Rating: 
Summary: A realistic view of the news
Review: The best thing about this book is that Bernard Goldberg admits to being a liberal. Only a liberal could credibly point the finger at his cohorts in the news business and draw away the curtain of denial that has been built up over the past several years. "There is no bias in the media" they said. Bernard Goldberg puts that statement to the test, and proves that it isn't true.
Rating: 
Summary: Progressives: Don't Write This Book Off
Review: As a non-conservative, I was extremely impressed by the thoughtfullness of parts of this book. That being said, my expectations of a 350 page right-wing diatribe set a decidedly low bar. BIAS's value, therefore, is not in Bernard Goldberg's shallow political incite nor the book's frequent one-liners (his sorry attempt at humor shows why he worked for CBS instead of Comedy Central), rather, it comes from the man's inside knowledge of the morally bankrupt way in which the newsmedia operates since its shift from journalism to entertanementFor example, BIAS reveals a shocking trend in TV news toward
'whitewashing' stories. Goldberg explains the "Throw out a black face when a white one will do," matra with the phrase "It's the economy, Stupid." More specifically, it is mostly well off, educated, white people who watch the news. These rich white people pay the bills of the networks through advertising revenues and it is the belief of the network executives that these rich white people don't care about the suffering of black people or brown people, and will therefore not watch commercials following news stories about these people. This book has shocking insight on the news business that can be found nowhere else, period. Even if you disagree with some of Goldberg's right leaning conservative rant chapters - I know I do - you should not pass up the oppurtunity to read a truly unique and informative piece of commentary on today's money-driven approach to news.
Rating: 
Summary: Personal Bias
Review: Mr. Goldberg complains about his treatment at CBS, and complains and complains. He complains that the media is biased, but he does not base his books on any evidence, other than his own opinion. The weight of the evidence contradicts Mr. Goldberg's thesis that our media is slanted leftward. Because of massive consolidation over the last 20 years, over 90% of the media (print, radio, television) is controlled by a handful of companies. This is a much bigger influence on what is or is not in the media, than the individual bias of the reporters, even the "super-stars." They are, after all, employees. I would refer people to the following sources for media evaluations that are based on weighing the evidence: 1. ...
2. Project Censored, 2002-2003 by Peter Phillips
3. Manufacture of Consent by Noam Chomsky.
Rating:
Summary: A year Later ---- It is still TRUE
Review: Goldberg has done this country a great favor. I reviewed this book on the 14th of December 2001. I have spent a year viewing the CBS news looking for the kinds of slights that Goldberg described. Has it had an effect? Yes perhaps, but of late I have begun to see the national news media (ex-Fox) begin to slip back into familiar habits. The Trent Lott situation is a great case in point. I care not to defend Lott because his record speaks for itself. But nowhere have I seen the balance in the national media about the democrats that support(ed) segregation (Sen Byrd) or that the Republican party is the party that emancipated the slaves. One more chance to get in a dig at the right without balance could not be passed up. Read and Reread this book to prevent the left for deciding on your behalf what is "best" for you to know and start watching Fox from time to time to add some balance to what you take in! Many people have already abandoned the network news for other outlets, look for this to continue until they shape up.
Rating: 
Summary: Boring stuff by a Rush wannabe
Review: I agreed with some of his points but man this guy can't write. And most of the book is his crying about how CBS mistreated him. Like nothing was ever his fault. Yeah, it was liberal bias against him! Whine, whine, whine. There wasn't enough facts about what's wrong with the media and too much poor me. If you want a good book about media bias just read anything by Rush. This guy isn't the real thing.
Rating:
Summary: Big Disappointment
Review: As I have often thougth that there is bias in the media, I was looking forward to this book. Unfortunately, it left me disappointed for several reasons.
The first half of the book is devoted to Mr. Goldberg's description of his mistreatment at CBS. Fair enough, I understand that he is hurt and angry. But this all happened six years ago. He is carrying around a lot of resentment, and the book seems directed at the people who hurt him, not the general public. For example, he includes lists of questions he would have liked to have asked Dan Rather and other CBS executives, if they would only return his calls. He ends the book with an Appendix that includes letters from his friends, agreeign with his position. Again, I can understand his hurt, but a book probably isn't the best forum. Who among us hasn't been hurt, and wanted a chance to say all the things that couldn't be said, and say, "See? So-and-so agrees with me! See?" But a respected journalist should be above all that. I felt like I was on the inside of a personal dispute, and that should not have occupied half a book about media bias.
My second complaint is just a mild annoyance. When Mr. Goldberg refers to men in his book, he does so by their last names, like "Heyward". Hoever, he often refers to women by their first names, like "Sally". That's a personal pet peeve that wouldn't have even bothered me if it weren't for my thrid point:
Mr. Goldberg devotes a chapter to his book about the "problem" of working mothers, specifically those who are working "not for economic reasons". While earlier in the book he taunts his CBS colleagues for being elitists, and out of touch with mainstream America, Mr. Goldberg actually comes out and says he thinks mothers are working to buy luxury cars and clothes. Now who's out of touch?
He expresses his anger at the fact that most women do not see childraising as their foremost responsibility. No kidding, Mr. Goldberg. Most MEN don't feel that way, either. He goes on and on about the dangers of children spending time away from their MOTHERS but not once does he mention the importance of FATHERS. Now who's biased? He was mad that a bigger deal wasn't made of a female professional who said that she hoped one day her child would understand that her work was as important to her as food or air. But Mr. Goldberg is himself a father. How much of the time he spent writing this book, which is essentially a complaint about Dan Rather, could he have spent with his kids? Did his children understand that writing this book was as essential to him as food or air?
Overall, this book could have been very powerful. In between Mr. Goldberg's rantings and own personal bias, there was some thought-provoking material that should have been more deeply explored. Unfortunatley, most people will see this book as the tantrum of a spoiled child.
Rating: 
Summary: An interesting read
Review: I found Bias an interesting look inside of the world of TV journalism, especially CBS. Goldberg gives the reader a glimpse of the bias many journalists show based on their own limited view of the world. We are told about how journalism has transformed from telling the story based on the facts to telling the story colored by the personal beliefs of the journalists. Instead of news reporting, we now get commentary disguised as news. What I really liked about the book are Goldberg's specific examples. He pulled out several important news stories and provided specific details of how the news stories have been spun into biased commentaries. I really liked the notes and bibliography that Goldberg provided, which allowed me to further research many of the high profile news stories we see. Especially interesting was his information on HIV and religious violence. From news coverage, I believed that HIV was a real worry for everyone, but Goldberg's detailed information helped me to see that the news world has ignored the facts and may be helping to spread the disease among the real at risk groups. In the same vein, I was under the impression that most religious groups were violent, but Goldberg showed how media distortion as lumped all religions together instead of focusing on the facts,... It is this extra bit where Goldberg takes popular news stories and shows the facts which have not been reported, that make the book worth reading. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition
Rating:
Summary: It's about time!
Review: This is long overdue. There is no way to argue with what Mr. Goldberg reports in this book. Everything he says can be checked out. One way the newsmedia slants public opinion is the way journalists mention a conservative's name versus a liberal. The conservative is the "odd" person who always has some kind of label attached to his/her name, the liberal is the "normal" one.
The writer asserts that since newspersons all think alike in their community on the big social issues of our time, they have lost touch with everyday Americans. After awhile they start to believe all civilized people think they same way they do. That's why they don't think they are biased, they think they are the intelligent, more moral thinkers. Deep down they must feel they are doing society a service. We really need to call them for being unfair. It's time to quit falling for the persona that is projected on the screen, and realize these people have their own agenda, are totally ambitious and will do anything for a sensational story. Some of the incidents the author brought out where totally wrong information has been fed to the public over the air, is mind boggling. Young people need to realize this! It is ludicrous to even attempt to convince people the media is unbiased and middle of the road. This book is right!
Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable.
Review: For many years, Bernard Goldberg was a well-respected correspondent at CBS News who had the ear of many top dogs at that agency - including Dan Rather. He enjoyed popularity and a good reputation for solid reporting ... but all that changed when one day he took issue with a news story broadcast by his own network during the 1996 Presidential campaign. The story, which purported to be an analysis of Steve Forbes' flat-tax plan, was actually a snotty liberal ad hominem attack disguised as a serious news piece. And this is where Goldberg parted ways with CBS. He wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal which was critical of his network's story, leading to an internecine firestorm. He ultimately paid a high price for his criticism when he was rushed into retirement by CBS. Bias is, in actuality, two books: one detailing the story of the original Steve Forbes news story which led to Goldberg's op-ed and the fallout from it, and one describing the problems Goldberg perceives with what he believes is a liberal slant to the news in general. Unlike many of Regnery's publications, _Bias_ isn't a sledgehammer-like conservative attack on liberal thoughts, institutions, or values. In fact, Goldberg takes special pains to note that he is an old-line labor liberal, raised in a blue-collar family and sympathetic to the "old" style of liberalism: the social safety net, the New Deal. Rather, Goldberg begins with a rather simple and appealing premise: no matter your political inclination, if you're going to be a journalist, you should check your bias at the door and be objective in your work. No more, no less. This is something upon which -- in theory, at least -- people of all political persuasions should be able to agree. Unlike many breathless anti-liberal-media works by blond-bombshell conserva-babe commentators, Goldberg takes an earthy, practical tone in his discussions. And he also speaks from a position of some experience with his many years in the news business. In a word, he's believable as he details the reasons he believes the media is biased and how it can (and should) be improved. Reading this book, one gets the feel of sitting down with "Bernie" in a bar at the end of the day as he rolls up his shirtsleeves, lights up a smoke, tips back a beer, and says, "See, lemme tell ya what's wrong with the news these days..." My only complaint with this book is that there's a hint of a personal vendetta or conflict with Dan Rather which leaches from the pages. It's nothing overwhelming, but it does cast a slight but unfortunate pall upon what's otherwise a most enjoyable read. Four stars for this reason. If you're interested in an insider's perspective on the media business and how an old-timer believes it's changed for the worse, pick up _Bias_. I don't think you'll be sorry.
Rating:
Summary: Unbiased and Uninformed
Review: Lighten up Francis! Listen, I've been working in TV for 10 years at five different stations, and I only WISH journalists were politically biased. But that would assume they had any opinions at all and knew what they were talking about. This is the REAL problem in TV news, (less so, but also true to some extent in print journalism). Journalists are simply ill-informed about almost EVERYTHING! And when the reporters and anchors don't know what they're talking about, ideologues from all sides of the fence (liberal or conservative), will be convinced that the media is biased against them. Why does Goldberg seem to miss this fact? I would argue he doesn't... he alludes to the laziness and uninformed nature of news several times in this book, but he writes it off as some kind of knee-jerk liberalism. BALONEY! The real coverup in news is TV doesn't want to admit that newspeople, (especially the high-priced anchors who are often the least informed), are hopelessly ignorant despite the "smart" way they seem to read the teleprompter. Journalists know this truth about themselves, (they're ignorant, not dumb, and they know they should know more but think they don't have time to learn... I say: try beat reporting!), so they try to hide it by acting super arrogant about how smart they are all the time. This doesn't fool me, and Goldberg's book is another example of this real coverup. His conclusions in this book are the best joke of all: he talks about how THE FOX NEWS CHANNEL is the only real hope for TV news! FNC, the channel that openly admits it's trying to be more favorable to the right, (although still finds time for an avalanche of anti-family sex stories), is the savior?!? Please Bernie, if you're hunting for a new job, try brown-nosing in private!
|
