Title: Credibility hurt by Dan Rather bashing.
Product review: Bias is truly a first rate classical muckraking literary example. The case for liberal bias in the various news media is compelling. However, what is more blatant is the omnipotent presence of Dan Rather bashing.Mr. Goldberg's credibility is greatly impeded by references to Dan Rather's personal character flaws; true though they may be. Just as one is getting into the credibility of a well organized and deliberative case being made by the author about liberal bias in the media, a "Dan Rather is a less than nice person" example is not so discretely woven into a paragraph. It tended to be so vindictive. In the very early chapters the reader is made well aware of the author's disdain for Mr. Rather. Any further references to Mr. Rather are whipping it to death. This reader found it to be distracting.As a past history/political science teacher, this reviewer still found this book to be provocative. I would look forward to more iconoclast works by Mr. Goldberg.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
