"'Fallon? That guy fawns more than a herd of deer. And I heard Seth Meyers and Trevor Noah ran off to be obscure together.'"
Now that's funny.
I remember when Marc Maron built his podcast into a monolith and was rewarded with a sitcom and nobody watched. The paradigm had changed and he didn't know it. Maron actually got more visibility with a role on the Netflix show "GLOW." Why is it that the oldsters and the Democrats are stuck in the past?
I was talking about Pee-wee Herman today. Remember he had that incident in the porn theatre and it killed his career? Wouldn't today. I'm not saying he wouldn't be hurt by it, at least not initially, but he wouldn't be disqualified. Yes, he might not host a children's show, but there would be plenty of opportunities. But Pee-wee felt shamed, and disappeared.
Did Sarah Palin feel shamed when her unmarried teenage daughter Bristol showed up at the Republican convention pregnant? Palin didn't seem to blink an eye. Previously, this would have been a no-no, a no-go, but Palin just doubled-down. And when the election was lost, not only did she go for the bucks, but Bristol did too. You see they knew more about the modern media landscape than those who'd been in it for decades. You strike now, when you're hot, you sell out, you take all the cash, because odds are you won't be around in a few years, no one will care.
Kind of like "Jersey Shore." The people on the initial "Survivor" thought they were really famous. By time "Jersey Shore" came around reality TV was a lark, hijinks for some fun, then you retreated to obscurity in Poughkeepsie.
Actually, that's what kept MTV alive, at least for decades. It was ahead of the game. It was MTV which opened its awards show with Pee-wee after his faux pas. MTV canceled not only shows, but veejays. Sure, old people pooh-poohed, cried, went to the media, but it turned out the channel was right, it knew who its audience was, young people, it didn't want to age and become irrelevant. Of course MTV ultimately did, because it did not have an internet strategy. Ditto with "Rolling Stone." Just because you triumphed in the past doesn't mean you'll win in the future. You might even get a ride of multiple decades, but eventually everything changes, everything, and if you want to survive, you have to change too.
So David Letterman created today's late night paradigm. And it continues to be repeated, forty years later.
First, why does the host need to sit behind a desk? That predated Dave, but come on, really? And the suits? The goal today is not to wear a suit, that's the ethos of the techies, and these pretenders are all dressed up?
Actually, the desk started earlier, but the content...
Dave put on a comedy show. Whereas the talk shows that preceded it certainly had some comedy, but they were also informational. Today every guest is pre-screened for a funny story, it appears rehearsed. If you want reality, if you want to be touched, don't go to late night television, and don't go to popular music either, they no longer specialize in that.
I don't want to talk about the politics of Gutfeld, that's no excuse.
But I will say he's been paying his dues for decades. And adjusting his act all the while. Putting in those hours, the legendary 10,000. Takes a long time to be good, for everybody. Oh, you can get lucky out of the box but most of those people don't sustain.
So Gutfeld's late night show is not like the networks' late night shows. I know, because I hear it on SiriusXM. Sure, I get paid by them, but I ain't never listening to terrestrial radio, my goal is to never listen to or watch a commercial, NEVER! My time is too valuable. And of course there are ads on "Gutfeld!," but I then flip the channel. But my point here is I'm listening to a TV show. I almost never watch MSNBC or CNN, but I listen to them. Maybe that's the paradigm for these late night hosts. Sure, they're creating content for YouTube, but maybe it's something closer to podcasts, long instead of short. It stuns me what a fan base Scott Galloway is building. He's hip, he's a rock star. He's not on TV all the time, then again, his core audience never watches TV, and they think Galloway's appearance on the flat screen is a victory, like seeing a rock act on TV in the sixties.
Galloway's humorous bro act gets thin, but ultimately what Scott is selling is intelligence and analysis, very important in an era where even your next door neighbor plays the market. I'm much more interested in the market than what's on late night talk shows. The market is more than entertainment. And we all know money changes everything.
But no one on late night has sold credibility, they're all pranksters.
And "Gutfeld!" may be one of the biggest.
You see "Gutfeld" realizes first and foremost it's entertainment, that's what brings viewers in. Put the viewer first, not the advertiser, the advertiser comes second, ratings are everything. You don't know what you'll get with "Gutfeld!," and there's this air of irreverence. There's no serious irreverence on late night TV, at least not since Jon Stewart's "Daily Show." And irreverence was a key element of the left wing sixties. Can you say "Abbie Hoffman"?
But the left is so worried about offending someone that it lives inside a box. Left wing creators are hamstrung, they're going to offend somebody, they shy away. Best to go by your own inner tuning fork and suffer the consequences. Controversy is good. And the truth is oftentimes it's a vocal minority that has a problem with you.
Sure, there are certain things that are unsayable...racist, antisemitic. But that leaves a lot of territory.
Hell, if you're on TikTok, and you should be, you know that one of the biggest stars is George Carlin, he pops up all the time. Alan King doesn't. Robert Klein doesn't. The other comedians are dated and fading in the rearview mirror. But Carlin was taking an independent stance and calling them as he was seeing them. I mean Carlin's routine about not voting...vote if it makes you feel good, but the owners of this country won't relinquish any power...and in order to believe in the American dream you've got to be asleep... See, I remember what George said, and I don't remember much of what was said yesterday, anywhere.
You first and foremost must have an identity. And know you're playing to a core, if you're trying to appeal to everybody you've immediately lost the plot.
So everything we knew about late night network talk shows... An aged audience that doesn't move the needle. Remember when a late night musical appearance meant something? Maybe you don't, that's how long it's been!
And why is it that Fox can reinvent itself but the rest of the competition cannot? Kinda like Netflix dropping all the episodes at once. Don't talk to me about money and ratings, this is what the AUDIENCE wants. And the key is to keep them coming, subscribing, for years to come. Now that I have to pay for Apple TV+ I don't. Because I can't watch shows week to week. People tell me about shows, I check and they're not done, and I don't go. And then who cares. But I'd pay if I could watch complete shows all at once. Who is standing up for me?
Very few. At their peril.
Gutfeld has tapped into his audience. He knows who they are and what they want. Fox nurtured him and now he's got the ten o'clock slot.
Oh, don't tell me about Tucker Carlson, whose second Twitter video said the Ukrainians blew up the dam themselves. Meanwhile, the real news, forget the commentators, came out:
"Why the Evidence Suggests Russia Blew Up the Kakhovka Dam - A dam in Ukraine was designed to withstand almost any attack imaginable — from the outside. The evidence suggests Russia blew it up from within.": tinyurl.com/3b7z6k4e
Don't roll your eyes, don't tell me about the "New York Times," bottom line is the "Times" doesn't care about you. But Fox News cares about the "Times." The "Times" does the research nobody else does. Better than some bloviating commentator.
The "Times" knows who its audience is. Then again, when it plays to its audience even I wince. Like that story over the weekend about the writer switching from a smartphone to a flip-phone. There are people living in tents too, but the majority don't. Stop this retro-tech stuff, makes you look out of touch.
But the bottom line is if you want to be popular today, you have to have an edge, an identity, and you have to stick to it. And you have to stop apologizing. And you have to take risks.
Kelly Clarkson put out a new album. The difference is it's about...her divorce? I'd be more interested in a covers album reworking songs a la Joe Cocker. Or a hip-hop album. I mean WHO CARES?
A music industry sans clothes. Doing the same thing it has done for years. Play it up the middle. If you had an outside sound in the sixties and early seventies they were bending over backwards to sign you to a deal, because you never knew, and the audience was interested in new and different stuff. I'll let you in on something, the audience is still interested in new and different stuff, but the major labels won't sign you unless you prove your success first in an approved vertical.
And you wonder why music gets no respect.
SNL used to be hip, offended people, was an inside joke. But that was the seventies, and that's almost fifty years ago and they're still using the same damn format, I mean really?
And with "Gutfeld!" we learn once again that the thing people care about most, pay attention to, is the news. Stop telling us about brain-dead Americans, it's now the American pastime, following the news, most especially politics. I don't want to see skits, I want to see something that wrestles with the real issues.
Happens to me all the time. I'm hanging with a famous musician, a powerful promoter, and what do they want to talk about? POLITICS!
But we can't say that, all we can say is the music is as good as it ever was.
Hogwash.
If you read this screed and talk about the viewpoints Gutfeld is espousing, you've missed the point. Gutfeld is playing to the believers, throwing it right down the middle, hard. Where are the Democrats throwing it right down the middle, with truth wrapped up in laughs?
Few and far between.
And last time I checked, the Republicans' are eating the Democrats' lunch. Disproportionate to their population. The minority is ruling because the Republicans have stirred up their constituents. The Democrats? Oh, they got rid of abortion, there's nothing we can do, you've got to vote, we're counting on you to vote. The same vote that George Carlin said was worthless?
Count most people out.
They don't bother to vote because they don't think it makes a difference. And this is not their fault, but that of the parties and candidates. But the candidates are so phony no one can believe in them. Now that Hillary Clinton has given up elective office she can speak some truth, she does, whereas when she was running she said her favorite book was the Bible. Did ANYBODY believe that?
No.
And you've got the problem right there.
People have to believe you believe. And are not beholden to the man. That you're on their side and willing to take risks.
That's the modern paradigm.
But the set in their ways oldsters refuse to own it, employ it. They'd rather just depend on what an out of touch, old wave mainstream media says. Only so many stories can fit in a newspaper, even a digital one. To be informed you have to canvass many sites, and most people do.
Come on, can we live in the twenty first century?
It appears not.
Except for a select few.
And they're winning.
--
Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, Unsubscribe
To change your email address this link
No comments:
Post a Comment