Stephen Colbert’s Late Show Legacy Through a Critical Lens
Stephen Colbert is in line to host CBS’s “The Late Show,” which, I think, brings a mixed bag of reactions. He stepped into a golden opportunity but, honestly, it feels like he might have mismanaged it. His focus on politically charged content seems to have pushed a significant portion of viewers away, perhaps leaving them less inclined to tune in.
As noted by FOX News contributor Joe Concha, Colbert’s version of “The Late Show” has reportedly operated at a $40 million loss for CBS. The show employed 22 writers for his predominantly liberal monologues. Interestingly, in the last six years, he featured just one Republican guest—former Rep. Liz Cheney.
A study from the Media Research Center showed that around 87% of Colbert’s jokes since early 2023 targeted conservatives, while nearly all guests appeared to share liberal leanings. To illustrate, Colbert made 3,639 jokes about Donald Trump during a set time frame, whereas Joe Biden was only the subject of 339 jokes, and Kamala Harris got just 21 mentions. It’s perhaps worth pondering what that says about his comedic approach.
If any doubts linger about Colbert’s political leanings masquerading as humor, just look at the numerous farewell messages from his Democratic allies after his final show aired. It suggests his legacy may lean heavily towards being a political commentator rather than a late-night entertainer.
Critics, including Joseph Wolfson, argue that Colbert’s era on “The Late Show” has been characterized by politically charged content and what some deem cringe-worthy moments. For example, in May 2017, he used his opening monologue to discuss Trump’s presidency with various jabs, including some quite explicit references that drew mixed reactions. Those familiar with comedic critique might recall the sentiment of Billy Madison, where one might state, “At no point in your rambling response did you even come close to rational thought.”
Then there were segments like “The Vax Scene,” a Broadway-esque musical number featuring dancers dressed as syringes parodying a classic song. It seemed to stray into territory that some viewers found unsettling rather than humorous. This led figures like Joe Rogan to question the comedic intent behind such segments.
Colbert’s awkward interactions, such as kissing guests like Pedro Pascal, often came off more as forced humor than genuine comedy, leaving many viewers scratching their heads. Moments like these, coupled with his critique of figures like Hunter Biden and Trump, highlighted a sort of partisan comedy that didn’t resonate with everyone.
Johnny Carson once expressed concern about the politicization of late-night shows, believing that comedians should primarily aim to entertain. He thought, and perhaps rightly so, that delving into serious issues risks alienating half the audience. If Colbert had perhaps taken a page from Carson’s book, he could still have remained a relevant voice in late-night without the disdain currently directed at him.
In closing, while Colbert’s approach may have aimed to provoke thought and shed light on political issues, it often bypassed the comedy that many viewers historically sought from late-night shows. It’s a curious reflection on how political tendencies can shape not just content but also viewer engagement. As he embarks on new projects, one wonders whether such a balance can be struck—or if he’ll lean deeper into narrative-driven interpretations without regard for the original source material, like Tolkien’s work. It raises a question: Could humor still bridge divides, or has it become merely another avenue for partisanship?
