The following article, Big Leftist Shakeup is Happening, was first published on The Black Sphere.
Saturday Night Live used to be that juggernaut. Not perfect, but unassailable. The show launched the careers of some of America’s greatest comics. Not anymore.
As the ever-tenacious Lorne Michaels pulls the ripcord on dozens of cast members, the greatest sketch show in America isn’t simply evolving — it’s gasping, rearranging deck chairs, hoping no one notices that the ship just hit an iceberg.
Let’s dig into what’s really going on with SNL, why the latest purge is less “renewal” and more retreat, and how what they built — around politics, outrage, and moral superiority — is now what’s choking the show.
The Cast Purge: Who’s Out, Who’s In, and Who’s Being Blamed
Lorne Michaels has always claimed SNL must refresh itself, bring in new blood, stay with the young crowd, adjust to shifts in culture. He recently announced that several familiar faces — Ego Nwodim (7 seasons), Heidi Gardner, Michael Longfellow (3 seasons), Devon Walker, Emil Wakim, among others — are leaving or have not had their contracts renewed.
Five new cast members are coming in: Tommy Brennan, Jeremy Culhane, Ben Marshall, Kam Patterson, and Veronika Slowikowska.
The official line: change is good, the audience is young and fickle, tastes shift, and SNL must move with it. Michaels said so at the 2025 Emmys: “new people” are essential.
Indicators of the Decline: The Cracks Already Visible
Ok Lorne, I’ll play along. But not for too long. Because there are several signs SNL is no longer the cultural force it once was — or at least, not in the same way.
-
Live viewership falling: During the 2024 election cycle, SNL averaged 5.4 million viewers, down from prior years, and especially low compared to what they pulled in during the 2016 and 2020 post-election shows. That same post-election episode in 2024 got only ~4.4 million.
-
Ratings drops for certain episodes: Some hosts and musical guests can’t seem to reverse the trend. The April 2025 episode with Mikey Madison and Morgan Wallen saw SNL sink further — its numbers dropping in the live ratings and demo.
-
Viewer attitude turning cold: Younger audiences (Gen Z especially) seem to care less; viewership surveys show that among 18-30 year-olds, SNL no longer carries the emotional pull it once did. Many prefer clips, social media short sketches, viral moments, instead of tuning in for the full live show. And the truth is, average people doing funny things are much more fun to watch than SNL.
-
Platform dilution: SNL still performs decently when you count all platforms (Live+7 viewing, streaming, social media), with a reported average of 8.1 million viewers across all platforms in the 2024-25 season, up about 12% vs. the prior season. But that masks the fact that the live TV demo — what advertisers still pay for — is weak.
So yes, SNL is still big in some ways. But the pillars — live ratings, ad revenue, risk tolerance — are wobbling.
What SNL Built vs What It Now Defends
Here’s the part that really hurts SNL (but is deeply satisfying to watch): the show staked much of its reputation, cultural capital, even moral authority on being the critic, the satirist, the Leftist pulpit against “conservatives,” “right-wing threats,” “populist rage,” and so on. They painted themselves as guardians of decency, humor, progress. In doing so, they locked themselves into ideological branding.
But ideological branding is a double-edged sword. When your brand constantly attacks on the right, people who don’t agree tune out. People disillusioned with Leftist orthodoxy tune out. Even people sympathetic to SNL’s politics stop watching because it’s predictable. You expect the same targets, the same mockery, the same outrage. It becomes formulaic.
Now they’re paying the price. They can’t pretend anymore that change is only creative; it increasingly has to be financial. Contracts not renewed, high-cost cast members cut, audience declines, advertiser anxieties.
“New Blood” Isn’t Enough and They Know It
Michaels and the NBC brass keep saying “new people.” Let’s parse that: it’s not just that they want fresh faces. It’s that some of their long-standing cast members are no longer “worth” what they were in past years. If viewership declines, the impact of a cast member doing a viral sketch or being beloved on social media is less able to offset the costs of paying them, promotional opportunities, risk of alienating parts of the audience versus pleasing others.
Consider the irony of the new so-called “stars” leaving SNL for lucrative careers on their own. Yet, they leave a desolate SNL in their wake. It certainly begs the question, “Are they worth what they currently get?”
As for SNL, bringing in new people ceases to be just about creativity; it becomes a cost-management tool. If someone’s no longer drawing in eyeballs, their salary, their presence on the show becomes an expense more than a benefit. Thus the departures: some voluntarily, others apparently quietly nudged out.
The Economy of Outrage Has a Shelf Life
Outrage is great for clicks, memes, trending topics — for a while. But laughter is harder to sustain when it’s always themed around political correctness, or political fury, or ideological jabs. There’s audience fatigue. There’s “oh, here we go again” weariness when every host or sketch needs to be a commentary, every guest appearance a signal, every cold open a declaration.
Add to that the fact that live TV is expensive: paying crews, production, sets, costumes; plus guest stars, writers. And when live ratings decline, advertisers pay less. When you couple that with rising production cost, SNL becomes harder to justify on middle-of-the-night budgets that demand returns. And when the returns fall short, you get the cast reductions, the cuts, the purging.
SNL has been pushing aggressively in digital space (clips, YouTube, social media) to offset these losses. But digital virality doesn’t always translate to monetizable revenue that covers the tens of millions required for a weekly live production.
The Hypocrisy Is Thick (And Delicious)
What makes watching SNL’s purge so satisfying is the hypocrisy baked in:
-
They attacked other networks or hosts for being beholden to ratings, to sensationalism; up till now they acted like artistry and moral clarity could override financials.
-
They claimed consumers wanted “real commentary,” “hard-truth satire,” constant ideological positioning. Now that audience is shrinking, they blame change being “hard,” or “young people not watching,” or “audience has shifted.”
-
They championed longevity, legacy, cultural relevance. But when legacy cast members stop pulling, they’re the first to be dropped. Longevity doesn’t buy you much when your ratings are in decline.
Reinforcement from Colbert, Without the Spotlight
Colbert’s cancellation (or winding down) is like the warning flare in the sky: powerful, but not the explosion. It reinforces SNL’s story, but isn’t its centerpiece. Because while Colbert was a talk show, more direct in its political commentary, SNL was always comedy + satire + pop culture + politics. When Colbert stumbles, SNL tends to benefit (more material, more fodder). But when SNL itself is part of the decline, that tells you the entire system is shifting.
The Joke’s On SNL
Lorne Michaels telling us “change is good” is like a boxing coach telling the beaten fighter change is good when he’s already flat on his back. SNL didn’t get to this point overnight. They built an empire mocking others, but then leaned so heavily into liberal caricature, political virtue, cultural lambasting, that they forgot comedy is also commerce. They forgot many viewers want laughter or escape, not always to be lectured.
The purge of cast members, the ratings declines, the desperation to go “viral,” the doublespeak about “keeping fresh” — none of it is new. What’s new is how obvious the unraveling is. SNL’s myth of being beyond consequence is crumbling. And that’s deeply satisfying to those of us who’ve long argued the whole setup was unsustainable.
If SNL wants to survive, it must reckon with the parts of itself that built its decline: its arrogance, its politics, its assumption that spite would always draw viewers, always justify costs. The irony is: they had all the stage, all the power, believed they were doing culture a favor. Now they’re left scavenging relevancy. In this case for comedy, the punch line is already written.
Continue reading Big Leftist Shakeup is Happening …