Posted on 06/21/2007 8:20:20 AM PDT by Roberts
Michael Savage vs. Brian Lamb.
Sounds like the unlikeliest of media showdowns, right?
Well, it's happening right now, it's bloody, and Lamb is winning.
First, some quick background. Talkers magazine recently awarded Savage -- a radio host whose talk show I enjoy -- a Freedom of Speech award. Savage did not pick up the award in person at a gathering in New York. Instead, he sent a speech on DVD. C-Span cameras were at the conference and covered parts of it but not the taped Savage speech.
How did Savage react? By selling a DVD of the speech on his website with these messages: "See the Speech that C-Span Banned!" and "See the Speech Too Hot for Left-Wing C-Span!" He even posted a list of C-Span phone numbers and e-mail addresses, including that of C-Span president and CEO Lamb.
And, like a mighty river, the Savage-driven anger is flowing into the network.
Rather than sit back and take it, Lamb decided to make the skewering public on the June 15 episode of "Washington Journal."
Lamb's weaponry was both brilliant and simple: the e-mails themselves. He quoted the outraged masses, sparing none of their vitriol.
Here's some of what Lamb read on air, according to closed captioning:
"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."
Hardly a coward, Lamb did respond -- by calmly stating facts:
"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."
I wrote about Lamb's reaction on my blog, praising him for doing something few other media personalities would have had the nerve to do: quote venomous words about themselves. The posting generated a good number of comments. Notably, it produced an outpouring of support for Lamb from conservatives.
An example from popular blogger Don Surber: "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."
Another wrote, "Michael Savage is an embarrassment to conservatives. C-Span 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."
Savage could not be reached for comment.
Lamb said Wednesday that he continues to receive hate mail from Savage supporters and is considering doing another show about the fight this Friday.
"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."
Well, I don't know if it truly leans left or not but it is not taxpayer funded, it's cable-subscriber funded. There's a difference.
Ah, so you don't have any evidence to back up your accusation.
They cover all manner of political speeches. Why wouldn't they cover one of his?
Do you wonder why Lamb chose only these emails to read and not some more reasoned ones? I’ll tell you why: to make Savage’s audience, and thus, by extrension, conservaties, look like a bunch of raving lunaics. He knows that that isn’t fair, but he did it that way anyway.
Because C-SPAN is nonideological, nonpartisan, and objective.
Okay, I was wrong. I’m glad it’s not tax payer funded.
I say it leans left because I think it does.
Those caller lines just don’t add up. Either dems call the republican lines, or libs calling themselves independent call the lines.
Whatever the reason, C-Span does not do a good job at balancing the callers. Some of the voices you hear calling in do not sound like people who know who their own senators are.
They are seminar callers and C-Span makes no real effort to control this. I cannot listen to their callers.
But having C-Span as a resource is worth the cost to me, so okay.
I got 2 out of 3 right, and Lamb got 2 out of 3 right. Guess we’re even.
These new assertions can hardly have any credibility, as you have proved unable to support the previous ones.
When I read that Weiner was a no show at the Talkers Freedom of Speech Award ceremony, I was thinking “Typical Weiner”. Then I read this piece and I was thinking “Typical Weiner” as well.
After all, Weiner has grown to be paranoid lately. He doesn’t make public appearances anymore and he barely gets his facts straight anymore. He does more damage to the conservative movement than what one person may think.
Can’t wait to see what Mark Levin has to say about this.
“it’s cable-subscriber funded:
I think the cable and satellite are forced to fund it as one of those mandatory public service thingys.
I’m watching a terrific speech right now by Duncan Hunter at CPAC using the C-SPAN web site. Without C-SPAN, I would have never got to see it.
If Savage wanted people to hear the speech, he should have shown up and made it in person.
People tune in and show up to hear people speak, not to watch some nutjob’s prepackaged sales pitch/rant.
The people sending comments to Lamb sounded exactly how Savage sounds when he’s on a tear.
That might technically be true in that those who do not subscribe to cable aren't forced to pay for something they don't want.
However, if you subscribe to cable, you are forced to pay for C-Span.
It's like union dues. You have to pay, and you have no say in how the money is disbursed.
I like c-span. I resent forced support, same as PBS. In the first two years of the klintoon era, I could hear the after hour speeches of the ‘pubs when they were actually conservative!
Excellent.
It, too, enjoy C-SPAN because it covers the looney left where I can’t afford to travel. I can watch their insanity on The Mall from the comfort of my home, where a double scotch and a bathroom are my respite from their nuttery.
I think Lamb has been remarkably fair when speaking to callers on his show. In fact, I can’t think of anybody with call-in show who remains as neutral as he. Unfortunately, it’s the Savage Sycophants who think their ox is being gored and the use the same tactics as their master.
Once you buy their product, you aren't forced to do anything.
Unless I'm mistaken, the CABLE INDUSTRY has decided to fund C-Span, just like Coke or Pepsi fund whatever they contribute to.
Now, if there is a law or reg that requires the Cable Industry to fund C-Span, you would have a point, but I don't think that's the case.
I used to think of C-SPAN as more or less balanced, but it does seem to have a definite leaning to the left in recent years although it will still show some conservative speakers.
On October 31, 1998, they were supposed to show the FreeRepublic March for Justice in Washington, DC, but at the last minute substituted a re-showing of some event with Madeleine Albright. They must have gotten a lot of complaints because a little while later the FR event was being shown. (At least that's how I perceived it at the time--perhaps I was misinformed about when the FR event was supposed to start. They "balanced" that with a pro-Clinton rally attended by a handful of Clinton groupies.)
Lamb did not “skewer Savage”. He deliberately chose the worst of the worst emails and read them—several quite profane during a family hour—right on the air in a sad attempt to smear Savage using the words of others. Truly a profile in cowardice on the part of Lamb, not to actually defend his own censorship but merely defame and attack by inference. It was a sad testament to the long decline of that once great network.
They cover an awards show but not the speech of the winner? HArdly a fair depiction. I am a longtime CSPAN fan, but this was pretty inexcusable censorship.
Both sides are playing games. Savage never said that he didn't show to accept the award and sent a DVD to C-SPAN. Now I know why the other talkers were covered but Savage was not. This little bit of information, Savage doesn't let out.
Savage has no control over who sends Lamb an email. However Lamb used to worst emails to try to discredit Savage.
Overall, I like and dislike Savage. He can be a bit off, but he was complaining about the lack of conservatism in the Republican party while Rush and Hannity were still "carrying water for those who didn't deserve it."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.