FROM NEW YORK CITY, THE GREATEST CITY IN THE WORLD: It generally seems that it's a foregone conclusion that
The Nighty-Night Show with CoCo will wind up on Fox, possibly as early as September 2010, but I think there's a different play which could be much more interesting. As soon as any contractual issues are resolved, Conan appears on
Late Show With David Letterman, where he and Dave make the following announcement:
- Effective September 2010, Late Show will no longer air a show taped earlier in the week on Fridays. Instead, there will be a new Late Show, taped on Friday, and hosted by Conan.
- Conan becomes Dave's permanent guest host when Dave takes vacation. (Both of these mirror the model that Carson used in the years before his departure.)
- Dave leaves the desk either in August 2011 or August 2012, handing over the show to Conan, who's given a long-term contract with timeslot guarantee.
- In the interim, Conan remains under contract with CBS/Viacom, and will do things like host awards shows, develop new sitcoms and other programming, and the like.
This lets Conan return to NYC (which he clearly never wanted to leave), gives a gigantic middle finger from both Dave and Conan to NBC, which they clearly relish, gives CBS a stable future in late night and allows them to youthen their image from the "Tiffany Network," and lets Letterman (at least potentially) go out on top as he deserves. Obviously, there are a lot of moving parts and other players there--Craig Ferguson was beating Conan at one point in the late night slots, and Viacom also has cable talent like Stewart and Colbert who may have their eye on the Letterman show, but if they could work it out, I think it would be a PR coup.
ETA: One thing I wasn't clear on here--what's critically important to this plan being even remotely plausible is for Letterman to be 100% on board with no bitterness whatsoever and to willingly be riding the pony off into the sunset. If there's any sense Dave's being forced out or doesn't want to go, it kills the idea.
If Letterman wants to go off the air on a schedule like that, and Jon Stewart's contract really does expire at the end of 2010, isn't he the long-term talent you want?
ReplyDeleteAs much as I like Conan personally and admire how he's handled this, I'm not convinced he's the best talent to anchor your late night schedule around.
This idea has merit.
ReplyDeleteJon Stewart has gone on record as saying that he doesn't want to move to network TV, as he'd have to change a lot of things about his act (so to speak). Obviously, that could be (1) puffery and/or (2) subject to change, but....
I'm not sure that Stewart is either--he's become increasingly a political figure, and a Major Broadcast Network may not want to do that, and the TDS format is hugely different from a traditional "Late Night" show. He's the big wild card in all of this, though, I agree.
ReplyDeleteI think Conan has a team of writers who 1. Already moved with him to LA. 2. Want to be paid to work more than one day a week. I have to think Conan would rather have a full-time hosting job for all their benefit.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Dave wants to stop hosting either. I don't know what he'd do with himself.
Why would it be better for Conan than going to Fox (where he worked as a Simpsons writer) and launching an 11:00 show right away, before the halo from this particular fight fades away? Why would he agree a second time to be second banana for years until the bigger star gets nudged, eased, or pushed into retirement? Why couldn't he just move back to NY under a Fox deal? Why would Conan, who by all accounts cares a lot about his staff and crew, agree to something that puts them all out of work? Why would CBS risk alienating its own late-night star (currently #1 in the ratings) by bullying him into a timetable for retirement, basically repeating NBC's blunder? How could CBS justify outbidding Fox for a late-night talent who would spend the first two or more years doing mop-up work without any real jobs? How does any of this give the finger to NBC in any way? This makes no sense for Conan or CBS, and only makes sense for Letterman if he's the one who brings it up.
ReplyDelete1. Letterman might want to do it since it would allow him to (likely) go out on top and send a massive and direct f-you to NBC, which is something he relishes. Obviously, this would all have to be voluntary and require Dave's cooperation. Conan likes it because he gets Letterman's (and by inheritance, Carson's) blessing to take the show and gets an established franchise to take over.
ReplyDelete2. Fox's affiliates are apparently not so thrilled with the idea of a late night show at 11, given Fox's prior history of Six Fabulous Weeks Of The Chevy Chase Show, and that they make a lot of money on the syndie sitcoms they run at 11 now.
I'm not saying it's the best option for anyone--that's a far more complicated question and depends on a lot of stuff that we don't know at this time--I just think it's an interesting "what if?"
Who says Letterman actually wants to retire?
ReplyDeleteThis kind of forced/scheduled retirement is the same thing that caused this situation in the first place...
I don't understand how Letterman getting out of Leno's way sends a "fuck you" message to NBC, or why you're equating ownership of "Late Show" to Conan's love of the 60-year "Tonight" tradition, or why you think Conan wouldn't have Letterman's blessing (if he wants it) to go to Fox, or why Letterman has Carson's proxy on that.
ReplyDeleteIf Fox affiliates are not thrilled, then that's obviously something Fox needs to deal with. It will need to convince them that they'll make more money on Conan than on syndicated shows. Comparing Conan O'Brien to Chevy Chase, though -- that's a pretty unconsidered view. Conan has 16 years of late-night experience.
I think this is an interesting (although incredibly unlikely to actually happen) idea. For one thing, it seems to me that people who prefer Letterman to Leno are more likely to prefer Conan to Leno. Which means that with all three potentially hosting shows at 11:35 Letterman and Conan might split some viewers (with Letterman probably continuing to beat Conan) and Jay will win the timeslot. But if Letterman were no longer an option, his viewers might be more likely to watch Conan than Leno. Or maybe that's just me. I used to record Ferguson and/or Conan so I could see both, now I do that with Letterman/Conan.
ReplyDeleteAs others have pointed out though, this would all hinge on Letterman. If he's already considering retiring after his contract is up in 2012 and there aren't plans for Ferguson or Stewart (or even Colbert) to take over, then Conan taking over could be kind of cool.
I would be shocked if this happened - only slightly less shocked than if NBC suddenly reverses their stance and announces they will keep Conan on the The Tonight Show at 11:35.
There would be something nice about Conan, after being screwed over by NBC and Leno, taking over for Letterman who was also screwed over by NBC and Leno.
ReplyDeleteAnd I think since Letterman was Carson's pick to take over The Tonight Show, Letterman choosing Conan to take over his show would be sort of symbolic.
But I don't think Letterman is really planning to retire anytime soon. He certainly seems like he's having a good time.
You want the name of another wildcard and a decent possibility to be the next major late night host? Ryan Seacrest is signed to Idol through 2012 ($15M/per). At the end of that deal, X-Factor may well have eclipsed Idol anyway, and he'll be 37 years old.
ReplyDeleteDid I miss something or has Jon Stewart stayed completely silent on this whole thing? I don't see a mention of it on his show at all.
ReplyDeleteThere was a bit at the end of the Daily Show last night where John Oliver was promised a "pre 11:30 timeslot" and they started a fake beginning of a show.
ReplyDeleteSeacrest allegedly wants the Larry King slot, and that's more suitable to his talents. Remember that the Emmys he co-hosted was a complete trainwreck--just because someone can host a reality show or game show doesn't make them a good host for a late night show (at least how we traditionally think of that sort of show). See also The Pat Sajak Show.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think Jon Stewart made a remark or two about Zucker (he called him the Dick Cheney of TV and then pantomined him shooting programs in the face, or something).
ReplyDelete<span style=""><span>Here's The Daily Show bit about Pleasant Evening with Johnny Oliver: </span>
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-14-2010/pleasant-evening-with-john-oliver
<span>The problem with Conan to play second banana to Dave? As others have said above, his staff. But Dave's ratings will be through the roof when he has Conan as a guest. </span></span>
I prefer Ferguson to either Conan or Stewart.
ReplyDeleteA lot of those writers, like say Brian McCann, have been with Conan since almost the beginning. Although he's obviously not willing to do everything possible to keep them employed, I think he's loyal to them.
ReplyDeleteSajak failed because he wasn't different enough from Carson, and not as good at it. Arsenio started at the same time ... and we know what happened there. I think Seacrest would do a good job of this.
ReplyDeleteI saw the ETA, but my point is not just that Letterman has to be on board. It's that going to Letterman and asking him to quit so that you can groom his replacement would be grossly insulting.
ReplyDeleteI really don't mean to sound snotty here, but I have to say I'm shocked that so many people care so much about all this. Really? Late Night and The Tonight Show? They seem barely more relevant than the 7pm network news.
ReplyDeleteisaac_spaceman:
ReplyDeleteIt sends a fuck you to NBC because NBC wanted to keep Conan and by treating Conan like garbage, they end up losing him to the same network they lost Letterman (who they also treated like garbage.) By CBS - yet again - getting the guy for a show that CBS is pretty much guaranteed to continue to air is more of a fuck you than if Conan would go to a network like Fox, which as a more rocky history when dealing with late night talk shows and no built-in audience.
Think of it this way: if you were in a relationship and broke up with the person, what would hurt more? Them dating someone new, or them dating the same person that had previously stole someone you had loved in the past, and had a long-loving relationship with?
Letterman being Carson's proxy: It is common knowledge that Letterman was Carson's choice. Carson would even write jokes for Letterman after he went into retirement and Letterman went to CBS. So while not physically, Carson passed the torch to Letterman symbolically. To this day, Letterman still works with Carson's ex-executive producer and Carson's long-time friend, who knew Carson quite well. Both this and Carson writing for Letterman and Letterman's huge farewell show when Carson past away shows there was an allegiance between them - not with Leno (who Carson hated), and not with the Tonight Show (which Carson was forced out of by Leno and NBC.)
As Letterman has Carson's torch, it is only naturally fitting to say that who Letterman wants to take over for him will get the torch passed on.
Letterman and Conan: Letterman helped out Conan (who took over Letterman's old show) by sending over audience members when needed and stuff and had no qualm's in being a guest for Conan. When Conan got the Tonight Show and guests' on Letterman's show would announce their allegiance to Letterman, Letterman would tell them to leave Conan alone and that he was a good kid. When Letterman's sex scandal came to light the ONLY late night host to not make a single joke was Conan - the closest Conan got to saying anything was when Drew Carey said something and Conan responded with "No Comment" and changed the subject. To me, that sounds like both have great respect for each other. With respect for each other to not take shots in an industry where taking shots is the thing to do, Also, both started at Late Night and both were screwed over by Leno. Even if they aren't "close", those two things have to count for something.
With regard to the original post: <span>I've been thinking that this may be a possibility, too. There were reports in the news up to Jan 9th/10th about Letterman and Ferguson being "very close" to extending a contract to 2012 (including how CBS unconditionally loves Letterman), and now.. nothing. Not a peep. No mention of whether it is official or not.</span>
<span>Letterman has said that he only plans to host for a little beyond 2010 (possibly 2012, as the - now silent - contract negotiations suggested.) Ferguson has also expressed how he has zero interest in taking over Letterman's spot, preferring the less stress and fame that comes with the later show. Ferguson has even went so far to say that he may even retire as well, when Letterman retires. Letterman owns his show, so has much more say in what happens to it and less chance of CBS being able to "force" him to retire, so it would have to be his choice (that and I doubt Conan would be a part of any forced retirement.) </span>
While I would love Letterman to stay on the air for eternity, Letterman likes Conan and Conan's humour would be palatable to a Letterman audience. On top of the parallel's of passing on the Late Show to Letterman passing on Late Night to [...]
I suppose all of that would make sense, provided that NBC were a fifteen-year-old girl instead of a corporation run by a man who has never been accused of having any feelings at all. But I guess you can ignore that if it doesn't fit the story you want to tell.
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, Johnny Carson hated Conan O'Brien. He thought he was puerile, immature, lowest-common-denominator. That's why the notion that Letterman giving his show to Conan somehow signals Carson's blessing is silly.
Okay, you don't the example. fine. But even the people running NBC are human (and competitive) and its got to sting a bit more that - yet again - CBS would swoop in to take something they wanted to keep to themselves knowing CBS has a history of succeeding in this department. For Fox to do the same, the NBC execs would feel less sting because they could justify to that it will fail(by reasoning that FOX has a history of failing in this department.)
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you noted that Carson hated Conan. I've never heard or seen anything that would have pointed to Carson having any opinion on Conan Do you have any information that points to this that you could share?
You have it exactly backward, Curiosity.
ReplyDelete1. Conan isn't jilting NBC. NBC is firing Conan O'Brien.
2. It makes no sense to talk about Fox as a network with "a history of failing" in late night. The last time it tried late night it was as a distant fourth-place startup network with an incompetent, untested host. Do you think the people at NBC haven't noticed that?
3. As NBC knows -- and this is the whole reason they did the five-year thing in 2004 -- O'Brien has a greater chance at success at Fox -- the #1 network overall and in Conan's key demographic, with the #1 network news as a lead-in, and a half-hour head start on everybody else -- than on CBS, a network that skews older. So NBC would rather see Conan at CBS, where he would be primed to fail, than at Fox. My guess is that you and Matt have outlined their dream outcome, where instead of a three-way battle with rules that favor O'Brien, it would be a two-way battle where Leno could beat O'Brien head-to-head on a nightly basis in a fair fight.
4. I've seen the Carson-O'Brien thing dozens of times. The most recent place I heard it was in the Bill Simmons-Tim Goodman podcast just last week, which is available on iTunes or from the ESPN Sports Guy podcast archives. Goodman is both a TV critic and a TV business reporter; Simmons is steeped in late-night lore, in part from the years he spent as a writer and segment producer on Jimmy Kimmel Live.
Sometimes with these messy business deals, there is a tendency for people to overpersonalize it. Pretty much everybody who reads this blog (including me) prefers Conan to Leno, both comedically and personally, by a wide margin. But try to take a deep breath and think less in terms of retribution for the grave injustice done to O'Brien (the $30MM probably takes care of that) and more in terms of what's best for him going forward. Instead of inventing bizarre scenarios where everybody does something heroically nonsensical to send an incoherent message to a person who probably isn't listening, just clear your head and try to figure out where he's likely to have the greatest ratings and creative freedom.
Simmons-Goodman 1/14/10 podcast, at about 16:40, talking about why O'Brien shouldn't care so much about the Tonight Show legacy:
ReplyDeleteSimmons: And Carson hated Conan!
Goodman: Yeah (laughs), exactly.
Simmons was talking about Leno. He mixes names up like that all the time, and it's pretty annoying. It is very well known that Carson hated Leno. Other than Simmon's mistake, I have never heard that Carson hated Conan, and I can't find it on any Google search.
ReplyDelete