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

The nonfiction word of honor of Bernard Richard Goldberg entitled Bias A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the intelligence activity is phenomenal and controversial. Goldberg boldly and bravely mentioned celebrity intelligence activity man and reporters who actively participate in the liking of media crook. His earmark generally states the slanted or one-sided constitution of the tidings entombage. The nurse depart expire the endorsers ideas and evidences on how integrity, fairness, and rest disappe bed from watchword programworthiness reporting. Hence, this paper attempts to give the readers a glimpse or so Goldbergs perceptions of the how the news is being formulated nowadays.It intends to discuss more or less of the evidences backed up with Goldbergs opinion about news formulation in America oddly in the CBS watchword. This paper similarly aims to provide ain feedback and evaluations about Goldbergs charges of media bias and present ideas about jour nalism today. Veteran CBS reporter, Bernard Richard Goldberg in his oblige Bias A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News exposed how media bias prevails in Americas media. The title itself gives the readers an idea about its content.The book distinctly walks them through from the authors experiences in the world of journalism. He de fitred an phalanx of criticisms against major broadcasting networks and news reporters. He mentioned his perceptions about his colleagues biases in presenting news. Goldberg showed how news organizations and his colleagues on the job(p) as journalists operate behind the cameras. Any reader will agree that the extreme bitterness of Goldberg towards his colleagues before was really evident and vaporous in the book. The book presents facts and evidences about the idea of the media being leftist.Chapter 5 is a good example on how reporters used media for political persuasion. Goldberg supported this idea through evidence. In 1980, Goldberg started nonicing that the roofless lot in America showed on the news didnt look very much like the homeless people (Goldberg 63). The ones he saw on the sidewalks at large were medicate addicts or winos who mumbled crazy things, yet the ones that journalists showed on television were different. They looked as if they came from their part and mine. They looked like us (Goldberg 63).The quantity of homeless people being render in the media will somehow tell the leaders power to lessen poverty. During that time, the elected president was send Clinton. Goldberg clearly said that media illustrated Bill Clinton as a perfect humanitarian. Homeless people have a better situation than before, or better yet, the problem of homelessness was solved. According to Goldberg, this was about non wanting to show certain Ameri weeds at all. Monumental stories of how Americans live their lives atomic number 18 non nearly monumental to some TV journalists.Goldberg criticized that journalists blessed so much on news and stories like Princess Diana, Fidel Castros communistic dictatorship, and Jon Benet Ramsey but failed to focus on more of the essence(p) issues for American people that need to be addressed. The TV news influenced the viewers that the most important and significant story of contemporary times was Princess Di because it inspired and illuminated the people, but how about the more important realities which need to be solved? Goldberg presented visionary references of how media always ignore more relevant information.An example of the presented evidences was that more and more mothers have opted for work outside of the house over taking lot of their children at home and the results have been disastrous (Goldberg 164). However, serious stories like this were not given serious coverage. The increasing number of sexual abuse in America, the increasing number of premarital sex of children below 15 geezerhood old, the effects of divorce and absence of Ameri can mothers at home were some of the important stories that were not accentuated in media. Identity politics, according to Goldberg, was very eminent.In his book, Goldberg gave an example During the Clinton impeachment trial in 1999, as the senators signed their names in the oath book swearing they would be fair and impartial, Jennings, who was anchoring ABC Newss live coverage, made sure his audience knew which senators were conservatives but express not a word about which ones were sluttish (Goldberg 57). This was a rimy fact given which proves that conservatives and liberals in politics are treated in an obviously different manner by the news media. The book also informs the readers how media selects news and how they present it according to their profess stand to attract attention. unity prominent example is the way AIDS in the U. S. was depicted as an epidemic to spark demand for massive government AIDS spending. Since Goldberg has been in the news reporting field for a l ong time, readers can tardily assume the credibility of the book. Most of the facts presented were even based on his personal experience in the business. His perceptions are backed up with statistics and evidences which will give the readers impression that he knows what he is talking about. His bravery to name names would make him gain heroic impression. Personally, however, I found weaknesses in the book.I agree with the idea that reporters mentioned by Goldberg tend to slant the news to run to their suffer preferencethe standard of most viewers or the pro government. However, I am skeptic about whether the presented evidences given by Goldberg are enough to coin them media biases. It may be safe to conclude that Goldbergs colleagues provided some favorable information and concealed unfavorable information to the news viewers. Goldberg observed that reporters choose to cover certain events only, but did he not consider that events are infinite in number which means blank spa ce and time are necessarily limited?Reporters make their judgments in choosing events to cover which they think are newsworthy. Personally, that is not enough to label them as bias in general. I strongly believe that there is media bias as Goldberg wanted to depict, but the presented evidences were not just enough. I wish he went beyond that. Another weakness I found in the book is that Goldberg used political and technical terms like liberal bias, liberal hate speech, and conservatives to name a few. He failed to define them according to its context. delimit those terms will give the readers an idea what he was talking about.It may be easy to conclude that his target readers are those people working in the same business. Thus, those ordinary people who seek the truth can just define those terms in their own context and reality. As a result, they may misinterpret the message. Goldberg also failed to mention what factors made the media elect(ip) to be bias in presenting and choosin g news. Was it because of their educational background? What kind of orientation and realities do they have that affect their preferences in judging what is newsworthy? Was it because of laziness, or was it because they unintentionally conform to the standard of the majority?It is natural for a reader to assume that Goldberg can actually answer these questions since they became his colleagues. I wanted to remember Goldbergs idea about the homeless story. I find it weak. The readers may ask themselves whether homelessness during Bill Clintons administration remained stagnant. If only Goldberg provided information on the succeeding 0% of homelessness during Clintons era, it might truly create a stronger impact. However, in reading the book based on Goldberg evidences, I came up with the conclusion that the media abused their power to give information according to their own preference and standard.The problem is that they are not aware of it. They think that what they are doing is rig ht. His book is good though in suggesting the news they are eating the public are filtered and manufactured either intentionally or unintentionally. News must be presented accurately and completely, then let the public try on its context. The problem with journalists is that they tend to go beyond their job. I do not want to think that men and women entered journalism because they want to make a difference. Although that is good, the problem is they may just report certain news move by their own idealism and preference.For example, highlighting inspiring stories that may, in their own idea, inspire people and make a difference. Media must be very careful in giving the right and accurate information. Viewers of news want accurate information. They dislike slanted information because it will be costly in time, money, and effort to seek the truth. Despite its weaknesses, the book has make me to go and seek beyond the box. It cannot be ignored that Goldberg presented facts in his ch arges and accusations. The book provides one assurance one cannot expect perfect accuracy and balance of information even from competitive and credible media.