How Stokely Carmichael Helped Inspire the Creation of C-SPAN

A Black Power radical, a Navy veteran, and the story behind the most boring channel on television.

Mother Jones illustration; Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In the late 1960s, Brian Lamb, the eventual founder of the cable network C-SPAN, sat at a Black Baptist church watching Stokely Carmichael give a speech. Lamb, fresh off a four-year stint in the U.S Navy, came away impressed. He found the talk by the leader of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) “thoughtful and intelligent and very well stated.” But, later that night, when Lamb watched coverage of the same speech on TV he was taken aback.

The news broadcast only played the two minutes when Carmichael was at his most incendiary. “What made it on was the fire and brimstone,” Lamb would later tell the New York Times of the experience. “It just seemed to me we were being unfairly treated as a society by the television news,” he lamented.

About a decade later Lamb founded the Cable Satellite Public Affairs Network, also known as C-SPAN. While the network is most known now for wall-to-wall congressional coverage, it was Carmichael’s unfair representation by white media that Lamb has said helped inspire the attempt to bring the public news without imposition. He wanted a channel “where everybody gets to see everything from start to finish,” he told the Times.

I was surprised by this connection. I discovered Lamb’s epiphany in the excellent autobiography Ready For Revolution: The Life and Struggles of Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture).

In the latter half of his life Carmichael embraced revolutionary Pan-African socialism, founded the All African Peoples Revolutionary Party, and changed his name to Kwame Ture—a combination of Kwame Nkrumah and Ahmed Sékou Touré, two former decolonial leaders of Ghana and Guinea. In 1969, Ture left the United States to make his home in Conakry, Guinea. One of the best explanations of this transformation can be found when Ture sat down for an interview with Lamb in 1998. (It was shortly before Ture’s death, while he was in Harlem for cancer treatments.)

Ture writes this of the conversation:

Mr. Lamb proved an interesting fellow, well-informed and tough-minded. His questions were sharp but fair. Not biased or hostile as is so often the case with the U.S media. … I admire Mr. Lamb’s public spiritedness and resourcefulness and I think his initiative to be especially necessary given the general debasement of political discourse in the American media.

Lamb was at the helm of the network as CEO until 2012, before retiring from media fully in 2019. Some have argued that by giving politicians the ability to speak directly to the viewer without mediation, C-SPAN was a gift to demagogues like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and paved the way for the rise of Donald Trump. But this origin story shows another angle.

In an exit interview with The New Republic, Lamb explained why he rarely imposed himself on a subject: “It’s probably a learned respect for the average intelligence of the American public to figure it out for themselves, right or wrong. I’m a pessimistic optimist. It’s just the way I am. Every time I said to myself, ‘I know that person isn’t telling the truth,’ my reaction was: ‘So does the caller at the other end of the line.'”

This “view from nowhere” approach to journalism can normalize injustice. But attacking the faux-neutrality of the status quo isn’t the same as assuming a child-like stupidity from audiences.

While reading Ready For Revolution, including this history of C-SPAN, I delved deeper into more Ture videos on YouTube. Having spent a life taking notes from street corner preachers in Harlem, Black Baptist ministers in the deep South, and revolutionary leaders in West Africa, Ture is a fantastic and nimble orator with an underrated sense of humor. Many of his speeches are readily available now, thanks in part to the network and amateur archivists.

I have one clip that is a personal favorite. In it, Ture explains the importance of good faith inquiry, of listening to what someone actually says instead of what other people say about them. You should just watch it.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate