Bernard Goldberg presents an ... interesting ... argument for the mainstream media's liberal bias. Goldberg had some pretty good support for this argument - i.e. 50% of journalists identify with being Democrats, while only 4% identify with being Republicans. But my question is ... why are there more Democratic journalists? Are Republicans ... discriminated against in the journalism industry?Even if he does present a good amount of support for this argument - some "support" left me a bit confused. For example, he has a whole chapter on "the network color bar" - explaining why so many "victims" on network news are blond-haired and blue-eyed. Goldberg says, "We know who our viewers are. We know what they look like. And we know that they would be drawn more to stories about homeless people who looked just like their mothers and fathers and sons and daughters than homeless people who looked like, well, homeless people." He says that if journalists win sympathy for "them" ("people who look like our next door neighbors"), then they had a chance of winning sympathy for the less sympathetic homeless - which might translate into a new homeless shelter. But if this is true - why is something that is classified as a "liberal bias"?? Are liberals the only people who would want to do something to garner support for something like a new homeless shelter?
In my opinion, Goldberg tries to appeal to conservative emotion more than present hardcore facts. An interesting book - but I'm not convinced. Don't waste your time.
No comments:
Post a Comment