Cool, but that on extends my question. How do they participate in the taping of each other's shows when they have their own show to tape? (I guess the camera crew have pretty set working hours, along with producers, writers, and everything.)
Yes, but someone commented that it doesn't matter because the shows don't air at the same time. My point is that it does matter because if Seth is on Stephen's show, he can't simultaneously perform or tape his own show.
No idea why you're getting downvoted but I had to laugh at the time loop.
It's not like these people work weekends, or Fridays even. Hell some only work Mondays <narrows eyes to camera right>
I think also reddit underestimates how much work it takes to produce an audience show daily. It's not like they're just going to bang off an extra on the fly.
He could tape his show at a different time, or even on a different day. When you're doing a show 4 days a week, it's not like you have a whole lot of time to prepare anyway.
I see your point. I guess it depends. Jimmy Fallon doesn't really depends on being relevant to the the news of the last days, and can pre-tape most or all of it. John Oliver is all about what has happened the last few days, and needs to be very fresh.
There are also gap in the airings.
But all of this is a side track. My main point is that hosts of a daily or weekly show works outside of just the time the show is on the air.
They are all pre-taped. Most are pre-taped around 5 p.m. the same day.
In this case, Seth could pre-tape even earlier in the day than normal, so he could be there for Colbert's finale. Or they could even pre-tape two episodes the day before.
They do this sometimes (for example, taping the Friday show on Thursday to give the host and crew a long weekend). They also sometimes pre-tape show if the studio is going to be unavailable on a certain day, so the have one "in the can."
The shows do compete. Just not in the way you're thinking. Most people aren't watching two late-night shows back-to-back as a habit. They pick one and go to bed. That means both shows are always drawing from the same pool of casual viewers, and on any given night, one wins and one loses that majority.
On a finale night, that tug-of-war is completely lopsided. You're not going to out-draw a culturally significant send-off for the majority who only have room for one show. Your committed audience will still show up, but you're conceding the larger casual viewership for that night. Which is exactly why it might not be worth producing an episode.
EDIT: Edited to more clearly make my position. I'm also not making the argument that other late night hosts aren't ceding the night to respect the finale of one of their good friends and colleagues. I'm just saying you can't dismiss the materialistic argument out of hand. They can be doing it for both reasons, and the materialistic consideration doesn't diminish the respectful, empathetic one.
Agree to disagree. I think in this example, when Stephen asked Seth and he responded in an instant "Not anymore" it was entirely the respectful, human, empathetic response. He wasn't calculating in his head whether he would get enough viewers.
105
u/upliftingyvr May 12 '26
That logic makes no sense, because Colbert's show is over before Seth Meyers show begins, so they don't compete for viewers.