The Latenighter

Few journalists know the rhythms of late-night television better than Bill Carter. As a longtime media reporter for The New York Times and former analyst for CNN, Carter has chronicled the genre for decades. Now editor-at-large at LateNighter, Carter is still closely watching the space that, while no longer the cultural juggernaut it once was, remains a vital lens on American politics and media.

In a conversation with Status, Carter reflected on the state of late night in the streaming age, the legacy of hosts like Jon Stewart and Conan O’Brien, and why Donald Trump remains both a gift—and threat—to the format. He also weighed in on the future of “SNL,” press freedom, and delivered some blunt advice to Shari Redstone.

Below is our Q&A, lightly edited for style.

You’ve chronicled the golden age of late-night TV extensively. How would you describe the state of late night today, especially as audiences fragment across streaming and social platforms?

Late Night can't expect to escape the general retreat from linear television. All the traditional late-night franchises are steadily diminishing as over-the-air attractions. You see the signs of shrinkage all over:

The bottom line is the bottom line, but a franchise that's 70 years old puts down really deep roots. Will there be fewer shows? Likely. Will there be none? Unlikely. A LOT of people still enjoy the nightly comedy/ celebrity chat. It's now buried some where in the country's DNA.

You’re now editor-at-large at LateNighter, a publication dedicated entirely to late night television. What drew you to this new venture, and how is the outlet navigating the tidal wave of changes washing over online publishers?

I was invited to join. I liked the idea. I like writing. The site of course deals with the overarching story of where the genre is going, but there are plenty of extensions of late night, beyond the current network entries, that generate good stories—like the better-late-than-never celebration this year of a breakthrough, hugely influential talent, Conan O'Brien.

And "SNL" is still a going-strong late-night franchise, maybe more culturally relevant than ever. It's even expanding to the U.K. Nobody's talking about that show going away.

With cable viewership declining and network loyalties fading, how are late night hosts or their networks maintaining relevance in this fractured media environment?

By being publicly attacked by Donald Trump?

It's a bit of a double-edged sword that Trump dominates so many monologues, because some folks, even some of those truly worried for the future of American democracy, just want the cacophony he stirs to stop, even as the hosts feel compelled to speak comedy to power. And mostly do it brilliantly.

The news has always been the foundation of much of late-night comedy. Trump creates more daily news than the next most talked about topic by a factor approaching infinity. And, for the most part, the hosts are bringing passion to their comic messages. Interestingly, though by conventional measurement the hosts' monologues would seem to be much less seen than in former days, more media than ever pay attention to them. The nightly jokes appear everywhere the next day, even in The NYT. So relevance would not seem to be one of the most pressing questions attached to late night's future.

Late night hosts from Jimmy Kimmel to Jon Stewart are offering jokes and jabs at Donald Trump's presidency amid intense political pressure on their corporate owners. How do you think the hosts are handling it?

As I said previously, I think the hosts are mostly speaking from their own passion, and their own concern. It is one of the traditions of our free-press history that satirizing and criticizing the president is a sacred right. Like many other things, that is being seriously challenged now by an administration that sees comedy commentary on its policies and impact on ordinary people as worthy of attack, especially in bogus legal action. How firmly the corporations which fund these programs stand behind the First Amendment principles the late-night hosts are validating every night is the real question, not the hosts' willingness to take whatever heat can be directed at them. They didn't all start out as stand-ups. But they are all being forced to be stand-up Americans now.

Trump’s presidency has marked a turning point for media companies and journalists, deploying an authoritarian-style playbook used in places like Hungary and Russia to muzzle the press. How do you think media outlets are navigating this moment?

The "outlets" have been shaky, and that's bad because it only encourages more bullying. It's not hyperbole to say we are at an inflection point with regard to what people and institutions can do and say without fear of attempted reprisal. If the institutions wilt and kowtow, the people won't have much chance.

CBS owner Paramount reportedly offered Trump $15 million to settle his lawsuit over the “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris, sparking bribery concerns. What would your advice be for Shari Redstone who is desperately trying to sell her father's media empire to Skydance?

It's easy to give advice from your couch, but at some point doing the right thing should matter, even to billionaires. Bribing your way into a deal is an especially loathsome thing to have on your resume, or your headstone. But beyond the potential bribery charge, if the deal sets up a scorched earth elimination of vital journalism—”60 Minutes"— and (in essence) political cartooning—Colbert—it will be perhaps the most shameful moment in the history of American mass media.

Kenan Thompson teased “a lot of change” is coming to “SNL” after its 50th season, what do you think the future holds for the show? Does it still have cultural urgency—or is it time for “SNL” to reinvent itself for a new generation?

Over its amazing history "SNL" has done nothing BUT reinvent itself for new generations. That's the only way it could have maintained its outsized place in American entertainment and culture. The pattern repeats itself: a young generation believes it discovered the show and they seize the casts of their youth as their own. Then a new generation enters, some people think they can't be as good and the cries of "the show isn't funny anymore" resound across the land.

But in an environment where nothing but sports provides true shared cultural moments, "SNL" still does. That's why it is written about on social media perhaps more than any other current entertainment experience. I would say it has reached such iconic status that if NBC decided it couldn't afford the show anymore, streamers would be at the door bidding to bring the franchise to their paying customers.

Of course there will be change at "SNL." There ALWAYS is.

[Data from BoxOfficeMojo]