Bargatze defends Emmys 2025 charity bit, saying it came from heart
Comedian says the onstage donation gag was meant to be celebratory, not coercive, and he could have explained it better.
Comedian Nate Bargatze defended his Emmys 2025 hosting and a charity-driven bit on a Nateland episode released Wednesday, saying he wasn’t trying to overshadow winners and that the gag came from a real place of heart. 'A lot of reviews did not like that, but it came from a real place of heart,' Bargatze, 46, said on the episode.
Onstage, Bargatze described the gag as a recurring bit in which he would donate $100,000 to the Boys & Girls Club, offset by a $1,000 deduction for any acceptance speech longer than 45 seconds. 'I know. It’s tough. It’s brutal. What are you gonna do, though? I can’t change it. This is a game I made up, and these are the rules,' he said. 'In my head I pictured it as actors could then go long but be a hero. So it was like a win-win.' The night became about love and giving to these kids, and he added that there was no ill will and that he was trying to have a very giving night. 'I could’ve explained it more,' he said.
Critics slammed the bit for pressuring winners to shorten speeches. Jennifer Coolidge, a presenter that night but not a nominee, was allowed to speak for about two minutes, while first-time winners Tramell Tillman and Owen Cooper were reportedly threatened with playoff music if their remarks ran long. Bargatze told Nateland he wasn’t trying to overshadow any of their speeches. 'I wasn’t trying to overshadow any of their speeches,' he said. 'What I thought would happen in the room... I thought it was going to be like Netflix donating or Apple. I did not expect Owen Cooper to give money.'
The ceremony, held in Los Angeles on Sept. 14, 2025, became the focal point of Bargatze’s post-show comments as critics argued over the tactic. He framed the moment as a philanthropic opportunity aimed at celebrating both the winners and the Boys & Girls Club, not as a coercive device. He said the concept was intended to keep the room fun and uplifting, a balance between humor and generosity. Bargatze acknowledged he could have communicated the idea more clearly in the moment and indicated that future hosts should plan a more explicit explanation to avoid misinterpretation.
The exchange underscores the delicate line between humor and philanthropy in live television, where a host’s bit can shape audience takeaways long after the credits roll. Bargatze has not indicated whether he plans to revise the gag for future awards, but his comments suggest an emphasis on intent and transparency when charity intersects with performance.
