Stephen Colbert’s “Woke Comedy” Cost CBS $50M Annually — Meanwhile, Sydney Sweeney Boosts American Eagle by $200M Just by Wearing Jeans
In a media landscape where outrage cycles spin faster than ever, two names have dominated recent headlines for wildly different reasons: Stephen Colbert and Sydney Sweeney. Colbert, the long-reigning king of late-night satire, finds himself out of a job as CBS axes his show, allegedly losing the network up to $50 million a year with his “woke” brand of comedy. Meanwhile, Sydney Sweeney, star of *Euphoria*, managed to send American Eagle’s stock soaring by $200 million—simply by slipping into a pair of jeans for a sultry new ad campaign.
But it’s the fallout from Sweeney’s denim-clad appearance, not Colbert’s cancellation, that has Americans at each other’s throats. The ad’s playful wordplay—comparing Sweeney’s “genes” to her “jeans”—has ignited a firestorm of accusations, ranging from tone-deaf marketing to outright white supremacist dog-whistling. The controversy has even drawn in the White House, with both sides of the political divide seizing on the moment as a symbol of America’s broader cultural battles.
The Ad That Launched a Thousand Tweets
American Eagle’s campaign, featuring Sweeney in classic blue jeans, was meant to be a lighthearted nod to her all-American image. Instead, it drew instant backlash for allegedly promoting “pro-eugenics propaganda” and “white supremacy,” with critics pointing to the casting of a blonde, blue-eyed actress and the “genes/jeans” pun as evidence of coded messaging.
Social media erupted. Some saw the ad as a harmless play on words; others viewed it as the latest example of insidious messaging in mainstream advertising. Hashtags trended. Think pieces proliferated. Commentators on both the left and right weighed in, with the controversy quickly spilling over into the political arena.
Colbert Weighs In: Satire Meets Outrage
As the backlash grew, Stephen Colbert addressed the controversy on his soon-to-be-canceled show. True to form, the comedian skewered the online uproar:
“I don’t want to alarm you, but the internet is mad about something,” Colbert deadpanned. “This time, it’s a commercial from American Eagle Outfitters starring Sydney Sweeney. Just like Sydney Sweeney, I also carry the gene for sexy commercial scratchy voice. I get it from my uncle on my mother’s side … Now, some people look at this and they’re seeing something sinister, saying that the genes-jeans denim wordplay in an ad featuring a white blond woman means American Eagle could be promoting eugenics, white supremacy, and Nazi propaganda. That might be a bit of an overreaction — although Hitler did briefly model for Mein Kampfort Fit Jeans. How do you say ‘badonk’ in German?”
Colbert’s segment poked fun at the tendency toward outrage, but also acknowledged the absurdity of the situation. Still, not everyone appreciated the joke. Some fans pushed back, arguing that even seemingly innocent ads can carry harmful subtexts, especially in a charged political climate.
The Political Echo Chamber
The controversy quickly became a political football. The White House, through spokesman Steven Cheung, called the backlash “cancel culture run amok,” blaming “warped, moronic, and dense liberal thinking” for fueling America’s divisions. On the other side, progressive commentators insisted that representation matters, and that the ad’s imagery was a deliberate choice in a country still grappling with its racial history.
Meanwhile, Sweeney herself has remained silent, letting the debate rage on without comment.
A Familiar Script: Outrage, Backlash, and the Business of Culture
The American Eagle ad is hardly the first time a fashion campaign has sparked national debate. Comparisons have been drawn to the infamous 1980s Calvin Klein ad featuring a then-15-year-old Brooke Shields, which also ignited a moral panic before being dismissed as overblown.
What’s different now is the speed and scale of the response. In a hyper-connected world, every ad, every joke, every celebrity misstep becomes a referendum on the state of the culture. Companies can gain or lose hundreds of millions in market value overnight, and public figures like Colbert and Sweeney find themselves at the center of storms they never intended to create.
Conclusion: What Are We Really Arguing About?
At its core, the American Eagle controversy—and Colbert’s response to it—reflects a deeper anxiety about who gets to define American identity, and how culture is policed in the digital age. Is the outrage justified, or is it a symptom of a society addicted to finding offense? Is Colbert’s satire out of touch, or a necessary check on the excesses of online discourse?
For now, the questions linger. Colbert may be leaving late night, but his parting shot at the culture wars reminds us that, in 2025, even a pair of jeans can become a battleground.
In the end, maybe the real story isn’t about denim, genes, or even who gets the last laugh. It’s about what happens when every ad, every joke, and every headline becomes a mirror for our most deeply held fears and divisions—and how, sometimes, the only response left is to laugh at the absurdity of it all.
