Customer Reviews

Media Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists, and Advertisers Mislead Us

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The fourth estate is supposed to expose nonsense in the public interest, but in this book, Radford exposes how the media itself purveys nonsense, betraying its contract with the American people.

Should be required reading for everyone -- arms you with the weapons you need to defend yourself from the daily onslought of error, half-truth, and ratings-pandering fake news.

There are hundreds of examples in this well-researched book of how the media distorts facts and displays its bias (not liberal or conservative, per se, but a coporate bias that panders to viewers who want spectacle, not facts).

Not since Neil Postman has there been a media critic who is so on the side of the critical thinker and so incisive in his critiques of the power of the media.

Highly recommended.

This book is a real eye opener to the truth behind the media's myths. Radford comes at everyday events, from 9/11/01 to mundane product advertising, at an angle that most of us never even considered. Communications and Media Majors will certainly appreciate his fresh takes on things that the public has become oblivious to. I highly recommend this entertaining and informative book to anyone who watches the 6 O Clock news!

. I recommend this book for his discussions of the media and of advertising--his critique of AOL is worth the price of admission alone.
. When Radford is addressing the press, he's right on. As he accurately points out, the media's efforts to keep the populace worked up and scared yields some untoward results, for example, fear legislation. He's right on the money.
. His crusade, that we as Americans are lacking critical thinking skills, is an accurate assessment. But when he addresses matters of science and law, he's sometimes off the mark. Although he labels himself as a skeptic, it seems much of his approach is that of the modern American cynic--if you can attribute an action to base motives, then you must be right.
. On matters of law, I wish he and other writers would understand that the making of a claim, or even the filing of a lawsuit, is evidence of nothing beyond the claimant or counsel could afford the filing fee. A court judgment means something. A settlement sometimes does and sometimes doesn't. But filing a complaint means nothing.

I have to be honest, I don't watch a lot of news programs. I don't watch my local news nor the endless parade of talking heads that work the 24 hour news desk on any of the big cable news channels. There is a good reason for this . . .I was able to recognize much of what Ben Radford mentions in his book - cross pollination of products and their producers, advertising disguised as news, and that not all experts are as objective as they should be.
While Ben writes about the problems in the journalism and advertising trades, there is also the suggestion that the integrity and objectivity we desrve from the media at large will only be offered if we demand it.

Written in the spirit of Vance Packard and Ralph Nader, Ben Radford delivers a blistering critique of the subtle media forces that vie for our hearts, minds and wallets. Acerbic and witty, this is a provocative, engaging book that would be ideal for college media classes.

Robert E. Bartholomew, Ph.D.

By far one of the most useful books to be published in recent years, Media Mythmakers provides essential information that all people, especially those living within the USA, should arm themselves with.

The media is a powerful force in our lives - in our thoughts, our beliefs and most importantly, our actions. Radford examines this force with a critical and objective eye, dissecting its elements and penetrating the motivations, meanings, and effects it has upon civilization. Even the most cynical reader may be horrified by what Radford uncovers. Fascinating examples are provided throughout this well-written book. Best of all, however, are the realistic solutions for change.

As an editor, Radford is more than qualified to examine this realm and he does so with great skill. I was happy to discover that the book was extraordinarily well organized and written. I can see it used as a basis for many high school and university courses in journalism, communication and critical thinking. In an improved world, it might also be used by activists, media professionals, decision-makers, politicians - even concerned parents and students of life.

The reader is left with a media literacy that will serve them well throughout life and is necessary in our time. I highly recommend this book to one and all.

With its broad scope, Benjamin Radford's Media Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists and Advertisers Mislead Us explores the ways in which the media misleads the American public. It is a multifaceted study, drawing examples from advertising and activism as well as mainstream media activities. The book's fascinating information is buried in redundant text and circular organization. Is Radford's scope too broad? Is a book written in 2003 still relevant? These are just a couple questions that arise from Media Mythmakers, and only the author can truly answer them. The information the book contains may hint at the answers.

The first step in answering these questions is determining what information is well presented. Radford succeeds in detailing the mainstream media's exploitation of emotion. He explains common logical fallacies committed by martyrmakers. With that, examples of groups profiting from tragic events illustrate some of the most deplorable aspects of the media and ordinary people working together to manipulate public opinion. This book is one of the few instances where anyone pins responsibility for declining media quality on the American populace. Another concept Radford examines with particular care is bias, be it the inherently subjective nature of journalism or his own bias in writing the book. He also discusses the value of critical thinking in a variety of situations from causes du jour to the effect of media-induced hype on the legislative process. At its best, Mythmakers dissects the consequences of emotion-clouded judgment and its effects on people being accurately informed of the most complex issues of the day.

While the book provides useful information, the organization of data and analysis feels frenetic, as information gets lost in ill-formed transitions. Radford's examples jump around, and he relies heavily on three news stories for examples of substandard journalism practices: Princess Diana's death, the Columbine shootings, and 9/11. This repetition in the book becomes tiring; perhaps Radford should have treated them as case studies so errors in media could be noted in one or two chapters instead of several. Likewise, the chapters on advertising are incongruent in tone and content when compared to the rest of the book. While reading later chapters, I wondered if advertising would be further addressed. Given its brief appearance in the beginning, the information on advertising may be better examined as part of other media manipulation tactics. The book's overall format also feels cluttered. While part of it stems from the numerous sources cited, the layout is more akin to a string of extended essays combined into a hardcover book with no thoughtful transitions between them. Dedicating individual chapters to the most prominent cases of media misbehavior would have facilitated more thorough and easy to follow discussion of the exact tactics used to sway public opinion and information.

Media Mythmakers also falters in properly identifying its audience. The language used shifts between formal and colloquial. This bipolarity suggests Radford attempted to write this book to appeal to two very different groups: the intellectually ambitious and mainstream media consumers. Finding a middle ground for these groups is difficult at best, and such fluctuation in diction is not a constructive way to achieve that goal. The intellectually ambitious crowd of this decade, meanwhile, will regard much of the information presented as old news. The statistics for white collar crime are a prime example of such information; this information is now taught in introductory social science courses at various higher education institutions. If this book is intended for the more cerebral audience, expanded discussion on the less obvious topics (e.g. activist manipulation of the media and the humanitarian aid paradox) would be a more sensible approach. Meanwhile, a more mainstream audience may need to be alerted of the white collar crime statistics. No matter the audience, new information needs to be presented to reflect the changes in the media environment since 2003. The audience and its various subsections have changed significantly since that time.

Radford's book provides some useful information regarding the state of contemporary media. Finding that information is a test of reading skill and perseverance. Valuable information hides in redundancy and outdated statistics. Media Mythmakers covers a subject that deserves more careful examination than what is currently given. Radford should consider rewriting this book for the new decade, which has not only a new crop of stories bungled by the media but also a transformed audience.