I think the reason why your mention of testimony is being rejected is because it only states their judgement (but not their reasoning) and especially because they were close to Colbert, which could suggest bias in their judgement. Because of this, I think you would be more convincing if you elaborated on details that these people provided to support their claims. For example, maybe there were specific events that they noticed that were unusual.
Sure, I'll give you that I could've posted their reasoning. I'll post that below. However, I have no desire to humor kiaghi7 and pretend to be civil or courteous towards his argument considering he's an openly
racist, sexist, transphobic, genocidal psychopath. who's too much of a spineless fucking coward to say on GBAtemp the same kind of garbage he spouts on Twitter because he knows he'd get banned in a heartbeat if he did. You'll forgive me if I don't give half a shit what he thinks about anything said in this thread. So this is posted for your benefit, not his.
Here's the
WGA calling for an official legal investigation into Paramount so that Paramount can say, under oath and under penalty of law, that the reasoning for cancellation was not the result of a bribe, as its members (made up of industry veterans who've worked for Paramount before) are in collective agreement that there's a conspiracy. Then there's Stephen himself, who pointed out that all of the information claiming the show was failing in ratings was only due to unsourced Anonymous leaks, and he asserts the show is actually #1 in Late Night ratings,
which is actually true according to actual data we have. The show still pulls 2.5 million viewers a night, is leading in its timeslot across all networks, and just won its ninth Emmy. When you take its timeslot and genre into consideration, The Late Show is actually doing pretty goddamn well. Then there's Jon, who pointed out that cancelling the entire show after it's been on the air for over 30 years (40 years if you count the NBC run) instead of retooling it or firing Stephen specifically does not make sense even as a business move and it simply isn't how CBS/Paramount operates.
And then there's an
Anonymous statement to CNN, supposedly from a close personal friend of Colbert, who said that the show being cancelled was a casualty of the merger (I know that sounds hypocritical considering I just pointed out the shadiness of "anonymous leaks" earlier, but we know that one is factually incorrect, unlike this, and that this is posted to CNN, an actual fucking news organization with actual news standards, versus New York Post, which is a fucking tabloid).
The smoking gun, however, comes from
Snopes's investigation into the conspiracy, where they point out that in
Matthew Belloni's report on The Late Show and CBS's financial woes, while the show was indeed costing CBS quite a bit of money and not pulling in sufficient ad revenue, top executives refused to ask key talent to take pay cuts, fire anyone, or cut the show's budget (you know, things you normally do in this situation) and simply cancelled it outright without any warning or consideration post-merger and even Belloni is suspicious. While cost was indeed a factor in the show's cancellation, it simply cannot be the only factor at play here. And if The Daily Show gets axed, that will be irrefutable proof that economics were just a scapegoat.
Keep in mind that when The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore got cancelled in 2016, there were no accusations of conspiracy from literally anybody. Nobody was saying CBS hates black people or whatever, because it was clear that it simply failed in the ratings and was cancelled for the same equal reasons as any other show. This is different and everyone knows it.
if josh's youtube channel is any indicator, he's the next big thing
nobody's really ready to be a host, of course, but josh is so talented
i'm expecting a breath of fresh air akin to when john oliver ran the daily show for a week back in the day
He killed it!
