Rating: 
Summary: Bias Exposed
Review: This book is very entertaining and makes you think and analize the evening news. This book made me realize why I prefer CNN Headline news - less clutter - basic facts & then repeat. Mr. Goldberg is an insider and a respected one at that. In the general public's views, if not the media elite, he is more respected now than ever. Way to Go!
Rating:
Summary: New truths about Liberal, Left, "Bias"
Review: This book illustarates how the liberal, left, has distorted the way our society is portrayed. We need many more individuals to come forward and tell the truths about the distorted views and lies that we are force fed by the media and special interest groups.Also strongly recommend "Slander" by Ann Coulter
Rating:
Summary: Truly Thought Provoking
Review: As a moderate that has spend the last decade working for liberal democrats on Capital Hill, I can say that I was very skeptical about this book before I read it. However, now that I have, I must say that this is one of the best thought provoking books I have ever read. Although I do not share several of Mr.Goldberg's views, I came away from this book with a very open mind ready to watch the nightly news and read the NY Times in a different way. For years people have argued that the media is slanted but most of them could not point at specific examples. Mr. Goldberg has taken it upon himself to find those blatant examples that prove the title of his book. The national media in this country is BIASED!!! Thank you Mr. Goldberg for helping others see that.
Rating:
Summary: a great book by a whiney man
Review: bernie is a punk, but if you ignore his personal failings you'll discover a great book that poignantly lifts the veil off the media's incessant liberal bias.
Rating:
Summary: courage
Review: This book should be retitled "Courage" since the author has become the victim of reverse Mcarthyism. The same liberals who justifiably tear apart Joseph Mcarthy now show that they are no better them him.
Rating: 
Summary: Caveat Emptor
Review: This is a book you should read. It's fun, well written and entertaining. Bernard Goldberg does a good job of detailing the most obvious bias of the journalism profession. But, he missed the forest as he focused on the trees. He focuses on obvious examples, the Anchor's identification of Republican Senators as "Conservative Senator..." while referring to Democrats as "Senator..." But, he totally misses the more insideous and most dangerous bias of the media. The real bias of journalists is the bias towards government intervention. It seems that every time a journalist identifys a problem there is an immediate assumption that the government should do something about it. Fat kids, what is government doing to regulate hamburgers? Cancer, has the government banned artificial sweetners, or tobacco or whatever? Drug abuse, what has government done to protect our children? Terrorism, has government done enough turn America into a police state? Never do journalists ask the really important question Peter Druker identified in his book "The New Realities." It's not what should government do? Rather, it's what can government do? Government can't legislate morality. Government can't save us from our appetites. Government can't legislate the abolition of risk. Journalists don't understand these limitations on government and consequently raise our expectations to unrealistic levels. Mr. Goldberg totally misses this bias. Had he addressed this bias towards government intervention, Mr. Goldberg might have written an important book. As it is he has written a fun book that does a good job of revealing the news establishment, especially at CBS, for what it is. Bias is a book worth reading. I just expected more.
Rating:
Summary: Proves FAIR is unFair
Review: If you go to fair.org they have been attempting to tell everyone how liberal bias is all in the heads of conservatives but this book is a slap in the face of fair. Goldberg does a great job showing how politics effect the content of the news and how conservatives are labled, this book has also thrown Andy Rooney into the picture admitting to the liberal bias in news. This is a must read to all those who want to go into journalism
Rating: 
Summary: Some Good Ideas Amidst A Retaliatory Missive
Review: Bernard Goldberg has some decent observations in this book, and offers some sound theories about why the media has a left-handed slant. He is pretty fair, too, acknowledging that media giants like Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, and Dan Rather aren't consciously giving the news a liberal flavor, but instead are reporting in the only way they know how to think and communicate. Goldberg posits that these and other newsmen are such natural leftist thinkers that not only do they see such extremely liberal groups as NOW as centrist and totally reasonable, but they see anything moderate and even-handed as far-right. It's too bad, though, that Goldberg's message gets lost in this book's retaliatory tone. As courageous as Goldberg was for initially writing an Op-Ed piece about media bias to the WSJ in 1996 (non-anonymously), and for not backing down from his position even in the midst of impending ouster, this book is in reality one long diatribe against Dan Rather. Goldberg sounds jilted from the beginning to the end of this work, and while I don't doubt the validity of his assertions or evidence (or that he was railroaded by Rather and an over-sensitive employer in 1996), the fact that this is more vengeance than expose is distracting. That said, there are some observations herein that read like a How-To guide for spotting liberal bias. For instance, reporters always precede a Republican's name with the label "Conservative," or "Republican," while never doing the same to Liberals/Democrats, as if it is important only to expose those from the right and to alert the listening audience to be on the lookout. People such as the homeless and AIDS victims tend to be "prettified" by the news, and have their negative qualities and irresponsible behaviors ignored or minimized, in an effort to make them more sympathetic. Republican and right-spectrum topics (like the coverage of Steve Forbes' flat tax plan, which prompted the initial Goldberg editorial in 1996), when covered at all, are done so in an unflattering way, and are oftentimes accompanied by snide commentary by smarmy newscasters. White males, the tobacco industry, and the Catholic church continue to be about the only fair game for nonobjective attack and criticism without fair representation. There were some inconsistencies that should have been cleared up, perhaps if Goldberg had allowed himself more time to calm down about the mosquito in his ear named Dan Rather. For instance, Goldberg reports that the newsrooms take great pains to make sure there is minority representation in all stories, even when it doesn't seem logical (e.g., to garner black opinion about local matters in all white towns, or to search high and low to find minorities in mostly-white professions); however, later on Goldberg mentions that blacks and other minorities don't tend to watch news programs with the regularity that whites do, and therefore, the news stations don't kowtow to non-whites in their coverage. Goldberg should have tried harder to forget the injustice dealt to him by CBS, and instead concentrated more on his tale's consistency- he was on the right track, but never fully executed.
Rating:
Summary: Three stars for the book plus one for courage.
Review: You will be forgiven if you visualize Andy Rooney as you read this book. The writing of Mr. Goldberg rings with the wit and sarcasm of his long-time buddy and I kept putting the face in the wrong place too. I hope I will be forgiven for being so in agreement with his basic thesis that I was only entertained by the book, not really educated. An entertaining little book it is, not as surprising in its revelations as it is devastating in its confirmations. It revolves around what can only be called a hatchet job done on an evening newscast (masquerading as a 'reality check' for the discriminating viewer) during the last presidential race. The Steve Forbes tax plan was the victim of this particular bit of undisguised vindictiveness from the arrogant left (masquerading as 'news', though I and millions saw it for what it was at the time and just blew it off - as usual). Mr. Goldberg saw it too and felt honour-bound to defend the remnant integrity of his profession against such blatant unprofessionalism. That is the uncritical view of his course of action, admittedly. A general reader would have no compelling reason to doubt, though an inveterate cynic would allege some alternate worst in such circumstances I'm sure. Goldberg's efforts to bring balance (let alone enlightenment) to his own kind, however, were stonewalled by those in control of network news at CBS; they really just didn't see the problem. Unwilling to capitulate on so fundamental an issue, an incisive piece of criticism targetting the offending 'hatchet job' was eventually crafted and sent to the print media by Bernard and that is where the threads began to unravel at CBS, unfortunately for him and his career, rather than for Rather. That would be Dan Rather, of course, or 'The Dan', as Goldgerg and apparently many others of that circle call him. Thus began the events, the pettyness, the vindictiveness, the isolation, the unspoken yet undisguised vendetta that culminated in Goldberg's leaving CBS and writing this book. A fair, if uncomfortable, reciprocation. We, the people, have been served and, as usual, the cost has been very high for someone. Inevitable, perhaps, that an employer should 'police' its own employees and require a certain fidelity. Unfortunate that this particular employer exhibited such a flawed understanding of its mandate, an understanding that evidences no change ... an understanding that may even put its existence in jeapardy. Not that Goldberg tells us anything about the political slanting of network news that we don't already know ... it's just that HE tells us. "He", remember, was an insider - one of 'them'! I am convinced that there must be many on the 'inside' who talk about these things as though it is a great conspiratorial joke (not what Goldberg proffers, mind you; he says they just think their thinking is rational and normal ... it's everyone else who is a bit strange, you know - in the red states) but anyone with a thought in their head can discern the bias daily. One would have to be politically inert to fail to notice, even in Canada! Sorry Bernard; I just don't believe they are really that dumb but you, after all, are (or were) in a position to know. To be frustrated and upset that they were finally outed by one of their own, without comprehending the whole affair, would indeed reveal a monumental level of ignorance to match the nightly arrogance. For the voyeuristic, this book of ready-made insights and anecdotes has its peep shows: 'The Dan' stories. Easy to visualize, now that it's in print, but to think of him "working the phones" to trash Connie Chung because she got more air time than he at the Oklahoma bombing is an acerbic, morsel! How petty and unworthy can our behaviours become? These revelations, Goldberg says, were the hardest parts of the book for him to write (because of the personal friendships involved). He certainly can be believed in that but I would bet his publisher had much to do with these particular inclusions. This touches the great sub-plot (perhaps the eternal verity) of the book and its ending was written long ago: you just can't make the boss look bad - no matter how deserved nor how impossible to prevent that may be. The lesson may also be that you have to have enough on him to send him up for a long time before this type of 'community service' will work. We all admire the courageous whistle blower and we certainly enjoy the dirty linen ... until it hits too close to home, of course, a lesson the CBS News establishment may learn from this eposide - or not. All of the revelations, of course, do nothing for the advancement of integrity in newscraft as long as 'they' remain in denial. The problem remains and will remain until the ratings take them all away ... and they will go, bewildered, into the night. "They" are the elites and "they" know what is appropriate to feed the society "they" wish to create - and, worse - feel they have the right to create and the higher calling to create. "They" are insufferable. Thank you, Mr. Goldberg, for your courage and your (higher) calling; may you rest in peace.
Rating: 
Summary: Lost opportunity
Review: The title for this book should have been "Bernard Goldberg's whine list" or "A biased view of bias in the media." This book could have been really good if it had attempted to show BOTH liberal and conservative media bias. (Or is conservative bias OK?) Goldberg is as out of touch with reality as he says Dan Rather is. A vast majority of women DO NOT work to push their family's income into six figures: They work to pay the bills, put food on the table, maybe buy a home and stay above the poverty level. What you did was stupid, Bernie. And now you're making money from it.
| 
