The lyin' lays into the lamb: savage vs CSPAN, round one

Boyo, it's darn hard to be exemplary anymore!

And which non-partisan untouchable's exemplarity is being trashed this time?

C-SPAN founder, CEO, and host Brian Lamb is the trashee; the trasher is excrementous talk show host, Michael Savage.(KTTH m-f, 6-9p).

Why, you ask, would these two ever be mentioned in the same breath? After all, one's the consummate, buttoned down, East Coast, public affairs responsibilitarian, the other a raving, West Coast, talk radio host who makes politically incorrect small talk for the entertainment of the knuckle-dragging, lower-than-common-denominator wing of the conservative movement.

It got quite nasty- at least in CSPAN terms.

Seems that after Talkers magazine gave Savage their Freedom of Speech award recently, he, refused to pick it up at the New York awards gathering; choosing instead sending his acceptance on a DVD.

C-SPAN cameras covered the conference, but not the recorded Savage speech.

Savage, raged over the airwaves and started selling the DVD on his website with headlines screaming: "See the Speech that C-Span Banned!" and "See the Speech Too Hot for Left-Wing C-Span!"

He posted Lamb, and C-SPAN staffer's phone numbers and e-mail addresses, letting slip the dogs of the Savage Nation.

(The Savage site is a florid collection of tabloid screamers like LESBIANS OUT OF CONTROL, MAKE PREGNANT WOMAN AND CHILD WATCH THEM HAVE SEX IN PUBLIC BATHROOM or DOG BITES MAN: HAMAS MEMBER WORKING FOR THE BBC!; cool links to beheadings videos; ads for his political and herbalistic health books, gold coins, and Savage Nation coffee mugs and baseball caps).

The earnest Lamb ,whose dry interview style is acclimated to the genteel climes of CSPAN'S Booknotes, or the congenial Washington Journal decided he wasn't going to take it in silence.

Lamb is ensconced in the cult of non-personality that is CSPAN, and can seem strait-laced, and nondescript. But frequent viewers know him to be, as one observer has noted, "sardonic and sarcastic behind his steely-eyed gaze."

So stiff-lipped, Lamb read the worst of the listeners' letters on the June 15 episode of Washington Journal.

According to The Politico's Howard Mortman: Here's some of what Lamb read on air:

"Here's one from Col. Tom Haggerty. He says, 'The little man Lamb' -- me, he is talking about -- 'the dry, stone-faced little man.' Signed, Col. 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 responding. I would hate to lead the effort of the removal of you people who have offended not only me but many other Americans.'"

And this one: "I am outraged at your cowardice. It is even an act of cowardice or something much more sinister. Perhaps you are a neo-Marxist, neo-Leninist. I do not expect a response from one that is, at best, a weakling and, at worst, an enemy of our republic."

"We are not a taxpayer organization," said Lamb. "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."

There was a great outcry in the blogosphere- and even embarrassed right-wingers came to Lamb's defense. 

Conservative blogger Don Surber wrote: "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."

Lamb told Mortman: "On almost every count, they're wrong. That's why I did this. ... To have every single one of them say 'you must be defunded' is totally devoid of fact," Lamb said. "I just want our audience to know what people are saying in their e-mails and their vitriol, and everyone who reads the blogs knows the vitriol."

We're all feeling proud of Brian Lamb, and generally good about the happy ending for measured reason. But Savage, as always, got what he wants: media attention, Savage Nation gear sales, and another addendum to his wild-eyed, self-propelled legend.   

Comments

[pugetSound]

C-Span's 'Button Down' Brain Lamb is a class act akin to Bob Newhart. You have to listen closely at times but it is well worth the effort. As stated above, CSpan is not left or right wing. It's about presenting information to the public with hosts that strive to play it down the middle. In the early 90's it was my first introduction into people like Christopher Hitchens (if you haven't read/heard it, get 'God is Not Great' a wonderful read but even better on audiobook). Cspan radio is also good stuff. In DC its even on FM.
Michael Savage is a concept/act that is beyond me. I've tried numerous times to listen to him and find it tedious. As is the constant hawking of his book the political zoo.

[My man Dori]

It's a free market and Dr. Savage can use it/exploit it as he feels.

The Savage Nation boasts significantly higher listeners than C-Span could ever dream of.

[Bill]

Of course its a free market....but it still amazes me that right wingers constantly refer to ratings. Yes, its the only way to keep score.

But just because McDonald's sells 10 billion burgers, it doesn't mean its food.

[My man Dori]

What do you mean burgers aren't food?

The free market will ALWAYS dictate what people want.

It's a plain and simple truth that is very painful for some people to accept.

[Bill]

I should have explained. I meant that just because McDonald's has served 10 billion fat/sodium ladened burgers, that it doesn't mean their product qualifies as good, nutritious food.

I was trying to draw a correlation between popularity and quality. One doesn't necessarily equate to the other.

[joanie]

Ah, Bill. Trying to reason with a rightwinger. You are truly quaint.

I bet if one plotted the right vs. the left programming on C-Span it would come out about even. I love CSpan and find myself turning away from about half of their programming . . . although, I haven't seen many authors on book panels (at book festivals) who support the war. A few . . .but not many.

Called C-Spin by some, it clearly demonstrates the extreme position taken by the right and their unreasonable tactics of name-calling and hate-mongering. And Savage is laughing at his listeners all the way to the bank while humming never underestimate the stupidity of your listenters.

[joanie]

One more thing: there was a time when I thought Brian was conservative. I think not overall; but, occasionally, a conservative bent has leaked out in some of his comments.

BTW, Michael, what do you think of Bloomberg's possible run as an independent? Things, they are a changin' . . .

[My man Dori]

If I support the free market then I'm a right winger?

That doesn't make sense.

Don't you ask to be paid what you deserve?

Innocent children understand the free market better than somee of you adults.

You guys have strange philosophies.

[sparky]

so...you actually EAT that stuff at McDonalds??
ew

[Andrew]

C-Span wouldn't run it because he didn't say it infront of people?! That's fucking retarded.

"Although we're giving you an AWARD, your acceptance speach has zero value to anybody BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T SAY IT INFRONT OF PEOPLE!"

And this whole blog entry is has nothing to do with C-Span's editorial curiousities, it's all about how can Weiner have the nerve to speak ill of the all mighty C-Span gods, who are obviously beyond reproach. Unfuckingbelievable.

[My man Dori]

My point exactly.

Nobody forces you to eat at McDonalds.

Nobody forces you to listen to Dori, Savage, etc.

It's the perfrct system. People get free choice.

Unfortuantely we as a society are frightened by freedom.

[Andrew]

(close bold)

My man Dori says The Savage Nation boasts significantly higher listeners than C-Span could ever dream of.

Please help me out. I, for the life of me, can't figure out what this has to do with anything.

[sparky]

Apparently Bush IS afraid of our freedoms or he wouldnt be working so hard to get rid of them. So I guess you have a point.

[coiler]

"The Savage Nation boasts significantly higher listeners than C-Span could ever dream of."

Where? any figures to cite?

[dorothy]

a strange eerie silence follows the request for 'facts'

[blathering michael]

What so times-er changin' about a billionaire being able to buy his way into the elction, Joanie? there's nothing about a Bloomberg candidacy that's remarkable except he has unlimited funds, that will get him on the ballot in every state. If it weren't for the dough, he'd be another Kucinich tilting windmills. (PS, don't think you'd much like his centrist politics, either). He can be no more than a spoiler to elect a minority president like Clinton in '92, or Bush in 2000- if he runs...

[pugetSound]

Bloomberg will be a spoiler but different polls have him spoiling in favor of the Dem and the Rep party. We will have to wait until we get the Dem and Rep nominees to get a better idea of how it will split.
You could easily have a NY Dem (Hillary) a NY Repub (Rudy) and a NY indie with Bloomberg. That would sure make the VP choice of each very interesting.

Savage sure has his legion of fans. I just don't get it.

[david]

Michael Savage, whose real name is Miahcel Weiner, is a self-hating Jew. That's all.

[joanie]

Michael, I know you're right about that. Not a change really . . . except that I think people are tired of being held hostage to the status quo where the parties manage their politics to such a degree it leaves many, many of us out.

If party bosses aren't going to allow candidates to wrestle during primary season, if they are fixing the game each and every time, then they will, in time, destroy themselves. I won't be the executioner; they will have done that to themselves.

So, unlike you, I am willing to take the risk. Not saying I'm voting for Bloomberg; am saying that he is a smart man who will certainly make a better showing than Perot did and could possible win in the end.

But, he does reflect a huge antipathy growing in this country toward the established parties. Sparky told of her experience as a Dean delegate; I posted Hong Tran's description of her treatment by Pelz. You can keep your head in the sand if you wish. But something needs to change. Some of us seem to be more risk-tolerant than others.

Having lived with this maniac Bush for the last seven years, I guess I can endure anybody if that is what people choose. We may be our own worst enemies. And it isn't me I'm talking about. I have courage enough to look at candidates and demand something more.

[sparky]

I dont want to vote for a third candidate, i want the stupid Dem leadership in this state to go with the results from the primary. Im surprised some person with a physical handicap and cant get to their caucus hasn't filed a complaint...

[joanie]

Neither of us wants to vote third party necessarily . . . but are you tethered to a party if you don't like what it is doing or the candidate?

[sparky]

I might feel differently in another time, but lately, JUST about any Dem is better than what the Republicans have to offer...that said, if we have a primary that counts, then a third party candidate at least has a chance, albeit an outside chance, to get elected, whereas in a caucus, forget it. I think the system needs changing first.

[joanie]

Yes, I agree about the system. Also, I think all candidates should be welcomed and heard whether competing within a party or representing an alternative party. I'm hoping that challenges like Bloombergs will help bring that about.

[Steve J.]

It's a free market and Dr. Savage can use it/exploit it as he feels.

No he can't. The airwaves belong to the public, not Richard Mellon Scaife.

[Steve J.]

Savage sure has his legion of fans. I just don't get it.

Here's a clue:

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people

- H.L. Mencken

[Steve J.]

The free market will ALWAYS dictate what people want.

The free market reflects choices. It does not dictate.

[donniedanger]

savage is pretty good.....a bit too self inflated, but then, who isn't?