Maybe Stephen Miller can go ahead and count tourists in his daily “immigrant invasion” numbers—after all, we’re now treating foreign visitors like undocumented border-crossers.
This is deterrence by humiliation. Come for the Statue of Liberty, stay for the cavity search and “nonrefundable” bureaucracy. And let’s not forget the part where we kneecap our own economy by gutting tourism promotion just before hosting the World Cup. Be sure to ask for your "patriot discount"
At this point, the only people actually invited into the country are arms dealers, fossil fuel lobbyists, and whichever oligarch is previewing a Trump property listing.
Welcome to Fortress America. Mind the trip wire—and don’t forget to tip your interrogator
Trump is the enemy of Trumponomics—the GOP overturn of the US government and social programs. The more he whines, the more he tries to obscure, the deeper he digs. His Brutus will be Rupert; the lawsuit against the WSJ, the knife. The GOP must in their star chamber, ensconced in leather chairs watch hopefully as Trump dethrones himself.
Pity CBS, they have jumped the shark. They eviscerated 60 Minutes with their stupid settlement, and in a moment of pique cut the cord with Colbert. Left now is a mediocrity of reality TV and ho hum news. Walter Cronkite, we miss you more each day.
An interesting week of cheap shakedowns from tariffs to visa fees. In the midst, not mentioned by Mary, is Paula White working feverishly to exorcise the demons.
"Paramount’s own earnings reports show its television division, the division Colbert literally carried, was the only part of the company actually making money."
This is misleading. TV may be CBS's cash cow, but The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, isn't. An article in the NYT says revenue is down $50 million over the last 7 years. And it's not just The Late Show that's in trouble. "Last year, the network late-night shows drew an estimated $220 million in advertising revenue, 50 percent less than seven years earlier..." The article discusses the Paramount merger with Skydance, and whether political calculations played a role in the decision. So it was balanced, unlike this newsletter. Please don't mislead your readers. Telling the whole story gives you credibility. Otherwise you're just a liberal version of Fox News.
Since we are not privy to the conversations concerning the merger, we are left to suppositions which in turn lead to the bribery money that was paid but dares not mention any cuts to network shows that were deemed unsatisfactory by "dear leader"! Sometimes the whole story must be one-sided to combat the lack of truth on the other side.
I don't want one sided stories. We should include all the suppositions. The way to combat the lack of truth on the other side, is to tell the whole truth. The article would have been just as effective, maybe even more so.
Your point taken. But let us not sidestep Colbert’s indignation re: Paramounts $16M settlement. Let us not sidestep the Screenwriters outrage. Nor ignore his critiques of Trump as unnoticed. It is not a stretch to infer Paramount seeks favor from the WH, even at the expense of integrity. I will offer, and to your point, any commentary—including Mary’s—should be corroborated with other information. My experience so far with Mary is her opinions are supported by other sources. For example, her comment on the $450 visa fee is coming to light in other media. Pretty disgusting, and it is a shakedown.
Mary is a gifted writer and everything she wrote is technically true, but this sentence is is still misleading: "Paramount’s own earnings reports show its television division, the division Colbert literally carried, was the only part of the company actually making money." Any reasonable person reading it would conclude that The Late Show is making money for CBS. It's not according to the NYT.
A couple of other things indicate that this may not be political. If Paramount wants to curry favor with the regime, why let the show run another 10 months? Why not cancel it immediately? If it's really a money maker, why not just fire Colbert and replace him? I agree that Paramount’s $16 million hush-money payout is tribute paying mafia-style, but let's not sidestep other pertinent information. Let's have a full discussion of the issue, not just cherry-pick the facts.
“…there is little in Paramount Global Inc.’s recent earnings report to indicate that the finances of its television division had eroded so precipitously that jettisoning one of its trademark programs would be a necessary solution.
“Executives even highlighted the show’s performance as the No. 1 late-night broadcast show.
“Overall, advertising revenue for the television division declined 21% in the first quarter compared with the same period the year before, but the company said that was entirely due to the fact that CBS had broadcast the Super Bowl in 2024 but not in 2025. Excluding that loss, advertising revenue was flat year over year.”
Changes in viewer habits, with migrations away from broadcast TV, are affecting all TV revenues. It’s not credible that financial considerations made Colbert’s show - touted in Paramount’s own earnings report - the logical next target for cancellation.
Maybe Stephen Miller can go ahead and count tourists in his daily “immigrant invasion” numbers—after all, we’re now treating foreign visitors like undocumented border-crossers.
This is deterrence by humiliation. Come for the Statue of Liberty, stay for the cavity search and “nonrefundable” bureaucracy. And let’s not forget the part where we kneecap our own economy by gutting tourism promotion just before hosting the World Cup. Be sure to ask for your "patriot discount"
At this point, the only people actually invited into the country are arms dealers, fossil fuel lobbyists, and whichever oligarch is previewing a Trump property listing.
Welcome to Fortress America. Mind the trip wire—and don’t forget to tip your interrogator
"...we’ve still got enough energy to mock the absurdity of it all." Love it! A very energizing, dead honest piece.
Trump is the enemy of Trumponomics—the GOP overturn of the US government and social programs. The more he whines, the more he tries to obscure, the deeper he digs. His Brutus will be Rupert; the lawsuit against the WSJ, the knife. The GOP must in their star chamber, ensconced in leather chairs watch hopefully as Trump dethrones himself.
Pity CBS, they have jumped the shark. They eviscerated 60 Minutes with their stupid settlement, and in a moment of pique cut the cord with Colbert. Left now is a mediocrity of reality TV and ho hum news. Walter Cronkite, we miss you more each day.
An interesting week of cheap shakedowns from tariffs to visa fees. In the midst, not mentioned by Mary, is Paula White working feverishly to exorcise the demons.
"Paramount’s own earnings reports show its television division, the division Colbert literally carried, was the only part of the company actually making money."
This is misleading. TV may be CBS's cash cow, but The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, isn't. An article in the NYT says revenue is down $50 million over the last 7 years. And it's not just The Late Show that's in trouble. "Last year, the network late-night shows drew an estimated $220 million in advertising revenue, 50 percent less than seven years earlier..." The article discusses the Paramount merger with Skydance, and whether political calculations played a role in the decision. So it was balanced, unlike this newsletter. Please don't mislead your readers. Telling the whole story gives you credibility. Otherwise you're just a liberal version of Fox News.
Since we are not privy to the conversations concerning the merger, we are left to suppositions which in turn lead to the bribery money that was paid but dares not mention any cuts to network shows that were deemed unsatisfactory by "dear leader"! Sometimes the whole story must be one-sided to combat the lack of truth on the other side.
I don't want one sided stories. We should include all the suppositions. The way to combat the lack of truth on the other side, is to tell the whole truth. The article would have been just as effective, maybe even more so.
https://substack.com/@billyfinnegan/note/c-136968982?r=1wbr1r
https://substack.com/@billyfinnegan/note/c-136968982?r=1wbr1r
Your point taken. But let us not sidestep Colbert’s indignation re: Paramounts $16M settlement. Let us not sidestep the Screenwriters outrage. Nor ignore his critiques of Trump as unnoticed. It is not a stretch to infer Paramount seeks favor from the WH, even at the expense of integrity. I will offer, and to your point, any commentary—including Mary’s—should be corroborated with other information. My experience so far with Mary is her opinions are supported by other sources. For example, her comment on the $450 visa fee is coming to light in other media. Pretty disgusting, and it is a shakedown.
Mary is a gifted writer and everything she wrote is technically true, but this sentence is is still misleading: "Paramount’s own earnings reports show its television division, the division Colbert literally carried, was the only part of the company actually making money." Any reasonable person reading it would conclude that The Late Show is making money for CBS. It's not according to the NYT.
A couple of other things indicate that this may not be political. If Paramount wants to curry favor with the regime, why let the show run another 10 months? Why not cancel it immediately? If it's really a money maker, why not just fire Colbert and replace him? I agree that Paramount’s $16 million hush-money payout is tribute paying mafia-style, but let's not sidestep other pertinent information. Let's have a full discussion of the issue, not just cherry-pick the facts.
From Lukas Alpert of MarketWatch:
“…there is little in Paramount Global Inc.’s recent earnings report to indicate that the finances of its television division had eroded so precipitously that jettisoning one of its trademark programs would be a necessary solution.
“Executives even highlighted the show’s performance as the No. 1 late-night broadcast show.
“Overall, advertising revenue for the television division declined 21% in the first quarter compared with the same period the year before, but the company said that was entirely due to the fact that CBS had broadcast the Super Bowl in 2024 but not in 2025. Excluding that loss, advertising revenue was flat year over year.”
Changes in viewer habits, with migrations away from broadcast TV, are affecting all TV revenues. It’s not credible that financial considerations made Colbert’s show - touted in Paramount’s own earnings report - the logical next target for cancellation.
https://substack.com/@billyfinnegan/note/c-136968982?r=1wbr1r
Yep.
..and a fine job done , thanks.