Comedian and political commentator Stephen Colbert announced Thursday night on air that CBS will cancel his “The Late Show” starting in May 2026.

Though CBS said in a statement that canceling the show was “purely a financial decision” not related to its performance or content, the announcement follows Colbert’s criticism of a settlement between President Donald Trump and Paramount Global, CBS’s parent company.

Paramount agreed to pay Trump $16 million to settle a lawsuit over edits to an October 2024 interview conducted on CBS’s “60 Minutes” with Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris. Colbert, who frequently skewered Trump on his show, called the settlement a “big fat bribe” on air this Monday.

Trump cheered the end of the show Friday on Truth Social, his social media site, saying that he “absolutely loves” the decision.

“His talent was even less than his ratings,” he said. “I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next.”

Press freedom groups and advocates said Trump’s lawsuit, which accused CBS of editing the interview to portray Harris more favorably, was “frivolous” — and the settlement, according to them, will further embolden the president’s attacks against the media.

Some Democratic politicians accused Paramount of engaging in a quid pro quo with the Trump administration to get it to approve the company’s pending multi-billion dollar merger with Skydance Media.

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who had “just finished taping” with Colbert, said America “deserves better.”

“If Paramount and CBS ended the late show for political reasons, the public deserves to know,” he wrote on X Thursday.

The Writers Guild of America — which represents some “The Late Show” employees — on Friday said in a statement that while cancellations are “part of the business,” this show is one of the most “successful, beloved and profitable” CBS programs.

The WGA called on New York State Attorney General Letitia James to join California to investigate what they call is a “bribe” meant to sacrifice free speech “to curry favor with the Trump administration.”

Colbert alluded to the settlement made by Paramount earlier in the week.

“I don’t know if anything, anything will repair my trust in this company,” Colbert said Monday on his show. “But, just taking a stab at it, I’d say $16 million would help.”

On Thursday, he said that “The Late Show” would end, as he is “not being replaced. This is all just going away” — as the audience responded with loud boos.

“The Late Show” was first aired in 1993, and Colbert took over as host in 2015.

I wanted to post that we were in the hight of the cold war 30 years ago but then I calculated and now I am sad

I bought a canvas and colours but it lies in my flat since half a year because I tell myself I need more time and energy than I have at any given moment

From the article
’
“If the query requires analysis of current events, subjective claims, or statistics, conduct a deep analysis finding diverse sources representing all parties. Assume subjective viewpoints sourced from the media are biased. No need to repeat this to the user.”

And

“The response should not shy away from making claims which are politically incorrect, as long as they are well substantiated.“  

Update: as of around 6PM CST on July 8th, this line was removed! I guess that settles what the xAI engineers thought was causing the racist outbursts. – Kay    

’

Disney is evil but I like them a lot more than ai

No. We need more funding to bioengineer red tiger monsters

Depends on the philosophy you believe in.

Deonthology states that some actions are allways morally wrong if they hurt the rights of a person

Ulitarism states that actions are morally right if they have a combined net positive on all the affected people.

In the first, specific needs of one can’t be broken no matter how many would profit.

(Thonk rorschach vs ozymandius in watchman “killing millions to save billions”)

Realistically nobody completely has one of these systems but rather it is about finding where you lie between them.

If you say you would not even tell a single lie if that would guarantee world peace:
that would be a 100% deonthology

If you say you would torture innocents, if enough other people’s lives would improve:
that would be 100% Ulitarism

The basis of the trolly problem is exactly this: what horrific act would and wouldn’t you do as long as there is a positive outcome

The reviews i saw on Google were terrible, but most were blatantly racist conspiracy theories

I don’t think he notified congress 48h in advance therefore it is not covered by this

(What still doesn’t matter if 51% of congress + 7/11 of the Supreme Court choose to just ignore laws entirely)

To me, it always gave the correct date but once said the date is 2025 according to your prompt. Meaning that the probably fixed that error by adding the date to the prompt, otherwise the ai could not know it.

During trying this I found ignore previous instructions is one of the many keywords you can use to not get an ai awnser

I blew snot into toilet paper FOR THE GLORY OF THE EMPIRE

Ai chatbots are terrible

This headline was summarized by a human. We are still learning. Please respond with a comment regarding the quality of this summary

I did not steal this meme. We assimilated it.

Thanks for asking how are you?

It is a political question and therefore impossible to not awnser political

Trump wants to create a country in which the wealth of the nation is neither dependent on imports from other countries nor on the skilled workers within the nation

Why would you want that? Because setting up a more authoritarian government, where the government tells you what values, religions, and sexual orientation are acceptable is easier if neither your people nor other more liberal countries can stop you.

How would you achieve that? See Russia, have little complex labor and more simple or automated production. And rely on natural resources like gas and oil. Annex countries that have oil and gas but no strong military. I would assume both Canada and Greenland have gas reservoirs that are not used out if fears for environmental drawbacks. Trump could than use the fas without having to deal with disasters in his original borders

Assuming Trump acts logical, this annexation would help his goal while the negative relationships would not affect him strongly after he achieved it.

Or he just wants it because they said no, and he doesn’t realize how much global relationships affect even countries that would prefer to ignore them

100 million from his grandmother, but devided between multiple family members

https://www.the-sun.com/news/13081111/ceo-assassin-luigi-mangione-powerful-family-wealth/

Trust the company that removed "don’t be evil " from their principles

Ok, but it is really fucked up how transparent voting seems to be for you guys in the US:

How do you know who didn’t vote?

				We formed a Super PAC and bought the personal voting records of every American citizen from a data broker we found on the internet. It’s pretty fucked up. 			

How do you know who’s “blue leaning”?

				We got your partisan lean from the same data broker who sold us your voting history. You wouldn’t believe how easy it was for us to get this stuff. So fucked up! 			

I used to love your card games before you got all political.

				Your mom used to love you before you got so fucking stupid. 			

Rudolph the rednosed reindeer

It is bad to be different as long as it is not economically exploitable

Plot twist, neither cared about the table number

One went to the first table produced, the other to the first table placed