Cuts to NPR

[LDAHL]

Sometimes after some useless meeting or other arrangement the phrase, "Wasted another hour of our precious time", still comes to mind.

Sonja Henie’s tutu!

[littlebittybobby]

okay---i been bawling my eyes dry because this places my FAVORITE Tee-Vee show right after Gillygans Island in jeopardy. Yup. But yeah---my all-time favrite show is Mahstapiece Theahtah, broadcasted from Bahstun. Yup. I never miss an episode, unless i am busy. Nope. How do you like that? Also, the McGlocklin Group, where they bicker over stuff about like you kids.

[iris lilies]

I think the most salient number in this case was the forty million dollars CBS was losing every year on Colbert’s show.

Letterman is convinced CBS is closing down the Colbert show to avoid problems with the Trump administration in the sale, just as one narrative is saying.

Since I am a member of the church of Letterman, I have to give this weight.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kYpwujMwCSg

[Alan]

Letterman is convinced CBS is closing down the Colbert show to avoid problems with the Trump administration in the sale, just as one narrative is saying.

Since I am a member of the church of Letterman, I have to give this weight.

But that begs the question(s), if they were trying to pacify a tyrant as many people have suggested, why would they give Colbert an additional 10 months to double down on his "offensive" commentary? And why would they cancel the entire show rather than just replace the host?

I guess you could counter that if it was a financial decision, why would they allow it to continue until next year? Possibly because of Colbert's current contract which may contain language regarding early termination or breach of contract by either party?

I'm always confused in situations like this because no one seems to be asking the right questions, mainly because they have no interest in understanding something that may upset their preferred narrative. I guess I'm the same, my preferred narrative that it was a financial decision just makes more sense to me.

[LDAHL]

I don’t think it requires a fascist conspiracy theory to explain why a company would want to quit paying a guy twenty million dollars a year for losing them forty million dollars a year.

[iris lilies]

But that begs the question(s), if they were trying to pacify a tyrant as many people have suggested, why would they give Colbert an additional 10 months to double down on his "offensive" commentary? And why would they cancel the entire show rather than just replace the host?

I guess you could counter that if it was a financial decision, why would they allow it to continue until next year? Possibly because of Colbert's current contract which may contain language regarding early termination or breach of contract by either party?

I'm always confused in situations like this because no one seems to be asking the right questions, mainly because they have no interest in understanding something that may upset their preferred narrative. I guess I'm the same, my preferred narrative that it was a financial decision just makes more sense to me.

I assumed the 10 month continuance of the show had to do with Colbert‘s contract, but I can’t say I’ve read it as fact.