BN.com Gift Guide

Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

Overview

In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left. For years, Goldberg appealed to reporters, producers, and network executives for more balanced ...

See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (201) from $1.99   
  • New (4) from $4.50   
  • Used (197) from $1.99   
Close
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing 1 – 2 of 4
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
$4.50
Seller since 2014

Feedback rating:

(1)

Condition:

New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

New
New York, NY 2003 Trade paperback New. Trade paperback (US). Glued binding. 256 p. Contains: Illustrations. Audience: General/trade.

Ships from: DALLAS, TX

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
$8.06
Seller since 2005

Feedback rating:

(139)

Condition: New
PAPERBACK New 0060520841 Excellent condition, paperback 2003, no marks, great cover, readit.

Ships from: Federal Way, WA

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing 1 – 2 of 4
Close
Sort by
Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 7.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 10.1
  • NOOK HD Tablet
  • NOOK HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK eReaders
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook)
$10.49
BN.com price
(Save 38%)$16.99 List Price
This digital version does not exactly match the physical book displayed here.

Overview

In his nearly thirty years at CBS News, Emmy Award winner Bernard Goldberg earned a reputation as one of the preeminent reporters in the television news business. When he looked at his own industry, however, he saw that the media far too often ignored their primary mission: to provide objective, disinterested reporting. Again and again he saw that the news slanted to the left. For years, Goldberg appealed to reporters, producers, and network executives for more balanced reporting, but no one listened. The liberal bias continued.

Now, breaking ranks and naming names, he reveals a corporate news culture in which the closed-mindedness is breathtaking and in which entertainment wins over hard news every time.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

From Barnes & Noble
Is there a liberal bias in America's media? Conservatives have made the argument for years, but former CBS broadcast journalist Bernard Goldberg claims that the problem is so widespread that he was forced to blow the whistle on his own industry. Goldberg says that the problem goes much deeper than a simple "Democrats are good, Republicans are bad" mentality; indeed, it is so pervasive that it's considered a matter of course, affecting every decision made by supposedly "impartial" journalists.
John Leo
Bernie Goldberg is dead on. The astonishing distrust of the news media is rooted in the daily clash of worldviews between reporters and their readers and viewers. 'Bias is the elephant in the living room,' said one critic of the news business. After Bernie Goldberg's book, it will be harder not to notice the elephant.
U.S. News & World Report
Harry Stein
Bias is a fearless and vitally important book. In exposing the bottomless intellectual corruption within his own industry, Bernard Goldberg does what so many in the mainstream press only pretend to do: he tells the truth without regard to personal consequences. Colleagues will surely accuse Goldberg of treachery, and worse. But it is he, not they, who upholds journalism's finest traditions.
author of How I Accidentally Joined the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (and Found Inner Peace)
William J. Bennett
The allegation of liberal bias in the media is not a new one. However, in this book the allegation is made not by a conservative but by a reporter for CBS News-an old-fashioned liberal who has seen the bias firsthand. Bernard Goldberg has written a courageous book and told a story that needed to be told.
bestselling author of The Death of Outrage
From the Publisher
"This insider’s account of Mr. Goldberg’s career at CBS is filled with so many stories of repulsive elitism and prejudice on the part of his peers that it elevates Bias to must-read status. . . . His case is airtight."
—The Wall Street Journal

"The allegation of liberal bias in the media is not a new one. However, in this book the allegation is made not by a conservative but by a reporter for CBS News—an oldfashioned liberal who has seen the bias firsthand. Bernard Goldberg has written a courageous book and told a story that needed to be told."
—William J. Bennett

Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780060520847
  • Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
  • Publication date: 2/4/2003
  • Edition description: First Perennial Edition
  • Edition number: 1
  • Pages: 256
  • Product dimensions: 5.31 (w) x 8.00 (h) x 0.57 (d)

Meet the Author

Bernard Goldberg

Bernard Goldberg is the number one New York Times bestselling author of Bias, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America, and Arrogance. He has won eight Emmy Awards for his work at CBS News and at HBO, where he now reports for the acclaimed program Real Sports. In 2006 he won the Alfred I. duPont–Columbia University Award, the most prestigious of all broadcast journalism awards.

Biography

Bernard Goldberg was a CBS News correspondent for 28 years and is the winner of seven Emmy Awards, six at CBS and one for his work at HBO's critically acclaimed Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel. At CBS News, Goldberg covered stories all over America and much of the world for the CBS Evening News and 48 Hours. He also brought his unique perspective to the news in a special CBS Evening News segment, "Bernard Goldberg's America."

Author biography courtesy of Time Warner Book Group.

Read More Show Less
    1. Date of Birth:
      May 31, 1945
    2. Place of Birth:
      New York, NY

Read an Excerpt

Introduction

"They Think You're a Traitor"


I have it on good authority that my liberal friends in the news media, who account for about 98 percent of all my friends in the news media, are planning a big party to congratulate me for writing this book. As I understand it, media stars like Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings will make speeches thanking me for actually saying what they either can't or won't. They'll thank me for saying that they really do slant the news in a leftward direction. They'll thank me for pointing out that, when criticized, they reflexively deny their bias while at the same time saying their critics are the ones who are really biased. They'll thank me for observing that in their opinion liberalism on a whole range of issues from abortion and affirmative action to the death penalty and gay rights is not really liberal at all, but merely reasonable and civilized. Finally, they'll thank me for agreeing with Roger Ailes of Fox News that the media divide Americans into two groups-moderates and right-wing nuts.

My sources also tell me that Rather, Brokaw, or Jennings-no one is sure which one yet-will publicly applaud me for alerting the networks that one reason they're all losing viewers by the truckload is that fewer and fewer Americans trust them anymore. He'll applaud, too, when I say that the media need to be more introspective, keep an open mind when critics point to specific examples of liberal bias, and systematically work to end slanted reporting. According to the information I've been able to gather, this wonderful event will take place at a fancy New York City hotel, at eight o'clock in the evening, on a Thursday, exactly three days after Hell freezes over.

Okay, maybe that's too harsh. Maybe, in a cheap attempt to be funny, I'm maligning and stereotyping the media elites as a bunch of powerful, arrogant, thin-skinned celebrity journalists who can dish it out, which they routinely do on their newscasts, but can't take it. Except I don't think so, for reasons I will come to shortly.

First let me say that this was a very difficult book to write. Not because I had trouble uncovering the evidence that there is in fact a tendency to slant the news in a liberal way. That part was easy. Just turn on your TV set and it's there. Not every night and not in every story, but it's there too often in too many stories, mostly about the big social and cultural issues of our time.

What made doing this book so hard was that I was writing about people I have known for many years, people who are, or once were, my friends. It's not easy telling you that Dan Rather, whom I have worked with and genuinely liked for most of my adult life, really is two very different people; and while one Dan is funny and generous, the other is ruthless and unforgiving. I would have preferred to write about strangers. It would have been a lot easier.

Nor is it easy to write about other friends at CBS News, including an important executive who told me that of course the networks tilt left-but also warned that if I ever shared that view with the outside world he would deny the conversation ever took place.

I think this is what they call a delicious irony. A news executive who can tell the truth about liberal bias in network news-but only if he thinks he can deny ever saying it! And these are the people who keep insisting that all they want to do is share the truth with the American people! It wasn't easy naming names, but I have. I kept thinking of how my colleagues treat cigarette, tire, oil, and other company executives in the media glare. The news business deserves the same hard look because it is even more important.

Fortunately, I was on the inside as a news correspondent for twenty-eight years, from 1972, when I joined CBS News as a twenty-six-year-old, until I left in the summer of 2000. So I know the business, and I know what they don't want the public to see.

Many of the people I spoke to, as sources, would not let me use their names, which is understandable. They simply have too much to lose. You can talk freely about many things when you work for the big network news operations, but liberal bias is not one of them. Take it from me, the liberals in the newsroom tend to frown on such things.

And there are a few things that are not in this book-information I picked up and confirmed but left out because writing about it would cause too much damage to people, some powerful, some not, even if I didn't use any names.

But much of what I heard didn't come from Deep Throat sources in parking garages at three o'clock in the morning, but from what the big network stars said on their own newscasts and in other big public arenas, for the world to hear.

When Peter Jennings, for example, was asked about liberal bias, on Larry King Live on May 15, 2001, he said, "I think bias is very largely in the eye of the beholder." This might offend the two or three conservative friends I have, but I think Peter is right, except that instead of saying "very largely" he should have left it as "sometimes in the eye of the beholder." Because it's true that some people who complain about liberal bias think Al Roker the weatherman is out to get conservatives just because he forecast rain on the Fourth of July. And some people who say they want the news without bias really mean they want it without liberal bias. Conservative bias would be just fine.

Some of Dan, Tom, and Peter's critics would think it fine if a story about affirmative action began, "Affirmative action, the program that no right-thinking American could possibly support, was taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court today." But I wouldn't. Bias is bias.

It's important to know, too, that there isn't a well-orchestrated, vast left-wing conspiracy in America's newsrooms. The bitter truth, as we'll see, is arguably worse.

Even though I attack liberal bias, not liberal values, I will be portrayed by some of my old friends as a right-wing ideologue. Indeed, I've already faced this accusation. When I wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal in 1996 about liberal bias among the media elites, my professional life turned upside down. I became radioactive. People I had known and worked with for years stopped talking to me. When a New York Post reporter asked Rather about my op-ed, Rather replied that he would not be pressured by "political activists" with a "political agenda" "inside or outside" of CBS News. The "inside" part, I think, would be me.

Sadly, Dan doesn't think that any critic who utters the words "liberal bias" can be legitimate, even if that critic worked with Dan himself for two decades. Such a critic cannot possibly be well-meaning. To Dan, such a critic is Spiro Agnew reincarnated, spouting off about those nattering nabobs of negativism. Too bad. A little introspection could go a long way.

I know that no matter how many examples I give of liberal bias, no matter how carefully I try to explain how it happens, some will dismiss my book as the product of bad blood, of a "feud" between Dan Rather and me. How do I know this? Because that is exactly how Tom Brokaw characterized it when I wrote a second Wall Street Journal piece about liberal bias in May 2001.

In it I said that as hard as it may be to believe, I'm convinced that Dan and Tom and Peter "don't even know what liberal bias is." "The problem," I wrote, "is that Mr. Rather and the other evening stars think that liberal bias means just one thing: going hard on Republicans and easy on Democrats. But real media bias comes not so much from what party they attack. Liberal bias is the result of how they see the world."

The very same morning the op-ed came out, Tom Brokaw was on C-SPAN promoting his new book, when Brian Lamb, the host, asked about my op-ed. Tom smiled and said he was "bemused" by the column, adding, "I know that he's [Goldberg's] had an ongoing feud with Dan; I wish he would confine it to that, frankly."

Here's a bulletin: in my entire life I have mentioned Dan Rather's name only once in a column, be it about liberal media bias or anything else. Five years earlier, when I wrote my first and only other piece about liberal bias, I did in fact talk about the "media elites," of which Dan surely is one. So counting that (and before this book), I have written exactly two times about Dan Rather and liberal bias-or, for that matter, about Dan Rather and any subject, period!

Two times! And that, to Tom Brokaw, constitutes a "feud," which strikes me as a convenient way to avoid an inconvenient subject that Tom and many of the other media stars don't especially like to talk about or, for that matter, think too deeply about.

I also suspect that, thanks to this book, I will hear my named linked to the words "disgruntled former employee" and "vindictive." While it's true I did leave CBS News when it became clear that Dan would "never" (his word) forgive me for writing about liberal bias in the news, let me state the following without any fear whatsoever that I might be wrong: Anyone who writes a book to be vindictive is almost certainly insane and at any moment could find himself standing before a judge who, acting well within the law, might sign official papers that could result in that "vindictive" person being committed to a secure facility for people with mental defects.

I don't know this from firsthand experience, but my guess is it would be easier to give birth to triplets than write a book, especially if you've never written one before. Staring at a blank page on a computer screen for hours and hours and hours is not the most efficient way to be vindictive. It seems to me that staring at the TV set for a couple of seconds and blowing a raspberry at the anchorman would take care of any vindictive feelings one might have.

So, does all of this lead to the inevitable conclusion that all the big-time media stars bat from the left side of the plate? Does it mean that there are no places in the media where the bent is undeniably conservative? Of course not! Talk radio in America is overwhelmingly right of center. And there are plenty of conservative syndicated newspaper columnists. There are "magazines of opinion" like the Weekly Standard and National Review. There's Fox News on cable TV, which isn't afraid to air intelligent conservative voices. And there's even John Stossel at ABC News, who routinely challenges the conventional liberal wisdom on all sorts of big issues. But, the best I can figure, John's just about the only one, which says a lot about the lack of diversity inside the network newsrooms. On February 15, 1996, two days after my op-ed on liberal bias came out in the Wall Street Journal, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post wrote about the firestorm it was creating. "The author was not some conservative media critic, but Bernard Goldberg, the veteran CBS News correspondent. His poison-pen missive has angered longtime colleagues, from news division president Andrew Heyward and anchor Dan Rather on down." Kurtz quoted several dumbfounded CBS News people, one of whom suggested I resign, and ended his story with something I told him, more out of sadness than anything else. Journalists, I said, "admire people on the outside who come forward with unpopular views, who want to make something better. But if you're on the inside and you raise a serious question about the news, they don't embrace you. They don't admire you. They think you're a traitor." I am not a traitor, nor am I the enemy. And neither are the millions of Americans who agree with me. The enemy is arrogance. And I'm afraid it's on the other side of the camera.
Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Introduction: "They Think You're a Traitor" 1
1 The News Mafia 9
2 Mugged by "The Dan" 27
3 "The Emperor Is Naked" 41
4 Identity Politics 49
5 How Bill Clinton Cured Homelessness 63
6 Epidemic of Fear 75
7 "I Thought Our Job Was to Tell the Truth" 97
8 How About a Media That Reflects America? 109
9 Targeting Men 131
10 "Where Thieves and Pimps Run Free" 145
11 The Most Important Story You Never Saw on TV 163
12 Liberal Hate-Speech 179
13 "The Ship Be Sinking" 187
14 Connecting the Dots...to Terrorism 195
15 Newzak 207
App. A: The Editorials 215
App. B: The Response 225
Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(0)

4 Star

(0)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 75 Customer Reviews
  • Anonymous

    Posted May 11, 2006

    Propaganda

    The very sad thing about this book is that it is extremely biased - against fact and against liberalism, a double-whammy on the truth. I suppose with a title like this, it was an automatic best-seller - neocons love to breathe their own self-generated air (doesn't that have a high CO2 content, resulting in brain damage?). But what is NOT mentioned here is more disturbing than what IS mentioned: that the term 'balanced' suggests that there are two equal sides to every story, and disregards the media's primary responsibility is not to 'balance the story', but to TELL THE TRUTH. The examples that he gives repeatedly are situations where the media (owned by corporations and therefore pre-disposed to favor corporatist positions in their coverage to begin with)seems to be struggling with trying to deliver what is true in the face of pressure to 'balance' negative portrayals of Republican, so-called conservative, and, especially, neo-conservative points of view. In other words, he looks upon it as a BAD thing when the media (or some - far too few - in it) attempts to do its job: inform the public of NEWS they have no other way of knowing, rather than projecting a completely false and propagandistic world view that says every story must be 'balanced.' As such, he perpetrates a deception in this book ... pretending to be a journalist, but in effect acting as a shill for the powerful in politics.

    1 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 8, 2005

    A Must-Read for all Journalists

    I had to read this book for a college class. Goldberg does a superb job exposing what most Americans suspected all along. Easy-read and he definitly opened my eyes to how bias the media can be. I take comfort in the fact that there are people out there who still believe in reporting the facts and allowing the general public to form their own opinions. Kudos to Goldberg for not being afraid to tell the truth, he¿s earned my respect.

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 13, 2005

    Rewquired Reading

    Bernard Goldberg has written a book that should be required reading for all journalism students. He lays it on the line that the media are making suckers of us!

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 2, 2004

    Informative Read!

    A very conservative friend of mine read this book and started trying to argue the points with me. Having not read the book at the time, I chose not to argue but to postpone the argument until I had read the book. All I have to say is that after reading it, there was no argument. What Bernard Shaw had to say was absolutely true. As much as I wish it weren't. I had never thought of the news in that perspective but when he makes his points.....there is really no disputing them. Conservatives really are branded, while liberals are not. For instance, in one of his many varied examples... Rush Limbaugh is continuosly identified as a 'conservative radio talk show host', while Rosie O'Donnell ( who is as far to the Left as Limbaugh is to the Right and is also is as outspoken as Limbaugh on issues ) is never introduced as the liberal talk show host. While I am not on the side of the conservatives, I have to admit, Bernard Shaw ( a liberal ) is right. There is a bias in the media and instead of denying it they should create a network ( as Fox News did ) embracing it.

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 10, 2004

    Thought provoking but poorly done

    You would think that a book exposing media bias would rely on journalistic objectivity to make its case. In the case of Bernie Goldberg's book, you would, however be wrong. <p> Bernie has an axe to grind with Dan Rather and CBS for responding poorly to behavior most corporate management would find objectionable (I think you can skip the first 50 pages of the book which focuses primarily on the feud and mentions ONE example of bias). <p> The book makes a better case for arguing that what we call news is driven by market share than it does for liberal bias. This book itself demonstrates strong bias. <p> Think about it - if you were in high school and needed to do a report on bias in the news, you'd start by defining bias and you'd find some way of measuring that bias on news programs. Your analysis of content based on your proposed measure would allow you to determine first whether the news was biased and second in which direction it was slanted. The book does not do this. It lists a handful of questionable examples that are hardly representative of broadcast or cable news in its entirety. <p> If you submitted this book as your paper on media bias, you'd be lucky to get a C+. Far from a persuasive argument on the subject, the author sounds like a whiny little boy focusing on a scant handful of examples. The leap from these to his conclusion is hardly logical in that his justification seems to be, 'We all know it's true.' <p> Personally, I think the media is biased. I think they do pieces that are liberally biased but I believe there are also conservatively biased pieces. In today's news, I think the conservative bias is having a much bigger negative impact on our society. But more than bias, I think broadcast and cable news are pretending to provide journalistic coverage of issues while selecting (and presenting) only those topics which they guess lead to higher viewership. Gone is the notion of educating the public. It's been replaced by entertaining the public. <p> 'What Liberal Bias?' by Eric Alterman is a better read on the subject and it refutes some of the claims made by Bernie Goldberg. I recommend the Alterman book over this one. <p> If you read this book I encourage you to read it objectively and with an open mind. How should a bias argument be formed and what would be a persuasive analysis of that argument?

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted June 22, 2009

    Really Bad Book

    Don't buy this book! I bought it and couldn't put it down. Pretty much the entire world could have been destroyed and I would have kept reading it. Unbelievably absorbing.

    Finally all of the mystery of why the media is so biased makes sense.

    What I never realized is just how clever and pervasive they were at pushing their hidden agendas.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted April 20, 2009

    I Also Recommend:

    The Media is in the Tank for the left.

    While this book is a few years old, it is still a seminal work documenting the insidious and institutional bias in the media. Bernard Goldberg describes what happens to anyone who dares point out that the media bias is real and is hurting the media. His point is demonstrated even more by current events and who and what the media covers (or ignores).

    For anyone who wonders how this country got into the mess it is in, Bias illustrates the media's roll in helping to cause it.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted April 6, 2009

    Read this book

    This should be required reading for all high school students and again for all college students majoring in jouralism. What you will learn is that the media is out for their own agenda and somehow we as people have have allowed our information highway to be covered by left leaning liberals. Jouralism has become the black ice of our society.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 29, 2004

    Just a Post Script to an old Argument

    The really important point that so many people have overlooked about Bernard Goldberg¿s ¿Bias,¿ the interesting factoid that never seems to come under anyone¿s microscope is that when he wrote this book, Goldberg still considered himself a Liberal. In fact, even in the later book, ¿Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite,¿ after all the abuse he received at the hands of his powerful liberal ex-friends, Goldberg still considers traditional American Liberalism one of the great driving forces of 20th century politics. The book is more believable because it comes from a traditional Liberal. What Goldberg was giving us with this book is not one more rant on the evils of the Left by a conservative, but a Liberal¿s letter to his own camp on how they must shape up or vanish. The real message of this book is that the Left has ceased to attempt persuade anyone except those who are already converted, and Goldberg got a lesson about the truth of that message the day this book was published. What is more informative than anything in this book is the sad reality that instead of reading Goldberg¿s book and at least considering his criticisms, the Left first turned on Goldberg en masse and savaged him publicly, and then tried to ignore him in the hope he would go away. That he did not go away is a tribute to Goldberg¿s moral fiber. The Left's argument that Goldberg is merely a disgruntled ex-employee does not stand because of the resonance this book found in the American mainstream. If those of us here in ¿red state¿ country had not already felt and understood what Goldberg was talking about, we would not have bought the book.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 6, 2004

    Liberal Bias in the Media?

    Are the major broadcast media fair and balanced in presenting the news and issues of the day as they claim to be? Or, does liberal bias really exist in the American media? The book entitled Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, by Bernard Goldberg, reports how CBS and the news industry habitually forget its main mission: objective and disinterested reporting. Goldberg, at the cost of his job as a news reporter at CBS for nearly thirty years, expresses the notion that liberal bias really exists and that the media distort the news, as the title of his book suggests. Again and again he saw that the media slanted the news to the left. For years, Goldberg appealed to reporters, producers, and network executives for more balanced reporting, but no one listened. The liberal bias continued. Now, in Bias, he attempts to expose what the news business is really like, showing how and why the media slant their coverage while persisting that they're just reporting the facts. The way that Goldberg sees it, on issues ranging from homelessness to AIDS to child day care, reporters have simply reiterated the propaganda of pressure groups they favor, never minding the honest reporting. Chapter five of his book, ¿How Bill Clinton Cured Homelessness?describes how the reporters exaggerated the number of homeless to millions when in fact that number was only in thousands (page 72). Also, journalists ¿prettified?reality by showing ¿a very atypical, blond-haired and blue-eyed homeless family?(page 70) to establish a stronger identification with the audience and gain their support and sympathy (money) all under the control of the homeless lobby. He also stated that journalism omits inconvenient facts that might undermine the political agenda being promoted such as not mentioning the fact that 90 percent of the homeless are alcoholics, drug-addicts or are mentally ill. He wrote, ¿Meanwhile, the homeless lobby was putting the number of homeless in the millions¿Pump up the number of victims and we stand a better chance of getting more sympathy and support ?more money ?for our cause is what they correctly think,?(page 72) ¿And reporters are more than willing to go along and be yanked around by the homeless lobby.?(page 74) Later, in chapter six, ¿Epidemic of Fear? Goldberg makes the same argument again. The AIDS activists and gay lobby used the media to make AIDS seem like it was ¿everyone¿s disease?for sympathy ?and we know what sympathy really means ?from America. He stated, ¿But to do this (exaggerate the reality of AIDS in America), the activists needed their compassionate friends in the media. No Problem! It was the homeless story all over again. Tell the American people there were AIDS victims just like themselves ?if not right now, soon ?then maybe they would care enough to do something about the problem.?(pages 82-83) Not only the homeless lobbies and AIDS activists, but NOW (National Organization for Women) also has influenced how the news get reported. In chapter eleven, ¿The Most Important Story You Never Saw on TV? he expressed that the reporters don¿t report the real big story ?the absence of mothers from American homes is having dire consequences because the latchkey children don¿t know how to take care of themselves. Also, he points out that there are many policies being made that would make it easier for working moms to continue working and spend less time with their children, ¿The feminist response to any `controversial?news about day care is to call for more federal laws and subsidies to improve the quality of day care,?Goldberg (page 180). Goldberg offers another reason why the media distort the news: to look compassionate. When dealing with the homeless issue, the media sided with the homeless lobby and helped out the needy. When dealing with the AIDS issue, the media sided with the victims of the disease. Another example that Bias presents is the Alabama chain gang story. The state of

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 5, 2004

    Big Fat Editorial?

    I believe that Bernard Goldberg did a decent job on exposing the liberal bias that the media has. However, I do resent the length of the book. He repeats himself too much and dedicates about five pages of chapter 4 explaining how he is an 'old fashioned liberal.' It is unnecessary, especially since it follows a conversation he had w/ Rather (refer to pg. 34). In addition, he seems to be more than happy to take a few stabs at Rather and use up a couple more pages. I believe that he does make a point, but it becomes bogged down w/ all the unnecessary baggage.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted December 30, 2003

    A very important, UNBIASED, look at bias in the media

    There is bias in the news media, but unlike what some right-wingers propose, it has nothing to do with deliberate slanting. As Mr. Goldberg shows, the truth is far worse ... it's all unintentional. The news media is so left-winged that they consider liberal groups so 'mainstream' that they routinely use them and reference them as 'informed, learned sources.' On the rare occasions that right-of-liberal groups are referenced they are labeled as 'conservative', 'right-wing', or worse. Mr. Goldberg presents tons of evidence from numerous descriptions from transcripts to frequency of certain stories or types of stories in the media. I think the book runs a little long and the last half to a third basically continues the first half to two-thirds, just adding more concrete details. The audio edition also came with an interview with the author that added some fresh material, particularly dealing with feedback about this book. The only significant downside to the book is the way Mr. Goldberg several times mentions the fact that the TV news media takes its cues from the newspaper news (NY Times, Washington Post, etc) but then no suggestion is made about how to address that problem.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted July 1, 2003

    A little cheese with that whine?

    Being somewhat liberal myself, this book helped me to realize the extent of the liberal bias in the media. I always knew it was there, but never realized the extent to which this bias occurs until reading this book, and kudos to Goldberg for bringing it to light. That being said, I have some major issues with this work. First of all, his tone is whiny and sniveling. He goes out of his way to say that he may be perceived as a disgruntled ex-employee for writing this, then does nothing to prove otherwise (except a weak argument that he wouldn't have gone through the pain of writing a book if that were true. Huh?) That is EXACTLY how he SHOULD be perceived, especially based on his personal attacks on Dan Rather and other prominent members of the media. Secondly, most of the 'facts' he uses to support his thesis are merely quotes from his own or other people's opinions! Most come from op-ed pieces and hearsay. There are no hard statistics to support his argument. Either they don't exist at all, or he was too lazy to research them. Either way, he should be ashamed. Thirdly is the fact that Goldberg is a true literary lightweight (although I guess he can't be faulted for this since he really can't help it). His writing style, often pleading with the reader to see his point, is annoying, and he repeats himself frequently. Overall this book is nothing more than a desperate grab at a few bucks to support Bernard Goldberg's retirement. I became sure of this when I got to the end of the book and read through the appendix where his original op-ed pieces are printed. When I read them I realized that this book is nothing more than THOSE op-ed pieces spread thinly across 200 pages of pleadings, hearsay, opinions, and lame 'observations'. The only reason I gave the book 2 stars instead of 1 is that he does have a point and it made somewhat of an impression on me. It's too bad, however, that I wasted my time reading the whole book to come to this conclusion when I could have acquired the same information from reading his WSJ op-ed pieces in 5 minutes. Here's a piece of advice: If you're interested in this book, go to the bookstore, read the appendix to get all the info you'll need, then move on to something actually worth reading.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 14, 2003

    If you think you know.........

    This may or may not make you angry!IF you consider yourself educated, well read and informed, when read this book you will KNOW you are NOT!Do yourself a favor,read this!If you are a journalist,make a promise to yourself..Tell the TRUTH! If you lose your job, tell everyone why! Become independent and don't follow the 'rules'Question Everything!!!

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted May 12, 2003

    Absolute MUST READ!

    BIAS tells truths and exposes facts that many have suspected but never confirmed. Now we know - the mainstream media is hopelessly liberal and clueless about its left-wing thinking. Goldberg makes his case with style and wit.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 19, 2003

    EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS!

    A very reveling disclosure of the twisted way in which liberals think in the heart of liberalism, New York City. Bernard does a wonderful job explaining his own experiences dealing with the liberal press and what the ¿true¿ Dan Rather is really like¿...

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 22, 2003

    An Easy Read

    I just finished reading, Bias, and wanted to express my thanks to Mr. Goldberg for writing such an excellent expose of the extent of liberal bias in network news reporting. It is truly a shame that the leadership of CBS News did not take advantage of Mr. Goldberg's insight and use it to take them from the bottom back to the top. Their loss is Fox New's gain. Those of us who dropped away from Dan, Peter, and Tom have found refuge with the quality reporting of Brit Hume.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted March 26, 2003

    excellent

    What a great read. Confirms everything I've always know. I've seen Bernie on quite a few talk shows recently, and was afraid he had told all the stories on TV. Not so, plenty of good stuff in the book. Reads very fast.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 2, 2003

    People aren't smart enough...

    If people are smart enough to think and assess information by themselves, we don't need this kind of book to teach us whether the media has conservative or liberal bias.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 31, 2003

    Well, of course right-wingers will LOVE this book...

    ...but it is utter nonsense. As an eighteen year veteran of broadcast journalism now in academia (another "liberal" threat to those who love this book), I have nearly as many stories as Goldberg but, interestingly, they suggest different things to me. Yes, we distorted the news--shockingly, we even hid it sometimes--but decisions were uniformly made on the basis of maintaining a materialist, consumerist status quo. Yes, the media ARE liberal, but in the classic Adam Smithian, laissez faire sense of "liberal economics." It will be a cold day in hell when TV journalists try to subvert THIS cash cow. But the right-wingers love their conspiracies, especially the liberal conspiracies, and I'm afraid Bernard Goldberg knew just which buttons to push to sell a lot of copies of this truly embarrassing book.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 75 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)