Rating: 
Summary: A carefully researched look at trends in the media
Review: Eric Alterman's book is a fascinating read and revealing look at the gradual shift the media has made to the right. Moreover, he exposes the intellectual dishonesty of many of talk radio and TV "talents." It is obvious that he is passionate about his subject - and at time can be a little too dogmatic. At the same time, his careful research and thoughtful presentation stands in direct contrast to the shoddy work of some authors on the right who argue that the media is liberal. Give the book a read and decide for yourself!
Rating: 
Summary: A beautifully researched wake-up call to liberals
Review: Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media? is beautifully researched look at how those conservatives claiming it's a "liberal media" are just plain wrong--and lying. Offering many examples, Alterman shows how much money certain conservative groups are spending to keep the news tilted in their favor, and how the current administration is keeping reporters from doing their job. Is there a moment more chilling than when Ari Fleischer told a reporter asking an important but unwanted question that his question had been noted in the building? Liberal publications like the Nation publish works by conservatives but conservative publications like The National Review seem hellbent on silencing liberal voices. Alterman successfully shatters the lie that it's a liberal media. Conservatives, too, should be alarmed that people like Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Bill O' Reilly are stretching the truth just to make money, just to line their pocketbooks. If you care about this country, you want fair and balanced reporting, right? If the powers that be are messing around with the lives and finances of its citizens, shouldn't that be reported? I wish Alterman had gone even farther in his book, like discussing the terrible treatment Walter Mondale got from the press in 2002. But still it's an important book. Next time somebody says "that's the liberal media" to you, Alterman's book will help you offer several examples to [bring] that argument down...
Rating:
Summary: Excellent primer on the conservative media
Review: I picked up this book with hopes that it was not 200+ pages of name-calling and put-downs (i.e.: the 'conservative' method sometimes employed by liberals to compete with conservatives). I was pleasantly suprised. I wish I had been able to read it one year ago! I found it to be thorough and complete discussion of the conservative media, from print to tv to the internet. I have spent the last year roaming numerous websites to become familiar with the conservative and liberals pundits I see peppered throughout the industry. If I had read this book sooner, I would have had the information in half the time. I would highly recommend purchasing this book regardless of whether you identify yourself as conservative or liberal, simply for the conciseness of information. I highly suspect I will refer to this book numerous times in the future when identify names and media affiliations to friends and peers in the future.
Rating: 
Summary: More mindless drivel from Alterman
Review: Save your money - you will see this one at the Dollar Store soon along with all of the Clinton co-conspirator books.
Rating:
Summary: We shouldn't need a book to prove this
Review: The fact that even people like Pat Buchanan ("every Republican kids about it") and William Kristol ("I admit it, the liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse for conservative failures") concede that the liberal media is a myth when it is against their interests to do so makes it laughably obvious. Saying that the media is liberal over and over again, like some people on this board, doesn't make it so. Think about it--Pat Buchanan goes to the point of campaigning for a physical wall between us and Canada, yet he claims he received surprisingly fair coverage. Where was the vast liberal media then?
Rating:
Summary: Alterman not only asks, he Answers
Review: If you've ever watched Fox News go on about its "unbiased" and "fair & balanced" news, and think they doth protest too much, this book is for you. Alterman's book is all over the map, mainly because so is the subject matter: conservative media bias, both aggressive (the well funded, well organized think tanks and media machines) and passive (the lazy mainstream press which too often takes its cues from the conservative bloc). Alterman's not above name-calling or painting with broad strokes, but he backs up everything he claims with solid evidence, like how the RNC wrote the "Gore is a fibber" angle and got the whole mass media to parrot it. This is too sprawling to be the last word on this subject. But at least it has the distinction of being the first.
Rating:
Summary: read the book, then review it, ok?
Review: I get a little upset when someone reviews a book without having read it. To say that this book isn't worth discussing or debating is very short sighted. It's a critical question, and it is one that Alterman answers in an annotated and clear, convincing manner. First of all, he has been writing on this subject for years, and he is actually a journalist, something that most people who call themselves journalists should take note of. If you don't believe that the media is anything but liberal, look what has happened to Peter Arnett when he hasn't toed the line when it comes to reporting on a war.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: An excellent job by Eric Alterman. In contrast to right-wing commentary on this topic, this book is carefully documented with rational arguments based on actual facts. Alterman is particularly successful in demonstrating the right-wing bias of the media covering the 2000 presidential campaign and the Florida recount. He shows that the media were biased against Al Gore from the start and helped the Republicans to distort the facts and hand George Bush the presidency. In all, a much needed antidote to AIM, the MRC, and the rest of the right-wing progaganda machine which has created and promoted the liberal media myth.
Rating:
Summary: Was this book at all necessary?
Review: With glowing reviews posted from the New York Times and the New Yorker, to name a few, one can hardly imagine that there is any liberal bias in the media...I mean, come ON, the New York Times and the New Yorker? How right wing can you get! It's one thing if a book is created out of the author's beliefs, desires, whatever, but something else if it's just a mindless response to a more popular predecessor (i.e. that book by Anne Coulter.) I agree with a previous reviewer who labeled this book as propaganda...is anyone fooled by this?
Rating:
Summary: Books on this subject are a waste of time, paper and ink.
Review: Books on this subject are a waste of time, paper and ink. The subject of liberal or conservative bias is the one of the most subjective issues possible. This debate is as productive as a debate on relegion. In my opinion this is the modern equivalent of the debates during the middle ages over how many angles could dance on the head of a pin. A particular persons political ideology determines if any news source "is biased." As a trial lawyer, I can tell you that every fact is subject to multiple interpretations and every person has a bias or preconceived inclination towards a particular interpretation of those facts. Many trial attorneys will tell you that the trial is over once the judge is assigned and the jury is selected. Journalists and the media industry should just realize that "if you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere" only applies to street venders and Broadway. The Times maybe more conservative than the Village Voice, but in up-state NY and in the "fly over" parts of this country, the Times is considered as liberal as Pravda. A trial lawyer knows that the jury is the final judge of the "truth." The audience is the final judge of media bias. Nothing is stronger evidence that most media is out of the national mainstream that the rise of FOX and talk radio.
| 
