Colbert’s Support Rally Fizzles in NYC as Fans Wonder: Is CBS’s Decision to Cancel The Late Show Part of a Bigger Political Play?”

In what can only be described as a failed attempt at showing public support, a rally in New York City for Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show ended in disappointment Sunday afternoon. Organizers had billed the event as a nationwide call for “integrity,” drawing attention to the impending cancellation of Colbert’s show, but fewer than two dozen people showed up to demonstrate outside the CBS Broadcast Center on Manhattan’s West Side. Even the NYPD officers who had been on standby called it a day early, as the crowd dispersed within just a few minutes.

This so-called “We’re With Colbert” rally was organized by a man who identified only as Matt, though he goes by the nickname “Slim.” With an air of defiance, Slim told those present that the event was meant to serve as a protest against what he claimed was a direct assault on free speech and the First Amendment. “Our country is not perfect, never has been,” he declared to the small group. “But we’ve always had the First Amendment, and now Mango Mussolini is trying to take that from us,” he added, using a derogatory nickname for President Donald Trump.

But what could have been a passionate political gathering ended in a whimper, leaving many to question whether Colbert’s abrupt cancellation was tied to more than just poor ratings. CBS had already announced that the network would pull the plug on The Late Show in May 2026, citing declining viewership and waning profits as the primary reasons. However, some critics believe there’s more going on behind the scenes—namely, that Colbert’s vocal criticism of Trump played a key role in the network’s decision.

The timing of the cancellation has only fueled these suspicions. Just months before CBS’s decision to end The Late Show, its parent company, Paramount Global, finalized an $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media. The deal, which required federal approval, went through shortly after Colbert was informed that his show would be cut. Some have suggested that CBS might have been pressured into this decision by outside forces, including political and financial pressures linked to their relationship with the Trump administration.

As part of the growing controversy, Colbert’s political leanings have also been called into question. As one of the loudest critics of Trump in the late-night landscape, Colbert has faced backlash from both sides of the political spectrum. While many on the left praised him for consistently roasting the former president, others on the right saw his monologues as one-sided and unfair. His show was widely viewed as a progressive safe haven, often featuring predominantly left-leaning guests while rarely inviting conservatives onto the stage.

In fact, according to right-leaning media watchdog MRC NewsBusters, Colbert’s guests have been overwhelmingly liberal. Since 2022, he has hosted 176 liberal guests, with only one Republican making an appearance on his show. Critics argue that this ideological imbalance might have alienated a significant portion of the audience, contributing to the decline in viewership.

The rally’s poor turnout and the questions surrounding Colbert’s cancellation have sparked an even larger debate about the role of late-night television in today’s polarized media landscape. Late-night TV, once a space for political satire, has now become a battlefield for culture wars, and Colbert’s situation raises important questions about the intersection of media, politics, and corporate influence.

While CBS and its executives maintain that the decision was purely business-driven, the involvement of Skydance Media, an entertainment company with significant political and corporate interests, raises eyebrows. With the future of late-night television in flux, many wonder if Colbert’s cancellation is just the beginning of a broader shift in the landscape of American media.

Supporters of Colbert, including some rally attendees, argue that the decision to end the show is a clear attack on free speech. “This is a First Amendment attack,” one protester claimed, “We can’t stand for that.” Her words reflect the growing belief among some fans that Colbert’s ability to speak truth to power may have led to a targeted campaign to silence him, particularly given his outspoken criticisms of the Trump administration.

On the other hand, detractors of Colbert have pointed to the significant drop in ratings as a justification for the network’s decision. While The Late Show was once a ratings powerhouse, Colbert’s show has seen its viewership dwindle in recent years. With the rise of streaming platforms, YouTube influencers, and other forms of digital content, traditional late-night television has struggled to maintain its dominance. For CBS, whose primary focus is always on profitability, the decision to cut ties with Colbert makes financial sense, at least on paper.

The rally’s failure to gain traction might also reflect the growing divide between fans of traditional media and those who have turned to more alternative sources for entertainment. The 2020s have been a decade of shifting media habits, with younger generations increasingly turning away from network television and embracing online content. The former late-night kingpins—Colbert, Jimmy Fallon, and Jimmy Kimmel—are now facing competition from digital creators who speak directly to niche audiences without the constraints of traditional TV networks.

As Colbert’s last season nears, the tension surrounding the cancellation will likely continue to simmer. Was it really just about ratings and money, or does the timing of the merger and the political undertones suggest something more? The We’re With Colbert rally, despite its small turnout, symbolizes the larger, ongoing debate over the role of media in politics, and whether freedom of expression can still thrive in an era dominated by corporate interests.

The fight for the soul of late-night television is far from over, and with Colbert’s cancellation, it’s clear that the industry is about to undergo a massive shift. The question remains: will this new chapter be defined by the voices of the past or the ones ready to challenge the status quo? Only time will tell. But for now, the media landscape is watching—and waiting for the next bombshell.