Brian Battles The Lamb-asting
June 15, 2007 at 1:41 pm
On today’s “Washington Journal” on C-SPAN, Brian Lamb did something few other media personalities would ever have the nerve to do. He read aloud and showed on screen hateful comments made about him by Michael Savage followers. Then he responded calmly and factually.
Here’s what happened (and apologies for the all caps):
Brian Lamb:
ON MY DESK HERE IS A MAGAZINE CALLED THE TALKRS MAGAZINE FROM MAY 2007 AND THE PICTURE ON THE COVER IS MICHAEL SAVAGE, WHO RECEIVED A FREEDOM OF SPEECH AWARD FROM THAT ORGANIZATION A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. AND HE’S UPSET WITH US BECAUSE WE DIDN’T COVER HIS SPEECH. AND I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING HE’S PUT OUR TELEPHONE NUMBERS AND ALL AND OUR E-MAIL NUMBERS ON THE WEBSITE. WE’VE RECEIVED TONS THE LAST FEW DAYS AND CALLS WHERE HE SAYS THERE C-SPAN BLACKLISTS SAVAGE’S SPECH…. I THOUGHT I WOULD SHARE WITH YOU THIS HALF HOUR OR SO SOME OF THE E-MAILS AND WHAT SOME WHO LISTEN TO HIM HAD TO SAY TO US.
HERE’S ONE FROM COLONEL TOM HAGGERTY. HE SAYS: THE LITTLE MAN LAMB, ME, HE IS TALKING ABOUT — THE DRY, STONE FACED LITTLE MAN. SIGNED COLONEL TOM HAGGERTY.
THIS ONE FROM, LET’S SEE ARGULARIO, IT SAYS, DID YOU REALLY TURN OFF THE FREE SPEECH AWARD WHEN HE WAS TO TALK? HOW DARE YOU, ARE YOU A NAZI AND A STALINIST AND PROBABLY A HOMOSEXUAL AND I DON’T APPRECIATE YOUR AGENDA. THIS IS FROM A FELLOW NAMED JIM LEWIS. AS A TAXPAYER, I’M DEMANDING THAT YOU AIR THE FREEDOM SPEECH BY DR. SAVAGE. I PAY YOUR SALARY AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHT CENSORING PROGRAMS BASED ON YOUR POLITICAL BELIEFS. WHEN CAN I SEE THE TIME SLOTS AND PROMOS FOR AIRING OF HIS SPEECH. I WILL AWAIT YOUR RESPONSING. I WOULD HATE TO LEAD THE EFFORT OF THE REMOVAL OF YOU PEOPLE WHO HAVE OFFENDED NOT ONLY ME BUT MANY OTHER AMERICANS.
COUPLE THINGS, WE ARE NOT A TAXPAYER ORGANIZATION. WE HAVE TOLD OUR AUDIENCE THAT MANY, MANY TIMES. WE GET NO FEDERAL FUNDS, STATE FUNDS, LOCAL FUNDS. WE GET OUR MONEY FROM YOU. YOU GIVE US A NICKEL A MONTH WHEN YOU PAY YOUR BILLS AND THAT’S HOW WE OPERATE HERE. AND THE DECISION TO NOT CARRY THE SPEECH WAS MADE BY OUR PROGRAMMING DEPARTMENT, OUR VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMMING, TERRY MURPHY, AND THE REASON WAS THAT MR. SAVAGE DOES NOT APPEAR IN PERSON. HE SENT A DVD OF AN 11-MINUTE SPEECH AND WE HAVE OFFERED HIM, IN LIEU OF THAT, AN OPPORTUNITY TO COVER A SPEECH HE MIGHT MAKE, THE SAME SPEECH, IF HE WANTS TO IF HE GIVES IT BEFORE AN AUDIENCE OUT THERE IN THE BAY AREA WHERE HIS PROGRAM OPERATES.
A profile in cable courage from Brian Lamb.
A Waco Farmer said,
June 15, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Great post. Vive Brian Lamb!
I have more on my blog: http://bosqueboys.com/index.php?itemid=996
An excerpt:
The truth is, of course, Brian Lamb and C-SPAN have provided the most unrestricted forum for conservative intellectualism in the brief history of electronic media. All the while, they have provided a similar forum for liberal ideas, but with much less impact, as liberal thought already had numerous esteemed channels to disseminate messages.
I think and write about media and politics a lot. How do you categorize C-SPAN? Liberal? Alternative? Public? None of those really work. C-SPAN exists in a league unto itself. C-SPAN attempts to show all points of view without editorial comment. C-SPAN is fundamentally conservative in the ultimate Jeffersonian libertarian sense (”give the people light and they will find the way”), but the relatively unwatched mother lode of political information remains the only completely pure source of unvarnished news.
Brian Lamb is a national treasure, and his brainchild C-SPAN is the most positive development in American political culture in the last half-century.
and this:
Savage is a person of great intelligence and talent. His comedic timing borders on genius. He is truly an independent voice (wild card is probably more accurate) in the conservative movement (broadly construed), and he is a brilliant communicator.
Unfortunately, he is a sloppy thinker and a boorish bully.
If you don’t have enough sense to figure out that C-SPAN is not the enemy, you are not worthy of a single listener. In the past, I have listened to him casually for a chuckle (and sometimes even a belly laugh)–although never when my young sons are in the car with me.
An aside: Fodder for a future post. Should we judge talk radio hosts by how well they model behavior for my boys. That is, would we want our children interacting and debating like the person to whom we are listening on the radio? If the answer is no, perhaps we find another station.
Anyhow, no more Michael Savage on my dial. I am giving up this guilty pleasure.
Brian Lamb or Michael Savage?
Not a tough decision. Michael Savage is dead to me.
Bill Bowman said,
June 15, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Strange how Savage isn’t posting the offer C-SPAN made to him, isn’t it? That’s because Savage is a coward and will never appear in any forum, in which his opinions and “facts” can be challenged, where he does not control the mic. That pretty much leaves his radio studio.
AnonymousCoward said,
June 15, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Am I missing something here? Where is the courage?
Mumblix Grumph said,
June 16, 2007 @ 9:45 am
One thing I’ve noticed when I watch the call-in shows on C-SPAN is the disparity in the callers selected to go on the air. The Democrat line always seems to get erudite, articulate retired doctors and professors. The Republican line is likely to get KKK members describing the Jello they had for lunch.
Who picks the callers? Is it the same “un-biased” souls that choose the letters to the editor in the New York Times, Boston Globe and San Fransisco Chronicle?
Don Surber said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:17 am
Unbelievable. How do you criticize Brian Lamb? A more aptly named journalist there is not in America. To say there is a bias at C-Span is to turn the Right Movement back to the 1960s when it was a bunch of tennis shoe-wearing grannies in a tinfoil hat complaining about fluoridated water
drtaxsacto said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Michael Savage is an embarrassment to conservatives. CSPANN is a national treasure. Indeed, they do not cover every nutter’s speech but they do their best to cover a broad array of parts of the national discourse. How dare Savage set his listeners on Brian Lamb.
Bert said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:37 am
Quote: “COUPLE THINGS, WE ARE NOT A TAXPAYER ORGANIZATION. WE HAVE TOLD OUR AUDIENCE THAT MANY, MANY TIMES. WE GET NO FEDERAL FUNDS, STATE FUNDS, LOCAL FUNDS. WE GET OUR MONEY FROM YOU. YOU GIVE US A NICKEL A MONTH WHEN YOU PAY YOUR BILLS AND THAT’S HOW WE OPERATE HERE.”
If that nickel a month is mandatory, isn’t that a defacto tax? And doesn’t that make C-SPAN a defacto taxpayer funded organization if not a literal taxpayer funded organization? Someone tell me what I’m missing here.
M. A. George said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Michael Savage is a bully and ignoramus. Yes, I am conservative, but find that so-called conservatives like Savage are a stain and an embarrassment to conservate values and ideals. All of us, of whatever politcal stripe, must stand together against this kind of abuse of the Internet. Do not knuckle down to bullies!
John Burgess said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:51 am
Bert: The nickel comes from what you pay for cable or satellite reception. It’s part of the package. If you don’t use either service, your $0.05 is safe in your pocket.
John Pearley Huffman said,
June 16, 2007 @ 10:58 am
Bert,
C-SPAN is funded by the cable televisioin companies who pay for the programming in much the same way they pay for ESPN, USA Network, Turner Classic Movies or any other cable network — through a licensing fee. If a cable company doesn’t want to carry C-SPAN (or any other cable network) there’s no law saying it has to. But relatively speaking, C-SPAN is one of the very cheapest licenses out there for any cable network to carry (ESPN, on the other hand, costs each cable customer multiple dollars a month instead of a nickel) and has a devoted following.
The nickel a month for C-SPAN is no more “mandatory” than the dollars a month for ESPN. Of course C-SPAN’s audience is nowhere near as large as ESPN’s, and politicians (who have real power) love that there’s a cable network around dedicated primarily to them, but the C-SPAN license fee cannot be fairly described as a “tax.”
For most cable systems carrying C-SPAN is cheap and good business.
Nine said,
June 16, 2007 @ 11:08 am
I find it laughable that a guy like Savage, who decries the media, and purports to not want that attention ever since he got thrown off of MSNBC, whines like a child about C-SPAN. C-SPAN, to my mind, has been the fairest of the fair in airing all viewpoints. Memo to Mike: Quit hiding behind your microphone, and show up.
kevin black said,
June 16, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Right you are Mr. Burgess, and if you are unhappy with what’s being done with gasoline taxes, well you and your family can just walk to California for your next vacation. Or if you are unhappy with what your local school district does with your property taxes you and your family can just live in your car. Just because it’s a TAX on something you don’t consider essential, and that it is a small amount, doesn’t mean it’s not a TAX.
james wilson said,
June 16, 2007 @ 11:17 am
I listen to Savage daily for a few minutes. He is a valuable and talented free-thinker and wit who, more than any other individual, protects our free speech by projecting it’s rightful boundries. I would claim categorically that we would have less of it were he not around.
Yet I listen to him a few minutes only because he is not fully in contrul of his own thought process, as he is a true manic-depressive. This is his talent and his curse. I have heard him change his mind about important subjects on the very same day. There is some good in that, too, but it’s not easy to take and yet always comes with the territory.
For a fellow who is in the business of criticism, he has the shortest fuse possible. I don’t think this will come as news to Mr. Lamb, who knows what it means to be in control of himself. So much so that he makes it look easy and natural. I wonder if that is so. It would take work, and suffering, for my part.
Tennwriter said,
June 16, 2007 @ 11:20 am
If he went in public to do a speech for C-Span, there’s the likelihood that he’d have infiltrators from some far-left group come specifically to try to hoot him down and drown out his voice. Kind of hard to make a reasoned arguement while you’re competing with shouts of “Fascist” by some brownshirts, dodging pies thrown, and sidestepping maniacs rushing the stage.
betsybounds said,
June 16, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Mumblix Grumph,
I’ve called C-SPAN a few times. The “screener” who answers my call asks only what subject I wish to address and what location I’m calling from. That’s it. There is no attempt to filter the caller’s content, and whatever bias you detect in viewing is purely a result of self-selection.
Brian Lamb provides a valuable source of information and debate, and the nickel a month C-SPAN takes out of my monthly cable gives me a far greater bargain than those awful blowhards in Congress whose bellowings Mr. Lamb broadcasts. It’s nothing like a tax.
Kevin Baker said,
June 16, 2007 @ 12:16 pm
To Mr. Kevin Black:
It’s a TAX if the money is filtered through the GOVERNMENT. If it flows from consumer to business, it’s a PAYMENT for a SERVICE RENDERED.
If the nickel per cable/satellite bill goes through a Government Accounting Office prior to hitting the coffers of C-SPAN, then yes, it’s a tax. But if not, it isn’t. Because, you see, the cable/satellite providers aren’t able to come take that money from you at gunpoint.
See the difference?
And bravo, Mr. Lamb!
I’m about half convinced that “Michael Savage” is a leftist out to play the stereotypical right-wing hatemonger to the hilt.
michael said,
June 16, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
I might occasioanlly listen to Savage, ambivalently enjoy a bit of the current conservative snarl. He once talked about Jack Kerouac ‘who in his old age remounced liberalism. He was under the guardianship of his mother.’ A caller told of being in his uncle’s bar before opening and ‘Jack Kerouac was there throwing his knife at the dart board;’ then attempt at beginning another sentence, an attempt repeated nicely. Savage kept ranting, interrupting, repeating the point initially quoted above. The caller never got a chance to tell any more of the story. I never got a chance to hear it. Talk about a tax.
Aunt Rant said,
June 16, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
I like Savage, but he is one lazy bastard, and clueless about the Internet. His site looks like a hucksters’ mail-order ad - just released on probation. Don’t even look for an email address, everything there is done on P.T. Barnum faith and by remote.
Still, he tells a good story, and is semi-adept at fighting the windmills spinning conspiratorially in his own linguini-addled mind. That’s why I like him, he’s nuts, and even us nuts need a place to go.
But this send-in-a-DVD business is news to me. I’ve heard him railing against C-Span, but I don’t think he mentioned that his big “freedom” speech was delivered pre-recorded. But again, the man is lazy, I mean… really, really lazy. In fact, we’re lucky if he shows up at his own radio program four out of five days per week. And he often leaves early, I’m tellin’ you, the man is lazy.
Yet, I remain an independent fan, and as such challenge Brian Lamb to invite Michael Savage to appear on C-Span. This is a risk-free offer… because there isn’t a chance in hell Savage will ever show up. I can also suggest the reason; “That freedom-hating commie Brian Lamb demanded pre-conditions, and that’s “CENSORSHIP!”
roger sutton said,
June 16, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
It’s all very true that Michael Savage, here, appears to out of line, and that, on balance, C-SPAN has been a great benefit to conservatives in providing them a platform to disseminate their ideas. I do, however, have a gripe that, I believe, is valid, and that, I believe, does show a favoritism, on C-SPAN’s part, toward liberals. Several years ago, during their call in shows there used to be just one line. Well, as it turned out, there seemed to be about five conservatives calling in for every liberal. Brian Lamb and C-SPAN decided this wasn’t right. So, they created an affirmative action plan for callers; three call in lines: conservative, liberal, independent. The independent line, however, always seemed to sound more liberal than independent. The result, then, was that the call in shows just seemed to get reversed and falsely manufactured into liberal call in shows. Since then I stopped watching the call in shows. Only a liberal, I believe, could consider his conduct in this case to be a profile in courage.
Brian Maloney said,
June 16, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
I was at the convention and covered Savage’s presentation for my site, The Radio Equalizer:
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2007/06/michael-savage-freedom-of-speech-award.html
Or click the URL above.
jmcnulty said,
June 16, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
Whether or not you agree with Michael Savage is beside the point. He is not a conservative. I do not agree with him a significant portion of the time. He believes in autarky and thinks that “a man on a white horse” will solve our problems. But he is right on many things, including our traitorous elite, stuffing their pockets with Arab money and giving Americans “eyewash” on controlling the border. What is more important is that he represents millions of listeners. It is odd to me that the demanted ravings of Keith Olbermann and Rosie O’Donnell can be broadcast daily, while Savage and his audience is ignored, first by the networks, Fox News, MS-NBC, Reuters, AP, and THE NEW YORK TIMES (except when they are viewing that demographic with alarm as yahoos, “racists,” or “nativists” because, for example, they oppose the immigration bill). C-SPAN should and could have found some way to broadcast his speech. This thing about the speech being on a DVD is just an after-the-fact excuse. If Noam Chomsky and other leftists can be broadcast regularly, why not Savage? Despite the way he is mischaracterized by the major media, he is not a racist or fascist, not a “9/11 truther” or a conspiracy theorist. It is easy for C-SPAN to point our the Michael Savage supporters are wrong when they say that out tax dollars support C-SPAN, when you know that you are supported by fees paid by cable systems. So our dollars (from our cable bills) support C-SPAN, which may have “private” money, but has a “public” purpose: to reflect the public conversation, from left to right, without ideological bias. When this large and even majority demographic is systematically ignored by the major media, even Fox News, why should anyone support the First Amendment ideal of freedom-for-the-idea-we-hate? C-SPAN and Brian Lamb could have and should have done better. The thing that I have always liked about C-SPAN is that it will set up a camera and allow public access, “unfiltered” by the major media, to news events. Often what happens is quite different from what later appears in the major media. The idea that C-SPAN is playing favorites like the networks and the cable networks is deeply shocking and demoralizing to me.
Bob said,
June 17, 2007 @ 12:52 am
It was hinted on a few blogs awhile back that Savage was put in place during the Clinton admn. –to portry a typical example of a “conservative hate” radio talk show host. Savage is an actor. A lefty pretending to be conservative so as to discredit and sully the right.
jeff said,
June 17, 2007 @ 4:18 am
Can you blame Savage for not wanting to make appearances anyplace? Christ, I can’t even have a Republican bumper sticker on my car for fear sticker and car will be vandalized. When the left’s tactics are organized thuggishness against political enemies, what other options does one have but stay home?
I love his show because it is authentic. So what if he’s in a pissing match with c-span? Big f’n deal.
Dexter said,
June 17, 2007 @ 6:10 am
There’s nothing courageous about this. He got his depends in a wad and decided to use the public forum that we pay for against a group of people that he clearly doesn’t like. Just because he doesn’t read hate mail from the left doesn’t mean they don’t send it, he just makes a conscious decision not to go after them. And so what if it was a recorded speech? A while back c-span aired an event for Mumia abu Jamal, and of course he wasn’t there because he was in prison, but he did send a taped speech which c-span dutifully aired.
Zoe Brain said,
June 17, 2007 @ 6:36 am
Having been labelled a Freak by Mr Savage, and told that I should be grateful for having the privilege of being left alive to beg for my sustenance, I can’t be objective about the man. Fascist and Racist? I’ve seen no evidence of that. Obnoxious Sociopath? Oh yes.
I’m about to go to Israel, to actually do something against our common enemy. It seems to me that Mt Savage might be happier joining them. He’s a bully, a misogynist, and highly obnoxious, he’d fit in well with Hamas or Hezb’Allah.
K P Winterer said,
June 17, 2007 @ 7:49 am
I used to agree that WJ was a place to hear all points of view but not since they becaome overly politically correct with their biased phone lines and seminal callers on all lines. I’ve gone from a daily viewer to a never can stand it! I quit when I could see no difference between the twat they air and that on all the other liberal networks, NPR, PBS etc. I’d much rather turn TV off than be subject to so much propaganda. Liberals on all lines and they do NOTHING to try to monitor it. It’s gone from wonderful (geographic lines) bot most boring TV on the tube!
william said,
June 17, 2007 @ 10:38 am
The reason Michael Savage changed his name is because “The Weiner Nation” wouldn’t have much credibility.
Judith said,
June 17, 2007 @ 7:47 pm
One of the things I enjoy about c-span is the breakup of lines for dems, repubs, and independents. Then the dems all call in on the pubbies line and lamb lets them natter on and on. I get quite a laugh out of his comedy routine. Then, when he “gets tough” with a polite conservative, he really struts his macho stuff. During the last 8 months he has been able to show his great intellect (I can’t help it, I just have to guffaw at that one) and the next joke is his evenhandedness with dems and pubbies. I used to watch c-span and lamb, and take them seriously, but lamb has changed and turned his show into a comedy routine that is only slightly amusing.
Joshua said,
June 18, 2007 @ 8:33 am
C-SPAN is definitely liberal in its operations. It chooses to hide it by some of the procedures described above (# of lines available, number of callers who they take), but one of the most important ways is to allow the Conservative caller who may be on the line, to stay only a short time if s/he is calm, cool, collected and very reasonable. If the person is a ranting looney (which you do get a few on all of their lines), you are allowed to show that side, then summarily clilcked off by the leftist hosts.
One of the things they do, often, is if a person calls in on the Indpendent line and you sound conservative, you are reprimanded for not calling in on the Conservative line, then dumped. It did happen to me. And if you’re a liberal on the Independent line, you are allowed to stay much longer, and exchange reasoned well-thought out question/answer wit the host.
Brian Lamb is just another form of the mainstream media, with most of its biases intact.
Zeb Quinn said,
June 18, 2007 @ 9:10 am
“Bert: The nickel comes from what you pay for cable or satellite reception. It’s part of the package. If you don’t use either service, your $0.05 is safe in your pocket.”
So you admit it is a confiscated tax taken by blunt force. Thank you.
Oh, and the $0.05 amount isn’t really relevant. Multiply it by, oh, hrmmm, let’s say 60 million, and it’s a tidy little sum (it’d be $3 million for those of you educated by public school teachers) to be getting gratis, month in and month out, year in and year out.
katie said,
June 18, 2007 @ 9:21 am
“So you admit it is a confiscated tax taken by blunt force”
Um, NO, it’s part of the fee you pay for cable, you don’t want to support C-Span, cancel your cable. Since when is having cable TV a necessity in life?
rrsafety said,
June 18, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
As a first tier cable subscriber in Mass., I HAVE to pay over $1.00 a month to New England Sports Network, the channel that carries the Red Sox. I have no choice as it has been added to the basic cable line up.
It is NOT a tax. It is part of my cable bill…. Is Savage and his crew really trying to say that the $1.00 I spend on cable that goes to NESN is a tax??? What weird fellows…
David said,
July 31, 2007 @ 12:26 pm
I am a regular listener of Michael Savage and understand a few things about him:
1. He understands the big picture of what is best for America better than any other talk host I have listened to. Savage is great at predicting the unintended consequences of any action our government takes.
2. He refuses to lock-step with any other media figure or political figure. This is good in that you know he is speaking his mind and bad in that he burns so many bridges he gets no acknowledgement outside of his show.
3. Savage can tell a story like no other, whether it is funny, sad, or just anecdotal, he grips you. This is the strength of his show and the one reason everyone should give him a try.
4. He is not racist, sexist, or a true homophobe, although he does have a dislike for gay life like many men do. He basically wants people to keep their sex lives to themselves and not bother everyone with it.
5. He is a nationalist and does not want rampant illegal or legal immigration from countries that bring disease and uneducated leaches over. This is out of respect for what America has achieved. The third-world immigrants generally do not add value to our society for two to three generations.
6. He is terrible about spewing false data to support his points (ie the tax-funded CSPAN). Generally, his points are valid on their own merits and he makes them appear to be invalid because he backs them up with false facts.
7. He is conspiracy theory minded. Conspiracy theories are prevalent in left-wing talk, but I don’t hear much of this within conservative talk. This is where Savage can somewhat be fairly labeled a kook.
8. Savages infamous yelling tirades don’t bother me much, but I can see why they would turn off most listeners.
All this being said, Lamb should have just played the DVD and be done with it. I feel Lamb is making excuses and is empowered because the media will never stick up for Savage. If this happened to Michael Moore, it would have been all over CNN and MSNBC and perhaps even FoxNews. I also must condemn the Savage listeners that are spewing hate towards Lamb. They make fair-minded conservatives such as myself look like fools. Grow up, people.