media and the law

This new book is a welcome counterargument to the oft repeated conservative fantasy that they are somehow persecuted by a liberal-biased media. Alterman offers a readable and savage critique of the rise of conservative polit6ical pundits. he does a pretty good job of showing that the opposite is in fact true: through a combination of liberal meekness, corporate control, conservative showmanship, and journalists fear of bias allowed the rise of a media punditry that is largely right oriented and offers few strong liberal voices. Unfortunately this book will probably not change any minds. The people disposed to believe Altermans arguement likely already believe it and the people who need to hear his argument are probably unlikely to pick up the book and if they do they are likely to only do so so they can counter the latest arguments of the "Liberal dominated Media". Altermans case is not helped by the fact that he falls into some of the same traps as the conservatives he condemns: he often argues by anecdotes which, while apparently true, aren't necesarilly so. He often uses dogmatic language designed to reinfroce existing beliefs rather than convince people. He sometimes leaves arguments unsupported, and in his zeal to "get" the conservative demogogues he sometimes resorts to ad hominem attacks (he criticizes both Laura Ingraham and Anne Coulter for wearing revealing clothes, a fact which has nothing to do with the utter fallacy of their political thinking). Ironically "What Liberal Media" will probably, like "Blinded By the Right", be dismissed as part of the very liberla media eltie that the book seeks to debunk.

Eric Alterman has set himself the unenviable task of being the guy with the shovel walking behind the elephants in the circus parade. The "elephants" in this case are right-wing writers such as Bernard Goldberg and Ann Coulter, both of whom have made names for themselves (and bestsellers) decrying what they claim is the leftist bias in what they like to call the "mainstream media."

Having worked in the "mainstream media" myself, I'm in a position to know that this position is ridiculous, and Alterman makes a strong case that the reverse is true -- that a well-funded and hysterical right-wing cabal have so terrorized the media that they display a conservative, rather than a liberal bias. Whether it's the contempt that they showed to Al Gore during the 2000 campaign (as opposed to the fawning coverage that Bush received from Frank Bruni in, of all places, The New York Times) or the non-coverage of Bush's financial misdeeds as opposed to the massive coverage of Clinton's non-existent "crimes" concerning Whitewater, the press has chosen to cravenly cave in to the Republican line.

"Unbeknownst to millions of Americans," writes Alterman near the end of this book, "who continue to believe that the media are genuinely liberal -- or that conservatives and liberals are engaged in a fair fight of relative equality -- liberals are fighting a near-hopeless battle in which they are enormously outmatched by most measures." If you've been watching Fox's "fair and balanced" coverage you might not believe this at first, but Alterman makes a strong and convincing case.

This is an important book that needs to be read. Because it's long and takes the time to thoroughly make its case (and in small type, yet), I doubt that one person will read this book for every ten who read Ann Coulter's imbecilic "Slander." But people need to read Alterman -- as they need also to read Joe Conason and Paul Krugman and Al Franken. As opposed to the flamethrowing rhetoric on the right, these people have the facts on their side. It's time you knew the facts.

Real Americans don't stand a chance of understanding their country until they stop thinking in terms of "liberal" verses "conservative." Evangelical Christians see the media and other institutions pushing homosexuality and abortion - they're right! Others see the media pushing corporate greed - they're right! America is run by a group of people who want everyone to be oversexed, drug-addicted (Ritalin and Prozac preferred), childless, single, poor, stupid, and irresponsible. Can anyone with half a brain deny this? Does anyone really think that an upperclass of whom Paris Hilton and George W. Bush (the drunk, chronically unemployed trustfund baby, not the media creation) are typical members and who have purposefully set the country on a course where the best non-management job'll pay a measly $35,000 a year by 2010 wants ANYTHING else? People are going to be arguing about abortion and gay rights until we're all crowded in trailer homes - and guess what, we'll just get whatever a few fat cats want on those issues anyway. Americans better get their heads out of the conservative/liberal butts and think for themselves.