On Feb. 19, Vanity Fair published an article investigating how digital creators may be dethroning the “talk show format.” Author Joy Press questions: “Who’s sitting around at 11:35 watching TV anymore — if you even have a TV?” Some of our favorite interview clips from the past few years have come from online channels like Royal Court, Hot Ones, Last Meals, Therapuss, So True, Subway Takes — the list goes on. These YouTube interviews are far from underground, as is the concept. Magazines like Variety, Vanity Fair, W Magazine, and Wired have been posting celebrity interviews in full-length videos and clips for years; Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert and other late-night hosts have jumped on the Internet wagon as well. So, what makes these new interview formats “new”?
For one, the web series has given the interview a visible face. If you watch a Wired interview, it’s solely the celebrities in frame, holding up cards full of questions or top Google searches about the celeb and their work. Vanity Fair’s “Lie Detector Tests” and Variety’s “Actors on Actors,” in which celebrities question one another, have been clipped and reposted on TikTok compilations repeatedly. I would argue that when there’s a duality to the interview process, they do better. Yes, it’s funny to see an actor’s reaction to the bizarre things fans have wondered about them, but when it’s a costar asking those embarrassing questions, the internet goes wild.
Interpersonal chemistry is a formula for viral content. Take Brittany Broski’s Royal Court interview with Cole Sprouse, for example. Their witty banter, recalls to niche references in his work, and the openness on both sides is what makes this format stand out in a sea of question-and-answer. At 6.4 million views, it’s her most popular interview, and arguably what gave Broski her platform, which led to her most recent interview with Harry Styles. Charli XCX, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Josh Gad, Brie Larson, and Josh Hutcherson have paved the way for her to be able to have one of her favorite music artists on her own show. The magic of the internet is its permanence; these interviews can and will be watched repeatedly, on the date of their release and long after.
Before streaming services, this was a factor that late-night hosts did not have. Of course as I mentioned, it’s now common for them to upload segments of their show to YouTube or social media, but that requires a transfer of media. Television is often catered to the largest demographic, hoping to keep views up during air time and hold their audiences through the dreaded commercial breaks. These live shows also factor in the importance of relevance, if the celebrity has a new song or album, a new movie, a new story, or tidbit of information they shared in another interview. Now with streaming services, these interviews can (hopefully) be replayed based on which service you pay for, where the show aired, which company currently owns the platform, the list goes on. With late-night, the art of the interview has been privatized. You have to subscribe to hear your favorite star have a scripted, yet “authentic” chat with the host.
The common critique of internet-based interviewers is just that: they are seen as “internet personalities.” Fallon got his start on SNL, Colbert on The Daily Show, so on and so forth. Their fame has a TV documented history. These internet stars are documented too, just not in the same way. Many of them have been posting for years, waiting for their unique ideas to finally catch hold of specific audiences. The attraction to these kinds of interviewers and their content seems somewhat parasocial when it’s put into words: fans want to see themselves in celebrity interviews. These “internet personalities” started as people posting on social media, as many of us do frequently, but with a more concentrated goal. Anyone, hypothetically, could be internet famous, therefore watching someone like Jake Shane or Quenlin Blackwell who started on TikTok or Vine respectively, gives viewers the mental satisfaction of “they’re just like me!” when seeing an interviewer geek out or fan-girl over a star.
Where is the line between emotional freedom and professionalism, then? An interviewer working for Variety, for example, would likely be looked down upon if they were to openly make pointed jokes at a celeb’s personal life. Late-night hosts have a little more freedom, but they must conform to the image that their platform expects. It then becomes a question, not of allowances within different forms and presentations of media, but of branding. Influencers and media stars are their own brands, their individual personalities are typically their largest component of success — that, or making celebrities do non-professional activities.
Series like Last Meals sit celebrities down to have a meaningful meal and conversation, while Hot Ones puts them under pressure. Amelia Dimoldenberg takes celebs out on dates and asks all of the hard-hitting first date questions, though some of them might end the relationship there, some go on as though it had been a real date (like asking Damson Idris how many kids they should have together, or telling Andrew Garfield that they should just be friends). These interviews all revolve around food, of course, but that added element of conversation seems to help stars find more enjoyment in an interview. Not that most won’t appreciate the chance to chat with Kimmel, but it can break up the repetitive structure of press tour interviews.
For now, late-night interviews aren’t going anywhere; they’re being posted online along with magazine interviews and numerous web series. What’s definite, though, is that those web series will be sticking around, with more variations and unique ideas that will top our feeds in the near future, they’ve undeniably proven that individuality will always be trendy.