|
On February 13, 1996, The Wall Street Journal published an editorial entitled "Networks Need a Reality Check" by Bernard Goldberg, a fixture at CBS News. The premise of the editorial was that 1) there was a liberal bias on the part of television news reporters that 2) got in the way of their reporting. This was not exactly an earthshaking revelation to most people --- Gallup Poll results have long indicated that three out of four Americans are aware of this --- but Goldberg's editorial set off shockwaves for two reasons. The first reason was that a network newsman was stating the obvious. The second (and perhaps more important) reason was that the author of the editorial is, himself, a liberal. The editorial resulted in Goldberg's ostracism from CBS and, ultimately, in the writing of BIAS: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News.
The editorial that caused all the problems for Goldberg, as well as subsequent op-eds published on February 15, 1996 and May 24, 2001, are reprinted in BIAS. It would have been better, perhaps, if they had been reprinted in the front of the book rather than in an appendix at the end. They seem, at first blush, rather harmless, certainly when contrasted to the subsequent reaction they received in television newsrooms. And the reaction was not to the truth, or falsehood, of what Goldberg was saying; it was that he was making the observation at all.
Goldberg's position and the ultimate premise behind BIAS is that network news has failed in its mission by presenting the liberal position on issues as the baseline, if you will, of reasonableness and that any variation from that position is controversial or a deviation from how things should be. Reasonable minds, in other words, do not differ. Goldberg's observation, both at the time he wrote his initial editorial and now, is that differing viewpoints should be presented without disparagingly labeling one and giving the other, more favored, viewpoint a pass. Again, Goldberg is a liberal, but he is secure enough in his worldview and fair enough in his journalistic outlook to welcome the presentation of differing views.
The meat of BIAS is where Goldberg systematically illustrates how, when dealing with the major issues of our time such as homelessness, the Middle East, racism, AIDS and abortion, the networks have systematically favored one view to the exclusion of the other and have knowingly distorted the facts in order to do so. Goldberg also notes that the popularity of Fox News Channel in general --- and Bill O'Reilly in particular --- has occurred as a direct and proximate result of the major networks' failure to do the job they ostensibly set out to do.
FNC's policy of seeking viewpoints from responsible spokespersons of groups such as Right to Life and CORE, in addition to the usual suspects such as NOW, Friends of the Earth and the NAACP, has been rewarded with enhanced viewership. It has also been derided as a conservative network, if only for its steadfast determination to present more than the liberal point of view. Again, this is not exactly a bulletin, especially to those who have attempted to watch network news objectively over the past 30 or so years. What is fascinating about BIAS, however, is that Goldberg did not permit his personal worldview to interfere with his role as a journalist. As is noted in BIAS, he ultimately became a pariah at the network he had dedicated his life to for pointing out that the emperor had no clothes.
While BIAS does not contain any earthshaking revelations, it systematically and irrefutably lays out its case, point by point, for Goldberg's proposition concerning distortion of the news. For those who have been aware of this practice, BIAS will be a reaffirmation. For those who have been unaware of it, BIAS will be the salve that will cause the scales to fall from their eyes. Recommended.
--- Reviewed by Joe Hartlaub
• Click here now to buy this book from Amazon.
© Copyright 1996-2010, Bookreporter.com. All rights reserved.
Back to top.
|
