Fraters Libertas

Lambert Gets Religion

I have to laugh at the tone of the recent column by Pioneer Press entertainment columnist Brian Lambert on the departure of Jason Lewis at KSTP. Now that Jason is officially off the air, never to return to KSTP, Lambert admits he was a talented guy, with much to be admired.

Leaving aside for the moment the fact I'm habituated to disagreeing with every position he takes and everything he says, Lewis was/is excellent radio.

This coming from the guy who in the past used to promote Jason Lewis's competition on sports-oriented KFAN as the place to turn to, for not just sports, but also general coverage of news and current events. I interpreted this, I think correctly, as Lambert's attempts to turn the general audience for political oriented programming away from Jason Lewis (who was then dominating the ratings), toward a show more in line with his own political views.

But now two days after Lewis goes off the air, we hear Lewis was "excellent"? Classic Lambert, subjugating the facts (and this time, his honest opinion) to his political ideology. Now that Jason Lewis is no longer a threat to influence public opinion in the Twin Cities, Lambert is free to tell everyone what a great show he had.

Of course Lambert doesn't hesitate to continue to castigate the remaining talk radio hosts in town, the medium itself, and the audience. A few selected barbs:

[Lewis] understood the show-biz shtick part of modern, hyper-political talk radio.

He understands the game enough to treat it like a game. You get in the ring. You each take your shots. You make your points. Since it's his show, he always gets to "win." Afterwards, you laugh and shake hands.

While Lewis no doubt understood a radio show needs to be entertaining, with appropriate attention paid to the "show" aspect, Lambert woefully underemphasizes the substance of the Lewis show. His distinguishing characteristic was hard core economic and political policy analysis, properly articulated for a non graduate student audience. His comments increased the understanding of issues among the audience, and helped it develop it's own critical thinking abilities. This sounds to me more like a true educational experience, rather than some shtick or a game.

I dare say the long promised liberal radio network, now in development, will attempt to emulate this model. That is attracting an audience with some entertaining show biz, then enduring and prospering based on the substance provided. Will Brian Lambert be describing the forthcoming Al Franken/Jeanine Garafolo show as a "game" or "hyper political shtick"? We shall see, but I suspect he'll instead just concentrate on the "excellence" of their program.

There was another quintessential Lambert moment in his recent column, again commenting on the remaining talk radio hosts in town:

In stark contrast to a lot of other struttin' little howler monkeys clogging the local dial, Lewis actually has talent.

Struttin' little howler monkeys? Who is he talking about?

If his column wasn't an ode to Jason Lewis, one would have to assume that's who he was talking about. (Since even when he was making good points, Lewis was a shouter and screecher, really the only one in this market.) And in previous Lambert columns, when he would resort to blanket slurs like this, that's who I assumed he was talking about.

But now we see that's not the case (I think). So who is it? Joe Soucheray? Bob Davis? Mark O'Connell? Dave Thompson? To my ears, none of their styles can be described as arrogantly simian.

Maybe he's not making a political point and he's referring to some lefties instead. Is he calling Don Shelby a struttin' little howler monkey? Chad Hartman? Bob Yates? Tom Mischke? Ruth Koscielak? Gary Eichten?

Lambert also says the local dial is "clogged" with struttin' little howler monkeys. That means a lot of people, right? So, is it all of these people? All of these people and more?

A guessing game, that's what we're left with when Lambert decides to throw around unsubstantiated slurs and hide behind blanket insults. Is that the point of media criticism? Or is it more appropriate for a gossip column?

Remember, Lambert is the only TV/radio critic for the dominant newspaper in St. Paul. As such, if he feels some radio hosts are descending to an incoherent primate level, why doesn't he name them? Why doesn't the newspaper's editorial standards insist on this, instead of allowing generalized innuendo? Maybe they're content to wait until these hosts in question leave town, then we can hear what Brian Lambert really feels about them.

For a dissenting view on this column, check out our Northern Alliance brother Mitch Berg, who feels Lambert's writing is "excellent." Who ever said conservatives have to agree on everything? (Actually, I think it was the Elder.)