On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote:
> The founder of this list, Aaron Barnhart (for those who weren't around at > the beginning), talked to Paul > Harris<http://paulharrisonline.blogspot.com/2014/04/aaron-barnhart-on-letterman-retiring.html>for > 10 minutes about Dave and the resignation announcement. > Great to hear AB, and think of those early days of the Late Show News, when I and many still here were first gathered around the primordial internet campfires to hear and tell stories about David Letterman. I do disagree with him though about several things: 1. While the timing may have been influenced by getting Leno out of the way, I don't think it had much if anything to do with the success (such as it is) of Fallon or with any worry about CBS affiliates future dissatisfaction with his ratings. Aaron was one of the first to make the point years ago that even at second place to the Tonight Show, Dave's ratings were good enough to provide CBS with a steady and reliable revenue stream in late night, which is almost all gravy for them. This point is still true - maybe more so in the even more fractured late night environment. I can think of several interesting successors to Dave, but none that seem a slam dunk to get better ratings 6 months after they start than Dave is now. I am confident Dave could do his show literally until he dies, whenever that might be, if he wanted to and CBS and the affiliates would be happy. Dave is retiring now for the same reason he wanted to go to 11:35 and the same reason he stopped being the human Alka Seltzer and stopped doing remotes - he is getting older, and doesn't want to do it any more. Which is essentially when he said when he announced it last week. 2. I think Dave is exercising a lot more control over his exit than Carson did over his. It really is a myth that Johnny went out on his own terms - Leno's ratings were higher than Carson's, and there was panic over the age of Carson's audience, and open grumbling from NBC and affiliates over when he would retire. Johnny stopped all of that by announcing his retirement, and then got to bask in the nostalgic glory, which was smart, but he was already having the door pointed out to him, if not outright shown to him. 3. I really disagree that the network late night gig is more work than the Comedy Central shows. Stewart and Colbert may only do 4 nights a week, but by all accounts they put in many more hours getting each show together than any of the network guys do - and a hell of a lot fewer hours than the old guys Leno and Dave put in. I think Colbert would experience it as something of a vacation were he to move to CBS. 4. I really disagree with the view that Colbert's persona on the Report is tiresome or irritating. For Aaron to reference it as the "Bill O'Reilly" character tells me that Aaron does not really watch the show regularly and has not for a while. Yes, the conservative blow-hard is a big part of what he does, but he has always found ways to mix in other elements to that character, many of them actually endearing, and he is nothing short of genius in the way he mixes in incisive and challenging questions and observations during his interviews. Clearly if he were to move to CBS he would drop the person entirely, but not because it has become tiresome or irritating. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
