Reckless Disregard [Paperback]

Renata Adler (Author)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

An extraordinary coincidence occurred recently when two major libel cases involving famous military men and the American pressU.S. General William Westmoreland versus CBS and Israeli General Ariel Sharon versus Time magazinewere tried in the same courthouse in Manhattan at the same time. Adler, an experienced journalist as well as holder of a law degree, offers a penetrating analysis of the broadest ramifications of the two cases, including the disturbing conclusion that the press and the legal establishment in each instance placed their own interests above the search for the truth. This important book, which first appeared in the New Yorker , deserves the widest possible audience. Kenneth F. Kister, Pinnellas Park P.L., Fla.
Copyright 1987 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Product Details

• Paperback: 245 pages
• Publisher: Vintage; 1 edition (March 12, 1988)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0394755251
• ISBN-13: 978-0394755250
• Product Dimensions: 7.7 x 5.2 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,169,182 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The Hypocritical Media, June 13, 2003

By 

Dr. W. G. Covington, Jr. (Edinboro, Pennsylvania) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Reckless Disregard (Paperback)

Adler says CBS threatened to sue her for libel for writing this book. Isn't it ironic that the defenders of First Amendment protection threatened to go against the very argument they're defending in the subject of this book? This book is replete with such media hypocricies. This book could be used as a textbook for either media ethics or legal studies ethics. It is full of examples of the absence of both. Indeed seeing is not believing as she gives blatant illustrations where answers to questions were taken out of context and edited to make it appear they were the responses to particular questions. Interviewees' titles were inflated and the finished product was presented as a defense of the producer's thesis, not an objective journalistic inquiry. All of that in the CBS-Westmoreland case. In Sharon v. Time, the credibility of their writers, editors, and attorneys is laughable if this account is what really took place and she says it is. I don't understand why several people weren't in jail for perjury following these two trials. In the coda she claims CBS threatened her and her publisher and encouraged them not to print the book, but in their threat couldn't find a single factual error in its content. Even though these trials took place decades ago, they're still relevant as they describe the inner workings of two major institions, the legal system and mass media.