David Letterman takes subtle aim at CBS amid Colbert 'Late Show' cancellation
Letterman hosted "The Late Show" for more than 20 years before being succeeded by Stephen Colbert in 2015. On July 17, Colbert announced that the network was canceling the series for good. Seemingly in response, Letterman's official YouTube channel has uploaded a 20-minute compilation of the comedian roasting CBS during his tenure on the show over the years.
While the clips are old, the video was added to YouTube on Monday, July 21, as CBS faces criticism for canceling "The Late Show."
"You can't spell CBS without BS," the description of the video read.
The video includes moments of Letterman, 78, slamming the "bumbling executives" at CBS and complaining that the network doesn't care about his show. USA TODAY has reached out to a representative for Letterman for further comment.
The timing of the upload didn't go unnoticed by fans. "Thanks, Letterman people, for still taking potshots at the network," one YouTube comment read.
Stephen Colbert's friends Jon Stewart, Fallon support him on 'Late Show'
The compilation video wasn't the only pointed upload on Letterman's YouTube channel since the news about the "Late Show" broke. On July 18, the channel also uploaded a 2006 "Late Show" interview with Colbert, then the host of "The Colbert Report" on Comedy Central, who discussed mocking President George W. Bush at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. "This channel's reaction time remains undefeated. Whoever makes the decision to post timely clips: thank you," one YouTube commenter wrote.
Colbert, 61, made the shocking announcement that CBS has canceled the "Late Show" on Thursday, July 17. The network has opted to end the show entirely in May 2026, rather than replace Colbert as host.
Stephen Colbert is out at CBS. Is all of late-night TV officially doomed?
The decision has sparked a wave of support for Colbert and criticism of CBS. Some have accused the network's parent company, Paramount, of canceling the show to appease President Donald Trump amid a pending merger with Skydance Media that requires federal approval. Colbert is an outspoken critic of Trump and regularly mocks the president on his show.
The cancellation news also came just days after Colbert criticized Paramount for a controversial $16 million settlement with Trump, who sued over a "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris that he claimed was deceptively edited. Colbert slammed the settlement as a "big fat bribe" on July 14.
But Paramount has maintained that canceling "The Late Show" was "purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night."
Letterman served as host of "The Late Show" from 1993 to 2015, after previously hosting "Late Night" on NBC from 1982 to 1993. Since retiring from late-night, Letterman has occasionally hosted a talk show on Netflix, "My Next Guest Needs No Introduction."
Contributing: Bryan Alexander; Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What ‘Love Island USA' Revealed About Culture and Dating Is Straight-Up Sinister
By the time Love Island USA concluded on Sunday, millions of viewers who tuned in this summer felt defeated. Countless posts that flooded everyone's timelines on X were exhausted, delirious, and even angry. Let's state the obvious: the seventh season of the show was an absolute mess. The four remaining couples who competed in the finale perfectly exemplify how incredibly stupid this season was: not a single couple had been exploring their connection before Casa Amor, and two of the pairs had only coupled up in the final week. One of the couples even broke up on their final date, a first in Love Island history. More from Rolling Stone People's Princess Amaya Papaya, Late Breakups, Nicolandria: Fans React to 'Love Island' Finale 'Love Island Games' Sets Return After Two Years With Ariana Madix Taking Over as Host 'Love Island USA' Season 7 Winners Revealed But the mess went beyond the kind of lackluster romance: fans scoured each of the contestants' digital footprints better than the producers had. Two contestants were removed from the show for using racist slurs. Stan wars for other contestants led to the 'exposure' of even more allegedly problematic behavior online, though the flood of screenshots and allegations started to blur between the real and the photoshopped. Love Island has always been a source of extremely parasocial viewer behavior. The show invites it: there are new episodes six days a week in the UK and five days a week for the USA format for nearly two months straight. While the islanders are cut off from the world outside the villa, their family or friends usually take over their social media pages to support and, increasingly, defend them. And while the fate of the islanders is mostly in the hands of their fellow contestants — you must remain in a couple to stay in the villa — there are viewer votes in the app where their popularity matters, especially when it comes to determining a winner. Love Island UK, the first version of this global franchise, has been a case study in the pros and cons of the show's all-consuming success. The contestants, typically ordinary people with normal jobs in the earlier seasons, would leave the villa with massive followings and brand deals, drastically changing their lives. But the reality of the public watching at least six hours of footage of romantic trial and error left many islanders scrambling to re-piece their lives together in the aftermath; two islanders from the UK series committed suicide in 2018 and 2019 following cyberbullying from fans who disagreed with their romantic choices and behavior on the show. But at the bare minimum of each season, there was some real romance, and the most authentic couples who had great stories tended to rightfully take the top prize. Last season of USA saw the American version finally catch on for this very reason. Originally airing on CBS for three seasons before moving to Peacock, the show was always in the shadow of its UK counterpart, which releases episodes on Hulu stateside. After hiring Vanderpump Rules breakout star Ariana Madix to host, the show finally started to gain some traction and tally up the views in the process. Last summer's sixth season was dramatic and beloved: the girls on the show created a powerful sisterhood in the face of the men's rampant and mischievous exploration with new bombshells. But true love stories emerged, with three of the final four couples sticking together to this day. From the beginning of Love Island USA's seventh season, it was clear that the majority of the show's contestants were more hellbent on winning than fostering the types of connections that typically help a couple take the top prize in the end. It seemed like the islanders, most of whom were working influencers and models prior to the series, had never seen an episode of the show in their lives: they would punish each other for leaning into strong connections, eliminating individuals they felt weren't 'exploring' enough and used the ever-trending phrase 'lovebombing' to insult each other, in spite of the show's very real necessity that they work to build intense romantic connections quicker than usual. There were stark divisions and cliques in the villa, but they were nothing in comparison to the type of pop stan-like followings the islanders were gaining outside. Fans of individuals on the show were fighting more ruthlessly than the actual contestants. Any perceived slight would lead to a flood of hateful comments and messages on the contestants' Instagram and TikTok pages, or even mass unfollowings in the wake of feuds or recouplings. Individual popularity has never meant more than on this season of Love Island: even though couple Ace Greene and Chelley Bissainthe had been exploring their connection longer than any couple on the show, they were eliminated via public vote just before the finale. From early on in the season, the pair were plagued with accusations of being in a relationship prior to filming, and Ace's public image barely recovered from the perception of him playing the game too competitively after pushing for the elimination of Jeremiah Brown as Jeremiah was building a new and potentially strong connection with bombshell Andreina Santos-Marte. Even Chelley, one of the girls to quickly rack up followers while on the show, couldn't quite overcome the even more passionate following for her villa frenemy Huda Mustafa, especially after Huda coupled up with Chelley's Casa Amor connection Chris Seeley. Not making matters any better was production itself. This season was full of twists that made the show nearly unwatchable. Many of the eliminations were vote-based instead of through internal re-couplings that leave islanders single and therefore eliminated. The choice to do viewer and islander votes made the show feel too produced, keeping people on for longer than they probably needed to actually be there. Even the choice to make islanders couple up with bombshells in Casa Amor felt demented. When fan favorites Olandria Carthen and Nic Vansteenberghe were left 'single' in Casa, they were paired up and briefly explored a connection that viewers had been hoping they would since the first day. But the whole schtick felt more like fan service than an authentic realization; they were placed back in the villa, then immediately friend-zoned each other in order to fight for their original partners. They would only pair up again in the final week after Nic's partner, Cierra Ortega, was removed on Day 26 for using anti-Asian slurs in past Instagram posts. What Love Island revealed this summer about culture at this moment feels sinister. The outcome of the discourses and behavior both in the villa and online reveals how nasty and toxic fan culture has become. Increasingly so, production for reality series that are this popular will have to navigate casting a generation of people whose whole lives are one big digital footprint, one that will have captured the whole gamut of their growth as an individual. And as viewers lean into the popularity contest of it all, they will take advantage of that access, for better or worse. While holding Cierra accountable for her using derogatory language is important, there should be no room for death threats towards her or calling ICE on her family, who are of Mexican and Puerto Rican descent. The most telling reflection of all is how modern dating has evolved. The dynamics in the villa were gross and cruel from the jump, with the men seeming to often punish the women who would begin to show affection towards them, while the women grew territorial over their connections, even before knowing if they wanted to commit to them. Early in the season, Ace chastised eventual winner Amaya Espinal for calling him 'babe' while Taylor Williams was incapable of telling Olandria that he was just not that into her, even though she was clearly very into him. Third place couple Huda and Chris' final few days in the villa were hard to watch; in moments of conflict, both would talk over each other until Chris would shut down and Huda would walk away. In the final episode, she threatened a fight after he chose to sleep over cuddling with her in bed. When they spoke about it during their final date, Chris egged her on to end their romantic connection instead of being upfront and doing it himself. They left angry and even crying in Huda's case, just 24 hours before the winner of the entire show was revealed. This was Love Island USA flying directly into the sun. There's a real reckoning to be made about the casting process and how to move forward, especially given the type of influence and clout the show can create for its contestants. The show also needs to reexamine how it can even be structured when the fans are this emotionally involved. There's a reason that over the years, the show has started to prioritize casting people who have online followings to begin with. They already have a taste for the type of scrutiny and influence that comes with starring on the show, albeit on a much smaller scale. But given just how toxic the online scrutiny became this summer, it feels reasonable that less and less prospective contestants will want their lives viewed under that type of microscope. Only time will tell how this season's contestants fare in the real world once the dust settles. Most of Season Six has been able to largely move on and profit from the experience and their followings, starring in the Peacock spin-off Beyond the Villa. They left most of their feuds back on the island and focused on their real connections and very real emerging careers. Let's hope the season seven cast will be able to do the same. Best of Rolling Stone The 50 Best 'Saturday Night Live' Characters of All Time Denzel Washington's Movies Ranked, From Worst to Best 70 Greatest Comedies of the 21st Century Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Side Deal With 'New Owners' of Paramount May Hint at FCC Concessions
President Trump has said that he anticipates receiving at least $20 million in advertising, public service announcements or similar programming from incoming Paramount Global owner Skydance as part of a settlement to resolve a lawsuit that 60 Minutes conducted with Kamala Harris. In a Tuesday Truth Social post, Trump confirmed chatter of a side deal with the incoming Skydance regime that more than doubles the $16 million agreement that Paramount initially attached to the resolution of the case. More from The Hollywood Reporter Critic's Notebook: Ozzy Osbourne Created the Template for Reality TV Celebrity Reinvention, From Flavor Flav to Donald Trump House Republicans Vote to Rename Kennedy Center Opera House After Melania Trump The NEA Is Under Attack. If You Work in The Entertainment Industry, That Should Scare You. Trump's announcement directly clashed with Paramount's characterization of the settlement. When the deal was announced earlier this month, it said that it has 'no knowledge of any promises or commitments made to President Trump other than those set forth in the settlement.' Also on Tuesday: Lawyers for Trump and Paramount formalized the deal, with both sides moving to dismiss the lawsuit. The filing didn't include details of the settlement, unlike when ABC News reached an agreement to resolve a lawsuit from Trump over comments from Good Morning America and This Week anchor George Stephanopoulos. Per court documents, the two sides in that case explicitly laid out the terms of the deal, including timing of the payments. There's not obligation to publicly disclose the details of a settlement, though the widespread belief that Paramount would settle what was widely believed to be a frivolous lawsuit to open a pathway to regulatory approval of its merger with Skydance necessitated some degree of transparency on what the agreement looked like. Those details came directly from the company when the deal was announced close to midnight on July 1 rather than court fillings. Whether a party that's not formally a part of the litigation can participate in a settlement will be questioned. The Paramount-Skydance merger has not officially been greenlit. It's unknown whether the deal Trump announced is actually a part of his settlement with Paramount. Rather, Trump's characterization of the deal could hint at expected concessions new Paramount will have to make for the FCC to approve the transfer of the company's broadcast licenses to Skydance. Talks are already underway, with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and its Hollywood Local 399 and the conservative public interest group the Center for American Rights playing a prominent part. The latter group has called for increased viewpoint diversity, meaning more promotion of conservative perspectives. Also in play: more ideological diversity on the company's board of directors and a requirement that CBS have an 'independent, well funded, empowered, balanced ombudsman or oversight board' that would monitor for bias. David Ellison has recently held talks about acquiring The Free Press, the online publication co-founded by Bari Weiss, The New York Times reported. There's already legal blowback, with more expected down the road. The Freedom of the Press Foundation has sent to Paramount a demand for information related to its decision to settle, with plans to file a lawsuit on behalf of investors against controlling shareholder Shari Redstone and the board. Related are potential investigations by lawmakers like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders into whether Paramount violated anti-bribery laws, though there's skepticism about how those legal actions will fare absent a smoking a gun. Best of The Hollywood Reporter How the Warner Brothers Got Their Film Business Started Meet the World Builders: Hollywood's Top Physical Production Executives of 2023 Men in Blazers, Hollywood's Favorite Soccer Podcast, Aims for a Global Empire Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Quebec man who pulled off AI band hoax reveals his identity
The Quebec man who pranked journalists and music fans by saying he was behind a wildly successful AI band has revealed his identity as web platform safety and policy issues expert Tim Boucher. Speaking on video from his workspace in a rural area outside Quebec City, Boucher told CBC News Wednesday that the reality-blurring prank was partly motivated by revenge for the five years he worked as a content moderator. "When you're the one that has to deal with all the fighting and the fakery and just all of the garbage that humans can come up with, it changes how you look at the world," he said. Last month, Boucher claimed he created the Velvet Sundown, a '70s-inspired "band" that had about 300,000 monthly listeners at the time and was drawing attention for appearing to use AI. He set up an X account purporting to represent the band and fielded media requests. Using the pseudonym Andrew Frelon — frelon being the French word for hornet — he first said the band was made up of real humans, then "admitted" it was AI, then said he had nothing to do with it at all. The Velvet Sundown now has nearly 1.5 million monthly listeners and its creator remains a mystery. "I want to be able to show people a bit of what that's like — this feeling of having to determine what's real, and having to determine is this right or is this wrong, or having to make all these really weird decisions that for some reason are your problem, or your responsibility," Boucher told CBC News. Boucher has previously been in the news for publishing novels using AI and proposing an AI bill of rights. He also has a history of public pranks, having helped create a fake company and a fake art movement. He insisted on using a pseudonym when he spoke to CBC News three weeks ago, in part because he says he was bombarded with messages from people telling him to kill himself over the Velvet Sundown experiment. He says those messages have tapered off significantly. He says he also hopes to deepen the "convoluted" conversation that has come out of his experiment. "I realized that there's a limit of the depth that we can go to if I'm not willing to expose myself, too, and to be vulnerable," he said. The truth is out there The experiment has sparked conversations about the impact of AI and artificial streaming on music platforms, while spawning a miniature industry around the mysterious band. Countless AI artists with identical or similar names to the Velvet Sundown have popped up on Spotify. On YouTube, people have made videos using band's songs, dissecting the controversy, creating similar AI bands and, in one case, making an eerily realistic fake documentary. At times, it's difficult to parse who is involved with the original Velvet Sundown, who is trying to capitalize on its success and who is simply toying with the absurdity of it all. The Velvet Sundown's official social media accounts have remained quiet, and have not responded to CBC News's requests for comment. Two men behind one of whom says he's Canadian and lives part-time in Vancouver, told CBC News they are part of a network of people behind the Velvet Sundown, but declined to answer specific questions about the operation. The site is selling Velvet Sundown-branded merchandise but is not linked to the band's official Spotify or social media accounts. Meanwhile Vinyl Group, which owns Rolling Stone Australia and other music outlets, bought as a condemnation of AI trickery, with an expressed goal to "expose the fakes." Rolling Stone Australia editor in chief Neil Griffiths told CBC News he's found the Velvet Sundown experiment both "fascinating" and "terrifying" and says the new website will be a hub for conversations and investigations about AI and art. Spotify has not responded to CBC News's requests for comment. Boucher wants people to be vigilant Boucher's X account, which he initially claimed was run by the band, turned to absurd farewell messages mid week, including AI-generated images of the band members walking into Narnia, being abducted by a UFO and going to heaven. He also posted a collection of public domain Velvet Sundown T-shirt designs, playing on one of the biggest questions raised by the spectacle: who has the rights to a band that no one will claim ownership of? LISTEN | An expert speaks on AI and thinking: Many have suspected he's behind the band after all, a theory Boucher played into with a satirical blog post before going public with his real name in a lengthy blog post entitled The True Confessions of Andrew Frelon. He maintains he has nothing to do with the Velvet Sundown and has been working to crack the case himself. In the meantime, Boucher says he hopes the experiment encourages people to be more vigilant about verifying things they see — and people they encounter — online. "I want people to be encouraged and to learn on their own, to share and to have those conversations," he said. "In a way, it's too bad that sometimes the best way to make those conversations is to trick people in the wild. But I think if you can do that, and then you can expose the trick, there can be a lot of value in that."
