Rating: 
Summary: Masterful dissection of the myth of the liberal media
Review: Alterman was the first out with a blast at the right wing's incessant cries of liberal bias, and his book is thoroughly researched and masterfully written. It deserves more attention than it has received so far. He does a particularly good job with a unique perspective on the 2000 Florida presidential election debacle. A terrific and brave book.
Rating: 
Summary: worthless attack
Review: Like most liberal writings, this book expresses many thoughts but when they are examined under the eye of truth, they simply don't hold water. I don't recommend this book at all. I do not consider myself a republican or a liberal, but I do believe in expressing truth. If you do too, than don't bother wasting money on garbage like this.
Rating:
Summary: Even Walter Cronkite said that we have a liberal media
Review: Walter Cronkite recently said in an interview that the media was liberal by nature. The "esteemed" Walter Cronkite than went on to explain in great detail how and why we have a liberal media. Personally, I trust the "esteemed" Walter Cronkite more than I trust the leftist anarchist Eric Alterman. The judge of whether the media is conservative or liberal is based on your political viewpoints. Seeing that Eric Alterman is way to the left of most liberals including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Eric would view that the media is conservative since even though the media is liberal, the media is to the right of Eric Alterman. Seeing that the media is to the left of the majority of Americans, the majority of Americans would view the media as being liberal and Eric Alterman would be viewed as a left wing anti-american leftist. The discussion of whether the media is liberal or conservative is based on your personal viewpoints and how you view the world. Luckily most people are way to the right of Eric Alterman.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent examination of a difficult subject
Review: Eric Alterman has set himself the unenviable task of being the guy with the shovel walking behind the elephants in the circus parade. The "elephants" in this case are right-wing writers such as Bernard Goldberg and Ann Coulter, both of whom have made names for themselves (and bestsellers) decrying what they claim is the leftist bias in what they like to call the "mainstream media." Having worked in the "mainstream media" myself, I'm in a position to know that this position is ridiculous, and Alterman makes a strong case that the reverse is true -- that a well-funded and hysterical right-wing cabal have so terrorized the media that they display a conservative, rather than a liberal bias. Whether it's the contempt that they showed to Al Gore during the 2000 campaign (as opposed to the fawning coverage that Bush received from Frank Bruni in, of all places, The New York Times) or the non-coverage of Bush's financial misdeeds as opposed to the massive coverage of Clinton's non-existent "crimes" concerning Whitewater, the press has chosen to cravenly cave in to the Republican line. "Unbeknownst to millions of Americans," writes Alterman near the end of this book, "who continue to believe that the media are genuinely liberal -- or that conservatives and liberals are engaged in a fair fight of relative equality -- liberals are fighting a near-hopeless battle in which they are enormously outmatched by most measures." If you've been watching Fox's "fair and balanced" coverage you might not believe this at first, but Alterman makes a strong and convincing case. This is an important book that needs to be read. Because it's long and takes the time to thoroughly make its case (and in small type, yet), I doubt that one person will read this book for every ten who read Ann Coulter's imbecilic "Slander." But people need to read Alterman -- as they need also to read Joe Conason and Paul Krugman and Al Franken. As opposed to the flamethrowing rhetoric on the right, these people have the facts on their side. It's time you knew the facts.
Rating:
Summary: Criticism in the land of the "free"
Review: It is remarkable that conservatives are so afraid of any criticism. And that's especially true in America. But then a conservative is "person who is resistant to change". Criticism might expose them, might shake the pillars of their might...
They are the ones who shout the loudest about 'American values' and stuff like the 1st amendment od the constitution (you know: freedom of speech). And they're also the same ones who denie people their freedom of speech. By relentlessly attacking anyone who opposes their views or even have a different view. Screaming "un-american!", while they are the most un-american bunch of all.
American media liberal biased? Since when?? There're only a few huge companies owning most of the media. And as it is with big corporations, they're conservative as hell: nothing may come between them and the holy buck. And with a proposal lying around to let even fewer companies own more media, so a few companies decide what you hear see and read...if this doesn't scare you, then you are plain stupid.
Liberal? You don't know what liberal is.
It is the DUTY of media (and citizens by the way) to be critical about authority. If not (or if not allowed to...), that's how totalitarianism may start (and you're further up that road than you think).
Rating: 
Summary: Good prose wasted on a useless topic. . .
Review: How about this? Read this first, THEN read Bias. See which really stands out as having an authentic feel. Clinton is to the right of this joker, so of course he feels the media is biased to the right. A more accurate assessment would be to say the media is predominantly in support of the Democratic Party. (70% suggest some studies.) If you wish to argue the "left-ness" or "right-ness" of the Democratic Party, that's another issue entirely. Neither the far left nor the far right get a fair portrayal in the media because, simply stated, they are the fringe minorities. Clever as the author is, perhaps he should have harnessed his literary energies on an endeavor to show how the far left's opinions are being purposely omitted from media coverage. Or how about the fact that world travesties and tragedies are deemed "boring" and instead the news shows breast implant surgeries to boost ratings. Not that the bulk of America is against that. . . So, even though the subject itself is a poor one, the prose is actually quite good. The book reads well and will cause you to either say an indignant "That's right!" or a furious "What a load of crap!". For that reason alone I give it 2 stars instead of 1.
Rating:
Summary: Conservative Media
Review: Perhaps the reason that most media has a liberal bias is that it has to report on the homeless, unhelped, uneducated poor that this country is seeing increasing. There's nothing to make a person liberal like seeing how conservative media has portrayed them and how that has changed their entire life. Perhaps there is a liberal bias in more media but the bias in conservative media is much more blatant and loud. All I can say is wow. Great book but i've read better.
Rating: 
Summary: A Matter of Perspective
Review: Whether or not you see the bulk of the popular media as "liberal" depends, in large part, where you see yourself. For someone like Alterman, the media is decidedly to the right of him, which of course has nothing to do with where the bulk of the country sees itself. Most of the network news anshors see themselves as absolutley unbiased and mainstream- despit epolls that consistently show them to be overwhelmingly liberal Democrats. But that's just it; in their professional cicles, being a liberal Democrat *is* being mainstream. When Dan Rather appeared at a Democratic Party fund raiser in April of 2001, one might have reasonably assumed that CBS would have required his resignation for such a blatently partisan act by someone professing public neutrality. No such resignation occurred, because CBS and most of Rather's colleagues didn't see it as such a terrible thing. The only real offense against jounalistic integrity they recognize is endorsing any action of an elected Republican.
Rating:
Summary: Bad delivery of good information
Review: I'm convinced that the same people who complain about "liberal bias" in the media can't watch a ballgame without complaining about how the sportscasters are biased against their teams. Eric Alterman comes along and debunks a lot of the right-wing agitprop that passes for political commentary these days. The problem with this book is this: Alterman comes across as someone out for self-promotion. On top of that, Alterman has some sort of vendetta against fellow left-winger Alexander Cockburn, whom he singles out for attack in a book about right-wing propaganda. "Big Lies" by Joe Conason and "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" by Al Franken are much better books that cover this subject.
Rating:
Summary: Eric Alterman is a joke
Review: I personally stopped visiting MSNBC because they insisted on treating him like an actual journalist when he is obviously the most virulent, hate-filled, frothing-at-the-mouth uber-Liberal ever given a space to write. Was it because I didn't like what he said? Not at all. It was because he actually has nothing to say. He only has his worthless opinion, which isn't even his. He is like a 100-year-old parrot that sat on the shoulder of Karl Marx in his youth and then spent the rest of his time learning the "truth" in American universities, learning self-hatred and politically correct mind control Liberalism. The man is simply an idiot. Go ahead, buy his book, believe it if you like. Better your money is wasted on him than used to support his crusade.
| 
