Stephen Colbert’s
interview with Kamala Harris on Thursday was as dull as dishwater and as good a sign as any that boring interviews with unfunny, “serious” people are the reason CBS is pulling the plug on
“The Late Show.”
By their very definition, late-night shows air late at night, when people are sleepy.
Whether or not they count themselves as fans of the former vice president, some (if not many) viewers with work
in the morning were likely hard-pressed to have resisted drifting off to sleep.
The TV Blog acknowledges that many people do not watch late-night TV
in this way today. Perhaps many found the video on Friday and watched it while they were wide awake.
advertisement
advertisement
However, millions still watch the late-night shows in real-time, but
apparently not enough of them to sustain Colbert and “The Late Show.”
The show is being shut down next
spring along with the lame-duck host’s employment at CBS. The reason given in the CBS announcement earlier this month was financial.
Colbert’s “Late Show” is in the red with no foreseeable potential to make a profit. As always in the TV business, the underlying cause is inadequate
viewership.
Thus, the show had to go. The only question is why are Colbert -- and the show -- remaining on CBS for 10 more months, during which it can be
assumed it will gain no viewership and continue to lose money?
In the wake of the announcement that the show is ending, various critics have come out of the
woodwork to declare that the failure of “The Late Show” can be blamed on its partisanship.
It is too left-leaning, they say. Its comedy focuses
too much (or almost entirely) on politics rather than lifestyle subjects of interest to average Americans, they complain.
Then there is the anti-Trump
comedy. Colbert has pursued this strategy relentlessly ever since “The Colbert Report” on Comedy Central. He has continued to do since he came to “The Late Show” in
2015.
But here in the present Trump era, the observers ask: Is that wise? They say the show’s anti-Trump comedy instantly alienates the potential
viewership of half the country or more who support the president.
There is some truth to this. On the other hand, how is a guy like Stephen Colbert supposed
to move away from a style of comedy that has been his trademark for 20 years (“The Colbert Report” started in 2005)? This is his brand, and it is too late to rebrand now.
The point the commentators are trying to make is that the host of a mass-appeal entertainment-talk show should give the impression of being politically agnostic with a
healthy amount of skepticism thrown in regarding both sides of the political spectrum.
That way, a show
stands a better chance of drawing viewers from all sides, and not just one side.
Last Thursday’s appearance was the eighth for Harris on
Colbert’s “Late Show.” For the record, Trump has been on only once, in 2015.
The sleep induced by Colbert’s interview with 2024’s losing
presidential candidate was not really her fault. She was fine if you already like her.
But the conversation was
oh-so serious. Viewers who tuned in (if any) were likely looking to have a little fun before bedtime. Instead, their bleary eyes had stumbled on “Face the Nation.”
The interview was promoted as Harris’ first since she left office last January. Or maybe it was just her first interview on a book tour she is launching to promote a
new book due to be published in September.
Titled “107 Days,” the book is a self-styled memoir
of her presidential campaign. At only 107 days, the campaign is considered to be the shortest in presidential-election history. Or so said Harris and Colbert.
At the outset of the interview, she claimed that she did not look at any news media “for months” after she relinquished the vice presidency to J.D. Vance last January. Pardon me
for saying this, but this statement defies belief.
Not surprisingly, the interview was a love fest. Among other things, Colbert thanked the then-senator from
California for doing her “constitutional duty” on January 6, 2021, by participating in the Senate certification of the election results from the presidential election of the previous
November that she and Joe Biden won.
She accepted his thanks as the audience cheered, possibly prodded by an “applause” sign.
In talking about that day -- on which rioters stormed the Capitol building as the solemn certification process was underway -- she very graciously praised the comportment
of Vice President Pence, who steadfastly presided over the certification even as the mob presented a threat to the proceedings.
I fully expected the audience
to cheer that too, but they were silent as the show went to a commercial. I had the feeling the “applause” sign had not been activated.