interviews
Sam Seder
Detail:
An interview with Sam Seder. Air America Radio Talker and Filmmaker.
What is your status with AirAmerica at the moment?
I’m online editor of AirAmerica.com. AirAmeirca has
begun - with YoungTurks being the first element of it – to create
a second line up, one which is primarily online. I am talking to them
about that and it may be something that involves (Marc) Maron.
You’ve had some high profile radio stoushes - Ed Schultz and Armstrong Williams come to mind. Do you think this may have red flagged you in the industry?
I started my radio career in AirAmerica, I think that
creates some difficulty in and of itself. I think that the whole Ed Schultz
thing, which in my estimation was blown way out of proportion. I don’t
think that’s helped me in any way. Across the board, Progressive
talk Radio is having some growth problems. Part of that is a function
of the industry as a whole, they don’t recognize it as a distinct
format and frankly the industry as a whole has bigger problems than progressive
talk.
I’ve always seen you as an outspoken person often times to your detriment - you once called out Bob Woodward in front of Carl Bernstein. You mentioned once on Maron VS Seder “it was a lesson learnt you never learnt”. What was there to learn?
Well there are battles that you don’t necessarily
have to fight. (chuckles) I don’t really think I’ve really
learnt that lesson. I don’t think it’s a lesson that I’m
ultimately going to go down as I look back on my life as one that I have
learned.
I had not too dissimilar of an experience in the context of the entertainment
world. I feel like I could go and get a job in a company doing I don’t
know what - Human Resources, I’ve chosen the fields I’ve chosen
because I want to be able to set certain terms. I want to be able to work
under certain conditions and sometimes that cuts against me and sometimes
it helps me in some respects. There are probably certain battles that
aren’t worth fighting at certain times
You and Janeane have talked about that in regards to Colin Powell and Scott Mclellan, having to speak up. You’ve done that in your own way, compromising your own comfort to say things most people wouldn’t otherwise say
Maybe. Frankly I think Janeane did things that were far
more brave and bold than I’ve done on-air. I don’t know anyone
else who has been in more of a position to do something like that. She
was literally one of 4 or 5 people, maybe even less, who were allowed
to go on television. She was recruited by Win Without War to go on television
before the War and carry their message. These TV stations wouldn’t
let anyone else on and she really had no desire to be this person but
when you are confronted with the notion that you are only one of 3 or
4 people who are actually allowed to get on television and carry this
message, I mean what do you do? She would have times when she was walking
down the street in New York City and some jackass would get out of his
car and get in her face.
I don’t pretend for a moment that the stakes of what I’ve
done would be as big as what Colin Powell, Scotty Mclellan or Janeane
faced. Or any of those guys would have faced. Look I’m an opinionist,
whether I’m doing it in the context of talk radio or directly as
a satirist. What else am I going to do? If I stop doing that, I’ve
proven myself with an incredible inability to sell merchandise.
Has it given you a different perspective on party politics having dealt with interoffice politics (in AirAmerica). To use Obama as an example, having to negotiate personal principles within a larger apparatus. Having to be a team player?
I was heavily involved in student politics in College,
I think that was actually more of a similar dynamic. Again it’s
one of those things where the stakes aren’t the same but the dynamic
essentially doesn’t change. I don’t think I’m any more
or less forgiving than when I started this job in terms of what I see.
I’ve always been, to some respects fairly pragmatic. Even though
I see things obviously that I’m not terribly happy with that Obama
is doing or Democratic leadership etc… At the end of the day there
are certain cards that are dealt to you that you really can’t change.
I wish we had a different Democratic Party. I wish we had a system where
incumbents weren’t locked in so much. I wish we was had more representative
of my policies as a third party but we don’t.
I don’t believe that there is, at least not on the national level,
any good option for that. To that extent, right now I’m open to
compromise. But I don’t think that comes from anything that happens
at work, per se.
There have been times in the past at Air America, people’s assumptions
as to why certain things were done. Me losing my morning show for an example
of Maron losing his show.
They project (pause) It has given me insight (pause) that dynamic of hearing
what the audience thinks is happening behind the scenes. It's given me
insight in the way that I as an outsider look and see what is going on
in the Bush Administration. There's been times where people have sent
me emails about conspiracy theories that are taking place at Air America.
Sometimes the conjecture isn't necessarily irrational, when people deeply
care about an institution, whether it's Air America or the US government,
and it's not being responsive to them in some way. They are left to their
own devices in terms of creating a narrative to explain it.
Do you think you have a better insight into reality than someone like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity because of your lack of (job) security?
I don't know what their (Rush and Sean's) perception of
reality is because I only know them [from what I hear]. I've met Hannity
a couple of times off the show but he seems like as much of a nutball
as he does on his show. I don't know the way they perceive reality. They
espouse, I don't know that I would really call it a philosophy as I don't
think it reaches that bar. They’re mouthpieces to a certain extent.
Hannity is just lame, he's literally almost by definition a 'tool'.
Limbaugh I think has created a worldview, it wouldn’t make a difference
one way or another. It’s a worldview that sells. If you want to
create a strong and loyal audience it's a smart one. It's preying on his
audiences' desire not to have such doubt in their life. It's really not
that different in terms of dynamic to say Scientology or any other so-called
philosophy that gives you answers and makes it easier for you. You listen
to Limbaugh and anytime you're having a dilemma. It's resolved for you
very simply and always in a way that makes "You" the winner
because everybody else by definition is wrong and that is essentially
the conservative ideology. That is why they're going to do so well in
the role of the opposition because when they have power they really can’t
find anyone to scapegoat because they have the power. Hey have nothing
but scapegoating which is why their record of governance is so dismal.
They really aren’t set up to lead, they’re just set up to
say “the sky is falling because other people are dropping it on
your heads”.
I think Limbaugh is good at what he does, it's a very easy formula. If
you look in the paper and if you start with the assumption that anything
you see or read that you don't do or experience on a regular basis is
fundamentally wrong. You'll find it's very easy because everything becomes
a story. I remember there was this moment – I listen to quite a
lot of Rush Limbaugh – he was reading a story about the Swiss Alps.
It was clear to me by the end of it that he hadn’t actually pre-read
the story, his producers had just highlighted it for him. The lead was
some sort of Tin-foil was put on the Swiss Alps to keep them from melting,
ostensibly because of Global Warming or whatever it was. And he starts
in with “these enviro-whackos, they’re crazy!, they’re
actually putting tin-foil on these glaciers, this is how insane these
people have become to protect the skiing” And he starts to read
the story and he’s reading is like “so many sheets of tin
foil are placed on this thing and environmentalists are up in arms –
(Sam feigns outrage) “Alright! this is just absolutely insane”
and he cuts to break. It was so revealing, aside from the fact he was
yelling at his producer. Its also a perfect example of how they pull their
stories. Anything that sounds weird by definition is a story for them.
If its something that’s outside of you - the audience, it’s
very easy. If you start with the premise that anything you have ignorance
or lack of awareness about or laco of genuine first hand experience of
is necessarily bad. It’s very easy to create your own narrative.
As a liberal if I was reading that story as an example, I would say there’s
some indication of an economic downside to Global Warming, corporation
at all costs trying to make or whatever it is.
But if I hear a story of someone who’s not mainstream, someone doing
something odd in some way. It’s not ripe for me from a liberal perspective
and never mind in terms of programmatically. It just doesn’t strike
me as a person to be like “Wow that’s really a story I can
really create outrage for my audience about, because I don’t think
the problems of the world are that one person, I don’t think the
notion of one school that changed the words to ‘Silent Night’
really is indicative of anything. I mean who cares?
That’s frankly why I don’t cover shit like the chastity vow.
I don’t give a shit.
>> continue to Part 2 of transcript
 |
 |
 |