certainly seems to be thriving there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTmk7X8vGQk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTmk7X8vGQk has 3.3M views, and that's a "best of" collection. What's the viewership each day, and is that the whole show or just a few excerpts?
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    >> Does that bother you for some reason? > No, does it bother you to see late night shows attacked? You literally started by telling them to "Just shut down" and criticizing hosts for not writing all their material. All your comments indicate you're bothered. It's just curious to me that rather than simply not watch the shows, you're actively attacking them and wishing they'd shut down. >> Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, > whose bills? the "millions" who enjoy them? Pays the bills of the networks. In other words, if the shows are profitable. They wouldn't keep going if they weren't profitable.
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      > You literally started by telling them to "Just shut down" I guess irony is lost on you. > They wouldn't keep going if they weren't profitable "Profit" is an opinion, as any accountant will tell you. The studios' opinions are apparently wavering on this one.
      - crazygringo 3y ago
        > I guess irony is lost on you. I guess it is...? Because I really can't imagine what else you meant there.

crazygringo 3y ago

Does that bother you for some reason? All of TV audiences have plummeted for individual shows, because we're all watching different things now. But I think the majority of late night viewing may be on YouTube the next day. It certainly seems to be thriving there. At least when there isn't a writer's strike. I don't know why you personally want talk shows shut down. Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, then what does it matter to you? It's not like 12:00 am is a super coveted slot that they're taking away from something else that would be more popular at that time.

AlbertCory 3y ago
> Does that bother you for some reason? No, does it bother you to see late night shows attacked? Apparently it does since you keep replying. This was originally a comment about the late night shows shutting down for lack of writers. If TV executives are considering dropping them altogether and turning the time slot back to local stations, that must mean they're really doing worse than the other shows. This sentence doesn't even parse: > Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, whose bills? the "millions" who enjoy them? > It certainly seems to be thriving there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTmk7X8vGQk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTmk7X8vGQk has 3.3M views, and that's a "best of" collection. What's the viewership each day, and is that the whole show or just a few excerpts?
- crazygringo 3y ago
  >> Does that bother you for some reason? > No, does it bother you to see late night shows attacked? You literally started by telling them to "Just shut down" and criticizing hosts for not writing all their material. All your comments indicate you're bothered. It's just curious to me that rather than simply not watch the shows, you're actively attacking them and wishing they'd shut down. >> Many millions of people enjoy them, and if that pays their bills, > whose bills? the "millions" who enjoy them? Pays the bills of the networks. In other words, if the shows are profitable. They wouldn't keep going if they weren't profitable.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    > You literally started by telling them to "Just shut down" I guess irony is lost on you. > They wouldn't keep going if they weren't profitable "Profit" is an opinion, as any accountant will tell you. The studios' opinions are apparently wavering on this one.
    - crazygringo 3y ago
      > I guess irony is lost on you. I guess it is...? Because I really can't imagine what else you meant there.