David Niven – författare

ONE OF THE BESTSELLING MEMOIRS OF ALL TIME WITH OVER FIVE MILLION COPIES SOLD WORLDWIDEDiscover the heartfelt, laugh-out-loud account of one of Hollywood's greatest actors and, above all, greatest menDebonair English wit and humourist extraordinaire, star of The Pink Panther, Casino Royal and Around the World in 80 Days, few Hollywood actors are remembered as fondly as David Niven.In this bestselling autobiography, Niven shows how, even as an unknown young man, he knew how to live the good life, regaling us with tales of school expulsion and wartime hi-jinks. However, it is his accounts of working and partying with the legends of the silver screen - from Lawrence Oliver and Vivien Leigh to Elizabeth Taylor, Noel Coward and dozens of others - that turn this memoir into an outright masterpiece.An intimate, gossipy, warm and above all charming account of life inside Hollywood's dream factory, The Moon is a Balloon is a classic to be read and enjoyed time and again.***'An immensely enjoyable, witty and racy memoir' Sunday Times'Forthright, bawdy, and often hilarious, zany and zestful, his anecdotes should keep you entertained for hours' Sunday Express'Niven's life was Wodehouse with tears' John Mortimer

In America, women are the clear majority of the electorate and the clear minority of elected officials overall. In 1997, women held only 21% of the seats at the state legislative level. This study finds that a significant and overlooked culprit acting to limit women's state legislative candidacies is the political party elite. Surveys of county party chairs and potential women legislative candidates were used to investigate the interaction between party leaders and women candidates and to assess its importance in the women's candidacy equation. The vast majority of potential women candidates did, in fact, respond that their parties discriminated against women candidates.Why would party leaders harbor bias against women? Party leader survey responses are consistent with the notion that most leaders are subject to the outgroup effect, which in essence means they prefer candidates in their own image. Since most party leaders are men, this encourages them to value male candidates and doubt the merits of female candidates. The findings suggest that this bias against women is most likely to occur where chairs have greater decision-making power and where chairs are leading the parties in less competititve districts. The existence of outgroup-motivated bias from party chairs is estimated to reduce the number of women state legislative nominees by one-third. Scholars interested in women in politics, political parties and recruitment, legislative elections, social psychology, and political psychology will find this book useful.

This examination of the causes, severity, and implications of racially stereotyped media coverage of Congress incorporates original analysis of congressional media coverage and interviews with congressional press staff. The news media often portray African-American members as being primarily interested in race, overly concerned with local matters, and wielding little legislative influence. By contrast, the images African-American members attempt to project of themselves are more complex and comprehensive than the images the media communicate. The authors offer a psychological explanation for this phenomenon, the Distribution Effect, in which those who are numerically rare in an occupation tend to be lumped together rather than treated as individuals. Their findings suggest that it is the media, rather than members of Congress, who are responsible for the racialized images that appear regularly in the press. This results in an advantage for white incumbents trying to attract votes but presents an obstacle to be overcome for African-American politicians.This study will appeal to political science, media studies, and racial studies scholars. It incorporates content analysis of the newest forum of communication, congressional Internet web sites, to disclose how white and African-American representatives in fact have similar media priorities.

Nine in ten Americans believe the media are biased. Trust in journalists ranks beneath that in lawyers, and even the media themselves regularly portray their own industry as slanted toward Democrats and liberals. These perceptions, however, do not coincide with reality, as David Niven reveals in his bold new take on an often-debated subject. Tilt? The Search for Media Bias presents the first comprehensive review of the charges, the evidence, and the effects, beginning with a simple but altogether overlooked premise: to measure media bias or fairness, one has to have a fair baseline with which to compare coverage. Using situations in which presidents, governors, mayors, and members of Congress from different political parties have produced the same results in office, Tilt? compares media coverage of Democrats and Republicans in situations in which they clearly deserved equal treatment.The lack of evidence for partisan media bias is only part of the story. The media cover allegations of bias as if their industry has already been tried and convicted, while the American people readily accepted the premise that their main sources of information are selfishly slanted toward reporters' personal political agendas. Niven's findings, unmistakable and consistent, reveal that when the output of politicians is the same, media coverage follows—a conclusion that is as provocative as it is timely and necessary.