Was Kimmel show profitable?

1. Summary of the results

The question of whether the Kimmel show was profitable is a complex one, with various analyses presenting different viewpoints. According to ^[1], late-night TV shows, including Kimmel's, face declining viewership and advertising revenue, suggesting that Kimmel's show may not have been profitable ^[1]. Additionally, a network TV research analyst stated that 2022 was likely the last year most traditional network late-night shows turned a profit, and projected that net losses will widen in the years ahead, implying Kimmel's show was likely not profitable ^[1]. On the other hand, ^[2] reports that Jimmy Kimmel Live! brought in close to $70 million in ad revenue for ABC year-to-date, suggesting the show was profitable, at least in terms of ad revenue ^[2]. However, ^[3] and ^[4] suggest that the show's declining ratings and high production costs may have offset any revenue generated from advertising, making it unlikely that the show was profitable ^{[3] [4]}. Key factors to consider include the show's declining viewership, advertising revenue, and high production costs.

• The show's declining viewership, with a 45% collapse in total audience and nearly a 40% collapse in the advertiser-coveted demo in only seven months, as reported by ^[4], suggests that the show was likely bleeding money ^[4].
• The high production costs of the show, combined with declining ratings, may have made it difficult for the show to turn a profit, as suggested by ^[3] and ^{[4] [3] [4]}.
• The show's revenue from advertising, reported to be close to $70 million in ad revenue for ABC year-to-date by ^[2], may not be enough to offset the show's high production costs and declining viewership ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some analyses, such as ^[2], suggest that the show was profitable in terms of ad revenue, but do not provide information on the show's production costs or other expenses ^[2]. Alternative viewpoints, such as the impact of the show's suspension on its profitability, are not fully explored in the analyses. For example, ^[5] mentions that Nexstar Media preempted airings of the program following Kimmel's comments, potentially affecting the show's revenue, but does not provide further information on the impact of this decision ^[5]. Additionally, ^[6] quotes various individuals reacting to the show's suspension, but does not discuss the potential consequences of the suspension on the show's financial situation ^[6]. Key omitted facts include the show's production costs, the impact of the show's suspension on its profitability, and the potential consequences of the suspension on the show's financial situation.

• The show's production costs, which are not fully disclosed in the analyses, may have played a significant role in determining the show's profitability ^{[3] [4]}.
• The impact of the show's suspension on its profitability, which is not fully explored in the analyses, may have significant consequences for the show's financial situation ^{[5] [6]}.
• The potential consequences of the suspension on the show's financial situation, such as the loss of advertisers or viewers, are not fully discussed in the analyses ^{[5] [6]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement asks whether the Kimmel show was profitable, but does not provide any context or information about the show's financial situation. This lack of context may lead to misinformation or bias in the interpretation of the show's profitability. For example, ^[1] and ^[3] suggest that the show was not profitable due to declining viewership and advertising revenue, but ^[2] reports that the show brought in significant ad revenue, which may be misleading if not considered in the context of the show's production costs ^{[1] [3] [2]}. The sources that benefit from this framing are those that have a vested interest in portraying the show as unprofitable, such as competitors or critics of the show. Additionally, the sources that report on the show's ad revenue, such as ^[2], may have a bias towards portraying the show as profitable, as this may be beneficial for the show's advertisers or sponsors ^[2]. Ultimately, a thorough understanding of the show's financial situation requires consideration of multiple sources and viewpoints.

• The sources that benefit from portraying the show as unprofitable, such as competitors or critics of the show, may have a vested interest in presenting