This is fair, though it doesn't really reflect how the argument is usually framed (as one side alienating the other), nor does it address why the presence of political content seems not to have hurt viewership figures before the last decade or so.
Yes… it is very one sided… including our Martini loving dog who says politics should stay away from late night talk shows… but watches Gutfeld)the most unfunny person I have ever witnessed IMO)every night on Fox by his own admission
As it turns out, the John Wayne story is mostly likely a myth. The original article from film critic Farran Smith Nehme is quite long, but here's an overview from the LA Times.
This is why I listed a half dozen reasons why I‘ve stopped watching, it’s death by a thousand cuts rather than a single reason.
I think this is the reasons why the older generations started falling off. But on the flip side I think #2 is the reason why the younger generation is starting to see a rise, they follow all their favorite young celebrities on social media and prior to recent years many of their favorite young celebrities weren't being honored or even going to the awards. I mean all you have to do is look at the crop of films and actors nominated in each category for years its swung older rather than younger. With now popular younger celebrities like Ariana Grande and Mikey Madison being nominated and attending and now the latter winning its having the effect of bringing in the younger generation to watch the show. I think this is going to be seen even more so in next years viewership numbers, especially with Wicked Part 2 likely being nominated once again, alongside its young stars.
I was a bigger Letterman fan in the 80's than I was ever a Carson fan, and some of Letterman's skits and bits still crack me up on YouTube over 40 years later. Larry Bud Melman offering hot towels to arriving bus passengers at the Port Authority still makes me fall off the couch! 
variety.com
That's true, but I don't think that's the root of it. Yea people watch Gutfeld because that's what they're looking for. But I think people like Kimmel and Fallon aren't giving their fans what they want. Funny entertaining content, not political commentary. So in my opinion it's more about Kimmel and Falon tanking their ratings more than gutfeld beating them.
Nice! Sadly, I feel like self-plagiarism and inbreeding (publications just linking to their other marginally relevant articles) is pretty common these days. Hopefully Forbes starts to uphold a higher standard. Thanks for updating us.
Good point. I thought Hurt Locker was great, but I get the point. That was also the first year of the expanded nomination list, after a lot of people were upset that The Dark Knight didn't receive a Best Picture nomination.
Not to continue this non-Oscars/non-box office discussion, but lets also not get things twisted here, we're talking about a show that only gets an average of 2.5M viewers. And while that might be more than other late night shows, its certainly not blowing the doors off any ranking list other than late night. It should also be noted that a majority of those viewers skew older, with only ~355K of them being 25-54 which in itself is low in my opinion even if they have had some gains recently it isn't a trend I see changing as the show will remain predominately older. The whole network tends to also skew older, but that is another discussion.
latenighter.com
I don’t find any of them particularly funny, when I was younger I used to love Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert but then they pivoted too far from sarcastic commentary to political commentary. Ironically I find myself watching Bill Maher more than any of them now, someone I used to absolutely loathe.
Exactly, that's why I said he's not beating them. And what you are saying is exactly the indictment im talking about with the traditional late night shows. They're beating themselves.
I would agree, but not for the reason you think. I just think that most of the older generations have moved on, and most of the younger generations aren't watching late night in general. So its not politics in my opinion, as I would think that is fairly even in terms of amount when compared to someone like Gutfeld, its just now a different era where late night is no longer in favor compared to other forms of entertainment. Maybe that changes and things swing back, who knows.
My question would be why did the older gen move on? I know for me it was I didn't want to watch comedians give me serious political talk. I wanted funny and entertaining. I can see what you're saying with the younger people. I know I rarely watched unless a band I wanted to see was on. So late night talk always skewed older in my opinion.
I think people tune in to gutfeld because they want that political satire. I'm not saying it's 100% political, nothing is 100% anything. But it sure looks like with the drops, politics was a significant factor. And since, like you said, other forms of entertainment are readily available, people are going elsewhere. I noticed when the drops really became noticable, was after they went all in with politics. Maybe it's just coincidence? I will also accept as an answer that fallon, kimmel, myers... Are just unfunny and not really good at their jobs.
Well as the saying goes, correlation is not causation. I don't think any one factor did it, its a combination of factors, and really like I mentioned I think its just a matter of a large number entertainment options being the largest factor across the different age groups and late night being more of an older generation thing rather than something that younger generations are picking up. As you'd think if it was just political there would be a general increase in viewership by those that agree with the political leanings of the hosts no matter the show if that was the case, and its just not, again no matter the show.My question would be why did the older gen move on? I know for me it was I didn't want to watch comedians give me serious political talk. I wanted funny and entertaining. I can see what you're saying with the younger people. I know I rarely watched unless a band I wanted to see was on. So late night talk always skewed older in my opinion.
I think people tune in to gutfeld because they want that political satire. I'm not saying it's 100% political, nothing is 100% anything. But it sure looks like with the drops, politics was a significant factor. And since, like you said, other forms of entertainment are readily available, people are going elsewhere. I noticed when the drops really became noticable, was after they went all in with politics. Maybe it's just coincidence? I will also accept as an answer that fallon, kimmel, myers... Are just unfunny and not really good at their jobs.
While I believe The Dark Knight should have been nominated and won Best Picture in 2008, Slumdog Millionare was still a pretty great movie and it made a decent amount of money at the box office ($378 million in 2008). Slumdog made much, much more than more modern winners like Anora or the Shape of Water or Moonlight.
www.forbes.com
Yeah, but now who is the angry mouse going to use as their "evidence" of budgetary malfeasance they claim Disney is perpetrating.It’s not really the linking to the marginally related articles that is the problem, but copy-pasting large segments from other articles that makes them almost unreadable. Took me 9 months for repetitive exposure to some of her articles to finally piece together what was occurring. My first reaction was AI rather than plagiarism.
I’ll link back to this one. That manages to spend 75% of its almost unending thesis off topic.
The $2.1 Billion Disney Theme Park Gamble
Judging by the huge crowds which have gathered at Tokyo Disney Resort since its new Fantasy Springs land opened last week you would have thought that it was guaranteed to have a happy ending. In fact it could become one of the most expensive mistakes ever made in a Disney park.
But now I know she’s just written many other articles on this topic and sews it together into a Frankenstein’s Monster. When you got the chance to interview Eisner once (more than a decade ago) and went Tokyo once (a decade ago), you start to run dry on the material and stop even rewording the same well, but just reposting it.
Now for a grievance, the original content in it is hilarious. Concerns about the presence of IP in TDS, when the park was built with a Jules Verne Land, an Indiana Jones Land, an Aladdin land (sort of) and a Little Mermaid land (that actually sheds pretense that it’s just an IP land). Then out the other side of her mouth questioning the longevity of Frozen and Tangled…
Gold Star to anyone who actually reads this whole article, but I want to bring this one forward because it’s the whole reason I decided I didn’t like this author, not the box office interpretation. But got there in the end.
Another fun fact is I guess the Box Office subreddit has banned her articles. Discovered that on my google rabbit hole.