Seth Meyers explains why his late-night show has 'weaned ourselves off politicians'
Liberal NBC "Late Night" host Seth Meyers offered a theory on Wednesday about why the era of politicians being interviewed on talk shows is coming to an end.
The digital landscape has rapidly changed in the era of social media, and both politicians and media personalities have taken notice. Some have referred to the 2024 election as the "podcast election," arguing that podcaster Joe Rogan and others like him turned the tide for President Donald Trump by having him on their shows.
Meyers famously roasted Trump for his political ambitions at a White House correspondents' dinner in 2011, a few short years before he went on to win the presidency. Now in the second Trump term, 14 years later, Meyers spoke to Variety magazine about how the media landscape has changed.
After the interviewer noted the trend of politicians appearing on comedians' podcasts, Meyers agreed they have turned out to be a far better platform for them than television interviews ever were.
"We've kind of weaned ourselves off politicians as guests to begin with, because we have more fun talking about politics than talking to politicians," Meyers said of his show which hosted then-President Joe Biden in February 2024 and then-Vice President Kamala Harris in October 2022.
"I actually think there's more value in a politician going on a podcast and not feeling the rush to just hit talking points, which sometimes they might have on a show like mine," he added. "I think it's good for the politicians and good for the voters for them to go someplace where there's more time and less of a race to hit whatever their PR team has come up with."
While Meyers argued that podcasts don't necessarily infringe on the type of comedy he does, he noted that they do have one key advantage.
"If there's anything that podcasts have affected, it's that you realize that when you're talking to somebody for eight minutes, it's very unlikely you're going to get deeper than a podcast host does with them over the course of an hour and a half," he said. He contrasted this with television interviews, where "You want to move quickly and be funny, because it has to be a different thing than a long-form podcast interview."
The interviewer noted a prediction from veteran talk show host Jimmy Kimmel that there might not be late-night hosts in 10 years, and Meyers said it may indeed turn out to be true.
"Unless some major sea change happens, I don't think there's going to be a whole new wave of network hosts, in the way there always has been," Meyers said. "Nobody understands this business and this format better than Jimmy Kimmel, so when he talks about it, I tend to share his opinion."
He added further that podcasts continue to be as big as ever, because people are simply going to adapt to the best technological format that carries their message.
"Interesting voices are always going to use the technologies they have at hand to find an audience. So, if you're a great lover of the institution of late-night talk shows, there's probably some sadness in your future," he said. "But if you love funny people telling funny jokes and talking to people in interesting ways, that's always going to be available."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
18 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump calls for special prosecutor to investigate 2020 election, reviving longstanding grievance
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Friday called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election won by Democrat Joe Biden, repeating his baseless claim that the contest was marred by widespread fraud. 'Biden was grossly incompetent, and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!' Trump said in a social media post in which he also sought to favorably contrast his immigration enforcement approach with that of the former president. 'The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed. This cannot be allowed to happen again in the United States of America! Let the work begin!'
Newsweek
20 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Is Donald Trump Considering Tactical Nukes Against Iran? What We Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Trump administration has not taken anything "off the table," including the use of tactical nuclear weapons, if it decides to take military action against the underground Iranian nuclear facility at Fordow, Fox News reported, citing a White House official. It followed a report in The Guardian that the president "is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow." The Pentagon declined comment to Newsweek, instead referring to a statement by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who said on June 16 that he had directed "the deployment of additional capabilities" to the Middle East. "Protecting U.S. forces is our top priority and these developments are intended to enhance our defensive posture in the region," Hegseth said. President Donald Trump speaks to the press in the Oval Office of the White House on June 18, 2025 (left) and a retired U.S. B61 thermonuclear gravity bomb, a type of tactical nuclear weapon still... President Donald Trump speaks to the press in the Oval Office of the White House on June 18, 2025 (left) and a retired U.S. B61 thermonuclear gravity bomb, a type of tactical nuclear weapon still in service, shown in 2021. More BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Jon G. Fuller/GETTY/AP Why It Matters No nuclear weapon has been deployed in war since the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945, and any use of such weapons against an Iranian facility would be extremely controversial in the U.S. and worldwide. On Thursday, the White House said Trump would decide "within the next two weeks" whether the U.S. will join Israeli military action that began on June 13 against Iranian nuclear sites. Israel claims that Iran is working toward building a nuclear weapon, while Tehran insists its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. What To Know One of Iran's most important nuclear sites is the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility, which is believed to be buried about 80 meters deep into the side of a mountain. Experts have suggested Israel doesn't have any conventional bombs capable of destroying the site, though on Thursday Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that "we have the capability" to "hit all of their nuclear facilities." Unlike Israel, the U.S. possesses 30,000-pound GBU-57s "bunker buster" bombs that are specifically designed to reach targets buried deep beneath the surface and can be deployed by B-2 Spirit heavy bombers. On Wednesday, citing people "familiar with the deliberations," The Guardian reported that Trump "does not appear to be fully convinced" that GBU-57s bombs can reach the Fordow facility. It said the effectiveness of GBU-57s against the Fordow facility was "a topic of deep contention" within the Pentagon, citing two defense officials, with some reportedly believing that only a tactical nuclear weapon could destroy the site. It added that Trump was "not considering" the option and said it hadn't been presented by Hegseth or Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Caine. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller than strategic nuclear weapons and are designed to be deployed for limited strikes or on the battlefield, rather than against whole cities. The U.S. maintains a large arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, though none have ever been used in combat. Fox News senior White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich said she was told by a White House official that The Guardian report was "false." According to Heinrich, the official "has no doubt about the efficacy of bunker busters in eliminating the site at Fordow" adding they also denied "that any options [including tactical nukes] have been taken off the table." Israel has been attacking Iranian military and nuclear sites since June 13. On Thursday, the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists said that at least 639 people had been killed in the attacks, though the figures have not been independently verified. In response, Iran has fired ballistic missiles at Israel, killing 24 civilians, according to Israeli authorities. On Friday the British, French and German foreign ministers were slated to meet their Iranian counterpart in Geneva, Switzerland, in a bid to resolve the conflict. U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy said that "a window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution." What People Are Saying Fox News senior White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich: "There have been a lot of headlines this afternoon including one from The Guardian that claims that the U.S. military has doubts about whether the 'bunker-buster' bombs could get the job done, further claiming only a tactical nuke maybe could finish it and it further stated that the president is not considering a tactical nuke, that it was not one of the options presented to him. "I was just told by a top official here that none of that report is true, that none of the options are off the table and the U.S. military is very confident 'bunker busters' could get the job done at Fordow." Fox News host Jesse Watters, on Thursday: "The Guardian reported Trump was getting cold feet worried about the effectiveness of 'bunker busters' and not willing to use tactical nukes. But the White House tells Fox that's not true, everything's on the table, even tactical nukes." Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, on Friday, referring to possible U.S. tactical nuke deployment, according to Russia's TASS news agency: "This would be a catastrophic there are so many speculations that, in fact, it's impossible to comment on them." What Happens Next It is not yet known whether the U.S. will launch strikes against Iran and, if so, what weaponry it will use. Deploying a tactical nuclear bomb, the first use of a nuclear weapon since World War II, would be a controversial move.
Fox News
21 minutes ago
- Fox News
Foreign policy experts rip Tim Walz's claim that China has 'moral authority' in Middle East conflict
Former vice presidential nominee Gov. Tim Walz, D-Minn., is facing criticism after claiming China could be the voice of "moral authority" in the Israel-Iran conflict. During a "What's Next: Conversations on the Path Forward" event hosted by the Center for American Progress (CAP) last week, Walz responded to a question from former Biden White House advisor, Neera Tanden, about the "escalatory" nature of the strikes between the two countries. "Now, who is the voice in the world that can negotiate some type of agreement in this? Who holds the moral authority? Who holds the ability to do that? Because we are not seen as a neutral actor, and we maybe never were," Walz said of the United States' role in deescalating tensions in the Middle East. As the United States weighs striking Iran and war in the Middle East rages on, Danielle Pletka, a distinguished senior fellow in Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI), told Fox News Digital that Walz's comments are "ignorance on display." According to Walz, the United States once attempted "to be somewhat of the arbitrator" in the Middle East, but Americans must face the reality that the "neutral actor" with the "moral authority" to lead negotiations in the Middle East "might be the Chinese." Walz didn't elaborate on why China would be that world leader. "It's so staggering to me that Tim Walz was within a heartbeat of the presidency," Pletka said, before adding, "We don't need a neutral player here," and urging him to "stick to local politics." Andy Keiser, senior fellow at the conservative National Security Institute and former senior advisor on the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News Digital that someone should "remind Governor Walz that China is far from a moral authority on much of anything," and said China is committing "cultural genocide." "The Chinese government has reportedly arbitrarily detained more than a million Muslims in reeducation camps since 2017," according to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). "Most of the people who have been detained are Uyghur, a predominantly Turkic-speaking ethnic group primarily in China's northwestern region of Xinjiang." In addition to the detentions, "Uyghurs in the region have been subjected to intense surveillance, forced labor, and involuntary sterilizations, among other rights abuses," according to the CFR. According to Human Rights Watch, President Xi Jinping has "detained human rights defenders, tightened control over civil society, media, and the internet, and deployed invasive mass surveillance technology" in Xinjiang and Tibet, which the human rights watchdog likened to "crimes against humanity." "I would strongly beg to differ that China has a moral authority on much in the world," Keiser said, and added, "I would not see them as a neutral arbiter here." "Obviously, we are not going to be a neutral broker between a terrorist and a democratic state," Pletka said. "That's just not how it works. You threatened to kill the President of the United States, but we're then meant to think of you in a balanced way with the state of Israel, our most important ally in the Middle East?" Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News' Bret Baier on Monday that President Donald Trump remains a target of the Iranians. "They want to kill him. He's enemy No. 1." "I don't know how anybody could have said what [Walz] said about the role that China plays. The idea that there is some neutral interlocutor in this world, that anybody is an 'honest burger' is nothing other than grad school silliness," Pletka said. Pletka added that "Of course, China can't play that role. China is an authoritarian communist [state] that is supporting Russia in its war on Ukraine, that is threatening Taiwan, that has broken its word over Hong Kong." And she said, "This is not a playground in which you need somebody who can talk to both Bobby and Billy about why it is you don't smack your friends." "The idea that it should be reduced to something where you have an arbiter who sees the arguments on both sides, no. This is a situation where there's a right and a wrong, and there's a winner and a loser. That's how it should be, by the way, because Iran has fashioned itself as an enemy, not just to the state of Israel, but to the United States." Nikki Haley – former U.S. Ambassador to Israel and a 2024 GOP presidential candidate, who sounded off on China's threat to the United States on the campaign trail – was quick to criticize Walz's viral comments last week. "This is absolute insanity. Democrats think that we need the Chinese to be the negotiators between Iran's nuclear production and Israel…God bless Tim Walz. Totally tone deaf," Haley posted on X.
