The Real Lesson of Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel

The roiling kerfuffle in late night network television demonstrates how confused, hypocritical, and angry Americans have become.

Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel should have been canceled long ago. They have little interest in creating a comforting diversion for all Americans, which used to be the reason for late night television. Instead, their goals are to advance progressive causes and bash anyone who disagrees. In doing so, they long ago lost most conservatives, many centrists, and even sympathetic viewers who wanted relaxation, not divisive politics.

But the real rub is that their self-indulgence isn’t good for business.

In the second quarter of 2025, Colbert led late night with an average of 2.42 million viewers, followed by Kimmel with 1.77 million and Jimmy Fallon with 1.19 million. This is down a combined 43% from 2015. In the 18-49 demographic coveted by advertisers, the loss is a calamitous 70% to 80% (Kimmel is down 77%). According to Guideline, advertising collapsed by half over the last decade.

This hemorrhaging is due to numerous factors, including Gen Z and millennial cord-cutting, and the continued fracturing of network audiences. But the blatant partisanship didn’t help. It alienates half the audience and, in the end, isn’t all that funny.

Industry sources suggest that Colbert’s “Late Show” now loses about $40 million each year, which hardly justifies his estimated $15 million to $20 million salary and excessive staff of 200 producers, writers, and camera operators. In the face of such dismal numbers, the vitriolic condemnation of CBS and its parents Paramount Global and Skydance Media for allegedly caving to the Trump administration, and purportedly infringing on Colbert’s First Amendment rights by canceling his money-loser with 10 months’ notice, is conspicuously misplaced. Strangely, there has been no suggestion that Colbert reduce his staff or take a pay cut, though there is precedent for doing so. In 2012, Jay Leno cut his salary at “The Tonight Show” by 50% to avoid layoffs and protect the franchise.

Of course, that was before confronting Donald Trump and his supporters became liberals’ purpose.

It seems likely that Skydance investor Larry Ellison, the conservative founder of Oracle, could not understand why CBS was losing $40 million a year to give a platform to a tiresome and predictably partisan late night host. Or, perhaps the change of ownership allowed CBS to do what fiscal prudence should have dictated years ago.

Over at Disney, home of “The Acolyte,” a reworking of “Star Wars” featuring lesbian witches from outer space, 10 hours a week of Trump derangement programming (“Jimmy Kimmel Live!” and “The View”), and news programming dominated by George Stephanopoulos, a partisan Democrat whose repeated insistence that Trump had been found liable for rape cost ABC $16 million, Kimmel had every reason to believe that he could continue disparaging Trump and Republican voters indefinitely.

Kimmel might generate a small profit for ABC. Though he too reportedly earns about $15 million each year, and his audience is smaller than Colbert’s, ABC/Disney monetizes Kimmel on YouTube, in social media, on other distribution channels, and through other programming. Still, the financial picture for his show is grim.

Disney/ABC executives with prior knowledge of Kimmel’s intended Charlie Kirk monologue begged him to change it. He refused. Apparently, when Kimmel declined to apologize the following night, Disney CEO Bob Iger suspended him. It is unclear if Iger’s decision was made before ABC’s largest affiliate groups, Sinclair Broadcasting and Nexstar, announced they would pre-empt Kimmel, though it was after FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr intemperately sought to intimidate Disney.

Facing threats of boycotts from consumers, celebrities, and creative talent, and with the left hammering it for violating Kimmel’s supposed First Amendment rights (conveniently ignoring their efforts to put Fallon in the doghouse for reaching out to Trump, and cancel Roseanne Barr, Gina Carano, and comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, among many others), Disney caved in four days. Kimmel resumed hosting with a statement of regret that mischaracterized his Kirk monologue, though some found it moving.

Neither Colbert nor Kimmel have a constitutional right to spread hate – or love, for that matter – on nightly television. The networks own that right. They can speak at events or self-publish, but neither has a First Amendment right to compel a network and its affiliates to cede 260 hours and pay him $15 million to proselytize about politics.

Kimmel’s Charlie Kirk monologue was no more contemptuous and inaccurate than his typical diatribe. It violated no FCC standards, and Brendan Carr’s imprudent venting made it more difficult for Disney to restrain Kimmel by making it appear that doing so would mean caving to the Trump administration.

Carr was wrong to get involved. ABC was wrong to single out the Kirk monologue. Colbert and Kimmel were wrong to use their platforms to spread disinformation and discord. The networks were wrong to subsidize their narcissism. They should have replaced both hosts before they burned late night to the ground financially and artistically. Now, CBS has ended the “Late Show,” and it’s only a matter of time before Kimmel makes good on his promise to retire.

Humorless angry diatribes are not comedy and are not enjoyable. Neither are they FCC violations, however, or a constitutionally protected right of network emcees. If the Disney board remembers its duty to maximize profits, Kimmel will soon enough join Colbert in well-deserved retirement.

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.