Rating: 
Summary: Ducks and Geese fly South for the Winter So All Birds Do
Review: Goldberg's book is based on the generalization that if he can find instances that he thinks are evidence of liberal bias; therefore, the media is liberally bias. He also sounds like a bitter old reporter that is striking back. And I am not impressed with the fact that he claims to be a liberal. How many times do the anti-civil rights politicans quote Dr. King?Here's some questions for Goldbery to answer; how many times a day do we hear about the stock market? How many shows are there called "Money..."? How many shows are there about the working conditions of persons with disabilities? How about the fact that the unemployment rate for persons with disabilities is at 69%. Airlines get socialist treatment when they have finacial troubles. The army goes to protect oil interests in the name of US economy but do the oil companies give the taxpayers (those who funded the wars) better energy rates? Cokie Roberts on ABC yelled that the unemployment rate went down in Jan 2002. Yeah but the number of jobs dropped by 97,000 and the unemployment rate went down because more people stopped/gave-up looking for jobs. Hey Goldberg how about debating me? Bob Ardinger Columbia, Md
Rating: 
Summary: Courage to oppose the lies
Review: Bernard Goldberg should be commended for breaking the code of silence that forces too many honest journalists to remain silent about political correctness, liberal bias that has made the American mass media a sick joke. Goldberg does a good of showing how the media elites are an insular group, that socializes only with each other; they move in small circles in Manhattan, Cambridge MA, LA - they do not know any honest working Americans in the fly over states like Nebraska, Tennessee, Kentucky and their reporting reflects this. Goldberg also lists the huge double standard the media has in covering crime, particularly interracial crime. Crimes and alleged crimes committed by Whites against Blacks are front page news, subjects of special news exposes. Crimes by Black criminals against Whites (90% of interracial crime) are rarely covered at all, or excused. Bernard Goldberg has done a great service to our nation in showing this horrible bias, but he doesn't have a real solution on what can be done to counter this bias. What can be done to end the media monopoly of politically correct liars?
Rating:
Summary: What a joke
Review: All the political finger-pointing and whining claims of media bias is epitimized in this book, there is little in the way of factual information here. If you want to see a one-sided cat fight, read this book for your amusement, it serves no other purpose.
Rating: 
Summary: "Bias" or "Dan Rather, what a jerk"
Review: An easy read about why Goldberg hates Dan Rather. Really, using only one example, Mr. Goldberg tells us about apparent liberal bias in the (pre 9/11) media. Unknowingly, he paints an excellent picture of CORPORATE bias in the media. The books 'purpose seems to be getting back at Rather for a couple of years of tension between the two men. Seems kind of stupid now
Rating:
Summary: A refreshing confirmation of one-sided reporting
Review: This book was an writtten well and Mr.Goldberg expresses his views clearly. Overall the book was easy to read. The most important aspect of this book was not to call the big three news orgs names, but was to point out how the personal beliefs of journalists color thier reporting. When people speak, they do so with certain assumptions regarding common ideas. As Mr.Goldberg points out, since most of the big journalists are liberal and, worse, only travel in liberal circles, they report as if thier ideas are mainstream. But the biggest transgression on the part of the journalists is thier unwillingness to challenge people, ideas and data that align or support with thier own beliefs, while identifying and even belittling those that don't. Everyone should read read this book to understand how journalists tilt the news by what they say, how they say it and even by what they leave out of thier reports.
Rating:
Summary: Started at five stars, went downhill from there
Review: Five stars -- because writing -- any writing -- is difficult, and one should always give the writer the benefit of the doubt, and not be judgemental at the start.
Four stars -- A incredible amount of bitterness that detracts from what I thought would be an objective analysis of American News Media.
Three stars -- the incessent use of italics. It's like being at a cocktail party and having a drunk guy talking to you. You listen, somewhat bemused, but after awhile it becomes incredibly irritating and you just want to smack the guy.
Two stars -- Instant realization that I could've bought some music instead of paying twenty odd dollars for this tirade that says nothing new.
One star -- my guilt -- at being sucked into the wording of the title, like reading a good National Enquirer headline at the grocery store checkout line -- then feeling like you've been robbed because you actually bought the damn thing.
Rating: 
Summary: Overall solid examination of a controversial subject
Review: I am a professed bleeding heart, having been a longtime Sierra Club member, an unrepetent pro-choice advocate, and having never voted for a Republican in my life. For my liberal bretheren to summarily dismiss Mr. Goldberg's BIAS without any credible argument to the contrary--which almost every negative BIAS review contained herein manages to do--simply confirms his message. Whether you choose to believe it or not, the liberal media bias has always been the proverbial elephant in the living room: it's huge, it's obvious, but nobody wants to talk about it. From the blatantly contrived AIDS heterosexual risk in the 1980s to the marginalization of "conservative" opinions by the "mainstream" media in the 1990s, liberal bias is perhaps the most pervasive force in the social conscience of America today. My only complaint about the book, and the reason I gave it 4 instead of 5 stars, is that the author can be somewhat over-the-top and ham-handed in his writing style. The VPs at CBS may very well be "Dan's b!tches," but there's probably a better way to express this sentiment.
Rating:
Summary: An Inspiration
Review: Bernard Goldberg's stunning work "Bias" should be required reading for every journalism student in America. I am a 22-year old producer just starting out in the television business, after graduating from Bernard Goldberg's alma-mater, Rutgers University. I received a liberal education and interned in elitist media environments like NBC in New York City. That's why this book didn't completely surprise me. But everything in this book needed to be said, and it showed me how much I didn't know about the career I'm embarking on. For most people, the proof offered in this book that the media can't help being blatantly slanted to the left and promoters of liberal causes would cause someone with conservative views to get out of the business as soon as they can. Not me. Goldberg's work has inspired me to fight against this elitist, leftward trend in one of the most influential professions in this country. I will dedicate my life and career to making journalism an honorable profession again, one that reports the news EQUALLY on all sides, and reports on important facts rather than celebrity gossip and lobbyist causes. I just hope I have as much courage to raise important issues as Bernard Goldberg does. Courage, as Goldberg shows, is an overstatement, however. Why is the media so afraid of this important topic? Simply: because the truth hurts. Thanks, Bernie. You were a hero to me yesterday, you are a hero to me today, and you will be a hero to me tomorrow. Difference is, I genuinely mean what I'm saying, unlike "The Dan."
Rating:
Summary: Well done
Review: Journalists have a liberal bias learned early as journalism majors in college. This book exposes this outright bias of the 'impartial' media.
Rating:
Summary: what a waste!
Review: I can't believe that after 20 years as a "journalist" all Goldberg managed to come up with is this shallow little volume. This book doesn't illuminate anything that we can't see with our own eyes. Further, its simply a self-aggrandizing tome by some self-righteous guy who uses the exact inflamatory, non-journalistic weasels he accuses everyone else of using. This isn't journalism, it's a very lame biography about some guy without much skills as a journalist, writer or whistle-blower. But he does have an agenda.
| 
