Rating: 
Summary: Great Read
Review: My friend Bernard definetly has an ax to grind, most people due after working over two decades for the same company in very competitive enviorment. What makes the book a great read is watching Bernard trash his co-workers at the same time supporting the argument that the mainstream is media is tilted way to the left. A book just about liberal bias in the media without the muck would be bore! Great job Bernard you stated the case and made it a fun read.
Rating: 
Summary: A newspaper veteran says says Goldberg is 100% accurate
Review: I have worked for newspapers in small, medium-sized and major markets for more than 20 years. I presently work in a major U.S. city for one of the country's two largest newspaper companies. I read "Bias" over the holidays, and I can tell you, honestly, that everything Bernard Goldberg says is 100 percent accurate. In fact, liberal media bias at the networks and at major U.S. newspapers is even worse than he suggests.
Americans need to realize that most of the people who produce their network newscasts and who put out their daily newspapers are not like them and their friends and neighbors. They are people who hold very liberal, often socialist/Marxist, values and who view ordinary, middle-class Americans who live between the coasts with contempt. You are a likely target for their contempt if you are any of the following: white, male, middle-class, a businessman or woman, a member of the military, Catholic, fundamentalist Protestant, a stay-at-home mom, an opponent of abortion or affirmative action, or a supporter of George W. Bush.
For the last decade or so, most major media companies have been on campaigns to promote "diversity" in hiring. What this usually means, as Goldberg says in "Bias," is giving preference in hiring to blacks, Hispanics, gays, lesbians, and other supposed victims who have been denied a media "voice." Not once, however, have I heard a media executive call for diversity of perspective. Not once have I heard a media executive call for hiring people who can accurately reflect the views of religious people, business people, military personnel, fiscal conservatives, etc.
Ordinary Americans deserve better from the major media companies, and the major media companies need to understand that America, as a whole, is far less liberal and ethnic and far more conservative and white than they realize. Maybe we all need to take another look at the 2000 election map and compare the "red" (Bush) states with the "blue" (Gore) states. There's a hell of a lot more red on that map than blue.
So think about it, people, the next time you open your morning newspaper or watch Rather, Jennings or Brokaw on your evening newscast. The people who produced the news you're reading or watching aren't at all like you, and if they knew you, they would probably scorn you.
Rating:
Summary: Solid Read
Review: A good read. Perhaps a little unobjective at parts, but informative nevertheless. As with everything else, it should be taken with a great of salt...but Goldberg does present a fair amount of evidence to substantiate his argument (you simply have to read the entire thing). For many he's simply stating the obvious, but he does add some fairly insightful critique.As a sidenote, don't listen to the apparently numerous Chomsky-ites...they most likely didn't *read* the book. Anyone who tells you the media and corporations are in the same bed has a severe disconnect with reality (1 word...Firestone), so you can pretty much disregard their opinions.
Rating:
Summary: Goldberg is right on!
Review: This book was informative reading and the author's criticism of the mainstream media was presented logically, factually, and with a minimal amount of unwarranted emotion. Regardless of your political persuasion, after reading BIAS (if you are honest with yourself) you will agree with the author that our major networks need to take a closer look at fairness in reporting the news - for the sake of every U.S. citizen's best interests.
Rating:
Summary: A Look Behind the Wizard¿s Curtain
Review: Bernard has done a good job letting us know what many of us have already suspected. There is a bias at the major network news. Problem is that this really isn't news to most of us. This is why so many viewers have already deemed the networks to be irrelevant to being informed and either dropped them altogether for internet or print media or switched to Fox or CNN. Still as a veteran insider Bernard offers a unique perspective, and insight in how decisions are made; such as why few blacks are featured during sweeps week, and how the politically correct is carried to an extreme. (Gannett required a minority side to every story including one about Hanukah food in Greenville, NC) As such the book is worth the read. He questions how the views of the news people exclude investigations into the problems facing children as a result of working mothers, or why there was no investigation into the fanaticism of the Arab countries that lead to the Sept 11 bombings. Bernard is not conservative given that he generally votes Democrat, and he sees the problem as one of balance. He does not insist that either the liberal or the conservative are more correct. He just expects the major news to show both sides with equal respect. Given the monolithic views of the media; this does not happen even though most of them insist that as professionals, it does. The press, he contends, do not see themselves as liberal- they see themselves as middle of the road. Therefore any conservative looks extreme. In the end he expects very little to change. There are conservative sources in radio and in some newspapers, and Fox and CNN offer some different viewpoints. Bernard himself can be a bit bombastic in describing his experience. The book is a worthwhile view behind the Wizards curtain; and will certainly change the way you look at the network news- if you are still watching.
Rating: 
Summary: Bias
Review: Personally I like Bernard Goldberg but this book is so boring and totally repetitious I must confess I went to sleep a couple of times but did finally finish. Seems to me that Bernie just wanted to make a few bucks and I really would like to get mine back. There is just nothing new here!!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Hoped for more
Review: This book promises more than it delivers. While it is certainly admirable what the author has gone through to reveal the bias in the news, he does it in such a fashion that I found rather disappointing. The first two chapters of the book are more or less a diatribe where the author rants and raves without really making a point. The more meaty chapters are not as meaty as they should be, with at best two examples of bias in those chapters. In the end, I am gald the author wrote the book because it is awakening everyone to the reality that yes the news is biased. However, my hope is that in the future the author will provide more examples and perhaps use better judgment as far as some of his choice of words.
Rating:
Summary: Leaves no doubt about the leftward-leanings of network news
Review: This book essentially confirms what many of us have known for a long time: that the mainstream media (save for Fox news) is hoplessly biased in favor of the left. On the one hand, I am suprised that it has taken this long for such an "expose" to surface; and on the other, I fail to see why the contents of the book are such a revalation. Groups such as Media Researd have been exposing bias for years and Mr. Goldberg even notes that the medias' liberalism is a well-known fact. Aside from providing a penetrating, insider's view of the liberal media, the author displays a good sense of humor and wit that makes the book even more enjoyable. My only complaint about the book is that it isn't longer (its only about 200 pages) and more in-depth. Indeed, the author talks at length about his experiences and observations, but more examples to compliment the eggregious ones he cited would have been nice.
Rating:
Summary: Who's Biased?
Review: Judging from the negative reviews and rants by many on this list, it's pretty easy to see who's really biased here. Having anticipated the release of this book for several weeks, I purposely waited to review it until I had a chance to read it. I have read with interest the many reviews - the rants against this book and the raves for it by those of opposing opinions who could not possibly have read this book. Therein is the true bias I have seen. And, without Mr. Goldberg's book, this, in itself, brings up an interesting point, no matter which side of the fence you are on. Bias DOES exist - whether the naysayers believe it or not. Given the limitations of humanity, it has to exist. But, which side is right? The right-wing or the left-wing? And which side has the right to push their agenda, regardless of what is fair to the average viewer? That is the essence of the question at hand. The one thing that Mr. Goldberg's book did for me was to frighten me. I always suspected a "conspiracy" existed. I didn't realize that it was more dangerous than an outright conspiracy. It is the righteous crusade of otherwise intelligent, caring people to "normalize" the rest of America. "Normal" being their interpretation of normal as opposed to MY interpretation of normal. In the end, the one question that keeps going through my mind is - how can any intelligent person not see this bias? With the wording and back-up "experts" these so-called news people use to slant their stories, it's fairly easy to see what is "normal" according to them. No, we never do see the words left-wing liberal used to describe those most of us know are, indeed, left-wing liberals. Just this morning, on the Today Show I saw a spot about the woman who killed her five children in Texas. This so-called "news" spot highlighted the insanity plea - giving testimony by her lawyer and interviewing a psychiatrist who supports the post-partum break defense. A small spot was afforded the prosecuting attorney. No follow-up with a psychiatrist who doesn't buy the post-partum break theory. Bias? Definitely. The spot made me mad! And I switched again to Fox News. And this was just one of many, many spots I have watched with dismay and fury on the networks (and CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, etc., although to a lesser degree). Mr. Goldberg's rundown of Peter Jennings comments on the impeachment votes for Bill Clinton was disturbing to me to say the least. How can any of you who disagree with Mr. Goldberg not see this? I understand that this bias will continue in the mainstream media until those of us smart enough to see it tune it out and tune in a more unbiased media. In the end, you "liberals" who have ranted here about big money and corporate sponsorship will be right! When the money to these biased networks dries up, only then will this issue be tackled!
Rating:
Summary: Well Written and More then Fair
Review: At this point with more than 140 reviews written, there is little I can add. The book is well written and argued; far better than many of the critics can recognize. If anything I feel Mr. Goldberg is too kind to the press. I am struck by the many negative reviews that make the same point: the networks are owned by giant corporations and therefore the networks would never tilt to the left. There are two problems with this argument. It does not answer any of the points of Mr. Goldberg. (It is interesting how many of the critics will not give their names as well.) Secondly, by this logic Hollywood studios, which are owned by large corporations (or are large corporations) would never release movies hostile to business. Did you see "Erin Brokavitch" (or however you spell her name)? Do you actually think that movie was accurate and fair to big business? The litany of anti-business movies would exhaust the 1000 word limit imposed here. In short the big-businesses-own-the-networks argument is not only irrelevant, it is wrong.
|
