AEJMC Archives

AEJMC Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave AEJMC
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: AEJ 05 CechM ENT A REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON THE STATUS, EFFECTS, AND CAUSAL FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE DIFFERENCES IN MEDIA COVERAGE FOR MENS AND WOMENS ATHLETICS
From: Elliott Parker <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:AEJMC Conference Papers <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Sun, 5 Feb 2006 03:55:09 -0500
Content-Type:text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

text/plain (720 lines)


This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
         If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line, 
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").

(Feb 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================

A REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON THE STATUS, EFFECTS, AND CAUSAL FACTORS 
INVOLVED IN THE DIFFERENCES IN MEDIA COVERAGE FOR MEN'S AND WOMEN'S ATHLETICS

Elizabeth Ann Gibler
Student
University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Journalism
[log in to unmask]
(816) 522-8330
8 Dorsey St. #3, Columbia, MO 65201









STATEMENT OF STUDENT AUTHORSHIP

This paper was written exclusively by Elizabeth Ann Gibler, a 
graduate student at the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Journalism.

ABSTRACT

	In this paper, the literature on gender differences in sports 
coverage is examined for an understanding of the issue's current 
status as well as its causes and effects. Despite the continuing 
increase in interest and participation in women's sports, media 
coverage for female athletes has actually declined over the past 
decade.  This unequal media coverage affects female participation and 
body image as well as the professional opportunities available to 
female athletes.

















  A REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON THE STATUS, EFFECTS, AND CAUSAL FACTORS 
INVOLVED IN THE DIFFERENCES OF MEDIA COVERAGE FOR MEN'S AND WOMEN'S ATHLETICS


It is widely understood that media coverage differs between men's and 
women's athletics.  Since the 1972 adoption of Title IX, which set 
standards of equality among female and male collegiate athletes, 
there has been rising national interest in not only equal opportunity 
and participation for female athletes, but also equality in media 
coverage of women's athletics.  The general belief held about sports 
coverage is that male athletes receive far more coverage than female 
athletes in the media.  Beyond this are less widely held theories on 
the quality of media coverage for women's sports, the most popular 
being the sexualization of female athletes.  Research in this area is 
designed to identify the problems in coverage and their causes, as 
well as demonstrate how this coverage can have a detrimental effect 
on the athletes, their audience, and society as a whole.
Gendered media coverage of athletes is one of the most heavily 
studied topics in the area of sports media. The scope of the research 
in this area, however, could be much more comprehensive. Studies on 
the topic focus primarily on the perceived bias against women in the 
sports media.  The majority of research is also confined to finding 
evidence on the status of media coverage for men's and women's 
athletics using content analyses to determine quantity and 
quality.  There are slightly fewer studies that also examine possible 
causes for this phenomenon and even fewer studies that touch on its effects.
This paper will examine the breadth of research available on coverage 
of athletes by gender to determine where research in this field 
currently stands, in order to discover where it would be beneficial 
for future research to go.  First, the status of gendered media 
coverage lies in two areas, quantity and quality.  In terms of 
quantity, it is clear the large majority of coverage is devoted to 
male athletics, although there are a few instances where female 
athletes reach or surpass their male counterparts in this 
arena.  Furthermore, although one would assume the emphasis on female 
athlete equality would result in an increase in coverage, when 
examining the media as a whole, this is not the case.  Regarding 
quality, there has been conflicting evidence found, especially 
regarding the use of stereotypical descriptors, but the emphasis on 
non-sport activities and sexuality in women's athletics is 
clear.  The placement and production value of women's sports also 
reflects a possible bias.
Next, this paper will explore the effects of sports media on the 
audience and the athlete through framing effects, participation, body 
image, the creation of role models, and endorsements and 
opportunities.  The last aspect of research the paper examines is the 
factors affecting media coverage of men's and women's athletics 
including the gender of the media personnel, the gender of the 
audience, the source of media funding, awareness of inequity, 
traditional gender constructions of sport, and the market value of 
sexuality.  By and large, these factors have been unsubstantiated in 
research or lie mostly in speculation.  Finally, the paper will 
identify holes in the literature and provide suggestions for further research.


STATUS OF GENDERED MEDIA COVERAGE

	The first step towards determining whether differences in coverage 
affect opportunities for female athletes, is to understand the way 
the media is covering the athletes differently based upon their 
gender.  Coverage differs in two primary areas, quantity and 
quality.  Quantity of coverage involves how much time and space is 
devoted to female athletes in the media compared to the time and 
space devoted to male athletes in the same media.  Women are 
typically covered less than men except for in specific instances 
where a concentrated emphasis has been placed upon women, such as the 
1996 Olympics, the NCAA News, tennis, and women's sports 
magazines.  There are also significant differences in the amount of 
time devoted within the coverage of women's sports.  The research in 
this area shows that while media coverage of women's athletics peaked 
in the mid-nineties, it has been declining ever since.
	The quality of coverage refers to the differences in media content 
when covering male and female athletes.  Research in this area has 
focused primarily on the use of gendered descriptors and 
stereotypical feminine or masculine language, but it has also 
examined the general content of stories and photographs as well as 
the placement and production value of the media coverage.  By and 
large the research on descriptors is inconclusive as a whole, but 
clear patterns emerge in the analysis of general content, placement, 
and production value.

Quantity of Coverage Devoted to Men's and Women's Athletics
	Typically, men's sports receive far more coverage than women's 
sports regardless of the sport or the medium.  Studies on the 
Olympics, the most popular single sporting event in the world, have 
found that aside from the 1996 Olympics, dubbed "the women's games", 
men's competitions have garnered far more airtime than the women's 
competitions.  In studies of the 1992 and 2000 Olympics broadcast by 
NBC, not only did the men receive more coverage overall than the 
women, but men's team sports received more coverage than women's team 
sports, and when men and women placed equally in the same sport, the 
men still received at least twice the coverage of the women (Tuggle, 
Huffman, & Rosengard, 2002; Higgs, Weiller, & Martin, 2003).
	In a study of broadcast media sports coverage done by Messner, 
Duncan, and Cooky (2003), the three major network newscasts in Los 
Angeles were found to not only cover women less, but to give women 
virtually no airtime on weekdays, saving the bulk of women's coverage 
for the weekends.  The same study also found that despite the lack of 
women's coverage on the networks, ESPN's SportsCenter was still found 
to air an even smaller proportion of women's sports coverage.
	SportsCenter, one of the top sports highlight shows in the nation, 
has been the subject of several studies for its extreme lack of 
coverage of women's sports.  Over a one month period in 2002, 
SportsCenter aired 778 stories about male athletes, 16 stories about 
female athletes, and 13 stories focused on both genders.  The 
boundaries of the study were designed to include ESPN's designated 
"Women in Sports Weekend", which produced only one women's story on 
SportsCenter (Adams & Tuggle, 2004).  In a previous study by Tuggle 
(1997), SportsCenter and CNN's Sports Tonight were only found to give 
about five percent of the airtime to women's athletics.  In terms of 
the print media, Sports Illustrated is the most widely read sports 
publication in the United States and it was found to only devote ten 
percent of its coverage to female athletes (Fink & Kensicki, 2002).
	Unlike national media outlets, market forces do not drive campus 
media, however, there is evidence to suggest that campus media 
organizations still follow the lead of the mainstream media in 
limiting the coverage of women's athletics.  In a study of university 
print and broadcast news, Huffman, Tuggle, and Rosengard (2004) found 
that male athletes made up 72.2 percent of the stories in campus 
newspapers and 81.5 percent of the stories in campus news 
broadcasts.  A study of university softball and baseball web sites in 
1999 also found that women's teams received inequitable coverage 
during both preseason and in-season coverage of the sports (Sagas, 
Cunningham, Wigley, & Ashley, 2000).  In terms of coverage quantity 
within the sports broadcast, Women's NCAA basketball was found not to 
generate as many lines of broadcaster commentary as the men's games 
during the broadcasts of the 2000 NCAA Final Four (Billings, Halone, 
& Denham, 2002).  Although, a similar study the year before on NCAA 
regular season games found women's and men's teams generated equal 
amounts of commentary (Eastman & Billings, 2001).  Although a measure 
of quantity, lines of commentary may also be an issue of quality, 
because the amount of time the broadcaster spends talking about the 
game likely affects the viewer's experience of the sports cast.
	The vast under-representation of female athletes that appears almost 
standard in the media does not apply across the board.  There are 
instances where female athletes do take center-stage in the 
media.  For example, the 1996 Olympics were dubbed "the Woman's 
games" and for the first time in NBC Olympic coverage, women received 
more television coverage than the men in same sport competitions 
(Higgs et al., 2003).  NCAA not-for-profit media outlets are also 
often a showcase for women's athletics.  In the NCAA News, for 
example, women receive coverage almost exactly proportional to the 
percentage of female athletes competing in the NCAA (Cunningham, 
Sagas, Sartore, Amsden, & Schelihase, 2004).
	The biggest equalizer in the disparate coverage of men's and women's 
athletics is found in the sport of tennis, both collegiate and 
professional.  In internet coverage of men's and women's collegiate 
tennis teams on university sponsored web sites, women equaled and 
surpassed the men in both the presence of team information and the 
amount of in-season coverage (Cunningham, 2003).  Female collegiate 
athletes are also more likely to receive coverage in tennis than any 
other sport on university newscasts (Huffman et al., 
2004).  Professionally, tennis is the only sport in which women 
challenge and supercede the men in either airtime or endorsements 
(Spencer & McClung, 2001).
	Women's sports magazines also give extra opportunity for coverage of 
women's sports.  In a study by Fink and Kensicki (2002), women 
received more coverage than men in Sports Illustrated for Women.  The 
women, however, still did not receive as much coverage in Sports 
Illustrated for Women as men received in Sports Illustrated.
	The gender bias in the quantity of media coverage is not confined to 
the proportion of men's and women's sports coverage alone.  There are 
time and length discrepancies within the coverage of women's 
athletics as well.  By far, women's individual sports receive more 
coverage than women's team sports.  In 1995, individual sports made 
up 95 percent of women's sports coverage on Sports Center and Sports 
Tonight (Tuggle, 1997).  Of the stories SportsCenter aired on women 
in one month in 2002, nine were on French Open tennis, three were on 
women's golf, two were on the WNBA, one was on softball, and one was 
on track, 13 of 16 stories on individual sports (Adams & Tuggle, 
2004).  Although the Olympic games include more individual events for 
women than team events, the individual events still received a 
disproportionate amount of airtime in 2000 (Tuggle et al., 
2002).  Outside the individual event bias, women's sports requiring 
physical power or hard body contact also receive little to no 
coverage in the media (Tuggle et al., 2002).
	In contrast to popular belief, an analysis of the available research 
suggests that the proportion of coverage devoted to women's athletics 
in the media is actually decreasing.  Coverage began increasing in 
the seventies with the introduction of Title IX and peaked in the 
mid-nineties, around Women's World Cup Soccer and the 1996 Olympics, 
before beginning the decline it is currently suffering from.  In 
terms of Olympic coverage, women's coverage increased from the 1992 
games to the 1996 games, with the biggest increases occurring in 
basketball, a 26 percent increase, and volleyball, a 69 percent 
increase (Higgs et al., 2003).  Women's sports coverage declined 
proportionally, however, from the 1996 Olympics to the 2000 Olympics 
(Tuggle et al., 2002).
	In Sports Illustrated, a composite of studies spanning 40 years by 
Bishop (2003) found that there was no increase in the proportion of 
women's coverage for the entire time period.  In fact, articles with 
a shared focus of men and women had decreased and the percentage of 
photographs featuring women also decreased.  Despite its poor 
statistics, SportsCenter did manage to slightly increase the 
proportion of coverage it devoted to women from 1989 to 1999 (Messner 
et al., 2003), however, it experienced a decrease in the proportion 
of women's coverage from 1995 to 2002 (Adams & Tuggle, 2004), 
supporting the peak and decline analysis.

Quality of Coverage Devoted to Men's and Women's Athletics
	In sports media, female athletes not only receive a disproportionate 
amount of coverage time and space, they also often receive a 
different quality of coverage than male athletes.  Literature in the 
area of quality examines a wide range of indicating factors including 
the use of gender and racially stereotypical descriptors, the context 
of the coverage, an emphasis on sexuality and femininity, and 
potential biases in segment placement and production.
	The majority of research regarding the quality of media coverage on 
women's sports deals with gendered descriptors.  Typically, male 
athletes are more often referred to in terms of their physicality, 
athleticism, and commitment, while female athletes are referred to in 
terms of their personality, appearance, and background (Billings & 
Eastman, 2002; Billings et al., 2002; Higgs et al., 2003).  This 
theory was supported in a study of the 2000 NCAA Final Four 
basketball tournament (Billings et al., 2002) and a study of the 2000 
summer Olympics (Billings & Eastman, 2002).  A similar study of the 
1992 and 1996 Olympics found that the use of descriptors was 
prevalant in individual sports such as gymnastics and swimming, but 
much less significant in team sports like basketball and volleyball 
(Higgs et al., 2003).
	In coverage of the 1999 Women's World Cup Soccer Championship, an 
event touted in the United States as bringing an increase in 
popularity, coverage, and equality to women's sports, the women were 
described using both stereotypically feminine and masculine 
characteristics (Christopherson, Janning, & McConnell, 2002).  The 
coverage also resembled what sports scholars refer to as the 
"essentialist perspective" which occurs when women's sports and 
female athletes are described as playing a "cleaner" game 
(Christopherson et al., 2002).
	Within woman-specific coverage like Sports Illustrated for Women, 
stereotypically feminine descriptors are still used (Fink & Kensicki, 
2002).  Racial issues are also more likely to turn up in women's 
games than in men's games.  For example, in regular season women's 
NCAA basketball games, whites received more commentary than blacks, 
there were proportionally fewer black commentators, and there were 
more racially stereotypical descriptors used in women's games than in 
men's games (Eastman & Billings, 2001).  This is likely because men's 
basketball is an older institution so the men's commentators have had 
more time and experience to work out unconscious stereotypical 
commentary.  In addition, the commentators for men's games have 
likely been instructed to watch for racially biased commentary while 
the women's games are still primarily concerned with gender 
stereotypes at this stage.
	The context and type of the media coverage given to female athletes 
also hints at biases in the coverage of men's and women's 
athletics.  According to Messner et al. (2003), coverage of women on 
SportsCenter and network newscasts in 1999, during the theoretical 
women's sports boom caused by Women's World Cup Soccer, women's 
stories were typically in the form of humorous features on 
non-serious women's sports.  Although Fink and Kensicki (2002) found 
that Sports Illustrated for Women depicted women in more sports 
related settings in both articles and photographs, they also found 
that the men in Sports Illustrated were still featured more 
athletically than the women in Sports Illustrated for 
Women.  Furthermore, 55 percent of the photographs of women in Sports 
Illustrated were in non-sport settings compared to 25 percent of male 
photographs.  Bishop (2003) also found that the photographs of women 
in Sports Illustrated highlighted femininity instead of athleticism 
and often the women pictured were not even athletes.  In contrast, 
women's articles in the NCAA News were more likely to contain factual 
information than personal information and in the photographs, women 
were more likely to be in competition than men (Cunningham et al., 2004).
	A major area of speculative research in the quality of coverage of 
women's athletics involves the perceived emphasis on sexuality and 
femininity.  Many researchers feel the "Kournikova effect" of 
exploiting sexuality undermines the legitimacy of women's sports 
(Spencer & McClung, 2001).  In an analysis of media coverage of 
women's sport in the nineties, Shugart (2003) found that the media 
often uses passive objectification and sexualization of performances 
in coverage of female athletes.  Outside of sexuality, the large 
majority of print coverage of the 1999 U.S. Women's World Cup soccer 
players emphasized the fact that the players were women when covering 
them (Christopherson et al., 2002).
	The placement and production of athletic events, including the 
gender of quoted sources, says a lot about the perceived importance 
of that event.  In the coverage of the 2000 Olympics, male sources 
outnumbered the female sources (Tuggle et al., 2002).  In one month 
on SportsCenter and Sports Tonight, however, more men were quoted on 
the shows, but a higher percentage of the women's stories used quoted 
sources (Tuggle, 1997).  In terms of placement, when the men's and 
women's stories were on the same sport, the men's story typically 
appeared first (Tuggle, 1997), and in Adams and Tuggle's study on 
SportsCenter (2004), no female story involved a reporter or appeared 
in the first two blocks.  In the NCAA News, however, women maintained 
preferential treatment by receiving more prominent placement in the 
paper than the male athletes (Cunningham, et al., 2004).
	Although SportsCenter and Sports Tonight have a bad record for 
giving women unequal coverage, there is no difference in production 
value between their male and female stories (Tuggle, 1997).  In NCAA 
Division I basketball, however, researchers found a difference in the 
types and length of camera shots.  Men's games had more court level 
and full court camera shots and more on-screen graphics, while the 
duration of close-ups were longer in the women's games.  This type of 
production makes the men's games appear more exciting and action 
oriented while asking viewers of the women's games to identify with 
the personal aspects of the players and coaches (Hallmark & Armstrong, 1999).


EFFECTS OF UNEQUAL COVERAGE ON THE AUDIENCE AND THE ATHLETE

	The lack of gender balance in sports media coverage is only 
important if it generates positive or negative effects on the 
audience, athlete or society.  So far, research suggests that the 
absence of equality in coverage affects all three interest 
groups.  In terms of academic theory, researchers are most concerned 
with how the absence of women's coverage frames women's sports as 
less important.  The tangible effects on the viewers and society are 
most notably available when looking at increases in sports 
participation among young women, the effects on body image and eating 
disorders, and the development of role models.  For the athletes, an 
increase in media coverage can mean more endorsements and more 
opportunities for women to compete at an elite or professional level.

Framing Theory Effects
	The most common theory used to explain the possible effects of 
gender biased sports media coverage is framing.  The lack of coverage 
for women's athletics implies to the audience that women's sports are 
marginal and unimportant (Adams & Tuggle, 2004).  Under this 
analysis, the less women's sports are covered, the less there will be 
an audience demand for them, and the more the media outlets can get 
away with not covering them and not putting them on the public 
agenda.  Giving society the impression that women's sports are 
inconsequential can have detrimental effects on the development of 
women's sports programs and the opportunities women and girls have to 
participate in athletics.  The media also frames women's sports by 
telling them what type of sports participation is appropriate and 
acceptable for females (Huffman et al., 2004).  According to the 
current coverage, the audience is being told that it its acceptable 
for women to participate in individual sports and sports that allow 
for traditional roles of femininity but not to participate in sports 
with traditionally masculine roles such as ones involving physical 
power and hard body contact.

Effects on Participation
	Since Title IX was put into place in 1972, and a corresponding 
emphasis was placed on female athletes in the media, there has been a 
dramatic increase in participation in women's athletics.  According 
to the National Federation of State High School Athletic 
Associations, from 1971 to 2001, women in high school athletics 
increased from 300,000 to 2,800,000 (Adams & Tuggle, 2004).  There 
was a 25 percent increase in participation of females from the age of 
six and up in basketball from 1987 to 1997, during the same decade in 
which women's professional basketball leagues were created and gained 
prominence (Spencer & McClung, 2001).  According to Women's Sports 
Foundation Executive Director Donna Lopiano, the nineties saw a 37 
percent increase in women's high school softball participation and 
youth softball teams increased from 1.3 to 1.85 million (Spencer & 
McClung, 2001).  These are the same time periods in which media 
coverage of women's sports was increasing.

Effects on Body Image and Eating Disorders
	Researchers often worry about the images in the media because of the 
impressionability of the children and teens watching.  It is 
relatively well known that sports participation is directly related 
to better self-esteem and body image among women (Bissell, 2004), and 
if media coverage increases participation, then an increase in media 
coverage could indirectly improve the body images of the nation's 
female youth.  A study by Bissell (2004) also suggests that just the 
exposure to sports media promotes better body image among 
females.  Increases in media coverage can also directly affect the 
audience's body image and tendencies towards eating disorders as 
well.  Bissell (2004) found that women who view women's sports are 
less likely than women who watch men's sports to have tendencies 
towards eating disorders.  The media also gives women polarized body 
images of the strong athlete and the skinny super model, making it 
difficult for young women to identify the ideal role model 
(Christopherson et al., 2002).    Christopherson et al. (2002) 
suggests that the potential for female athletes to be good role 
models and gain popularity comes from having both feminine and 
masculine characteristics.

Effects on Endorsements and Opportunities
	Endorsement opportunities increase for athletes as media coverage 
increases for that athlete or that sport.  The more endorsements that 
are available to women, the more chances women have to compete at an 
elite or professional level in sports, which in turn increases the 
likelihood of coverage of women's sports.  Currently the only sport 
that women have equality with men in endorsements is in tennis.  This 
also happens to be the only sport in which women receive equal media 
coverage with men (Spencer & McClung, 2001).


FACTORS AFFECTING SPORTS MEDIA COVERAGE

	If improvements are ever going to be effectively made in the 
coverage of women's sports, scholars, media personnel, and sports 
personnel will have to have a greater understanding of what factors 
cause the lack of coverage and what factors will improve the equality 
of coverage.  The gender of media personnel, although a popular focus 
of this research, has not been found to have an effect on 
coverage.  Instead, more market-driven factors like the gender of the 
expected audience, the type of media funding, and the marketability 
of sexuality are more supported in research.  Other factors include 
the awareness of inequity, and socio-cultural issues like the 
traditional gender constructions of sport.

The Gender of Media Personnel
	The gender of media personnel has not been found to have any effect 
on the coverage of women's sports.  In 1995, even though SportsCenter 
had a higher percentage of women on staff than Sports Tonight, 
SportsCenter still aired a lower percentage of stories on women 
(Tuggle, 1997).  In collegiate basketball, the gender of the 
commentator was found to make no difference in the quality of the 
commentary (Billings et al., 2002), and in coverage of Florida high 
school athletics, no association was found between media staff gender 
and quantity or quality of sports coverage for women (Pedersen, 
Whisenant, & Schneider, 2003).  The female and male sports staff 
wrote virtually the same percentage of articles about females and 
males (Pedersen et al., 2003).  In addition, the gender of the 
athletic director, as an agenda-builder, was also found not to be a 
factor in the perception of coverage that should go to women's 
athletics (Whisenant & Pedersen, 2004).

The Gender of the Audience
	The gender and gender preferences of the audience is often used as 
an excuse by media executives for providing unequal coverage of men's 
and women's athletics.  As of 2003, Sports Illustrated's readership 
was 78 percent male (Bishop, 2003).  In 1995, Sports Tonight had a 44 
percent audience makeup of women and SportsCenter had a 22 percent 
audience makeup of women (Tuggle, 1997).  The actual proportion of 
coverage of women's sports is significantly lower than the female 
audience in each medium.  ESPN executives argue the content is 
market-driven.  The audience wants to see mostly coverage about men 
and wants women's coverage to be non-serious and sexual (Messner, 
Duncan, & Cooky, 2003).  ESPN has also said it will increase coverage 
to meet market demand.  According to ESPN Senior Vice President and 
Managing Editor Bob Eaton on On the Basis of Sex June 22, 2002,
SportsCenter's job is to cover the sports that our audience is 
interested in because that's how we get the most people to watch.  As 
women's sports have increased in importance, and interest has 
increased… we cover more of that… We can't generate the interest on 
our own – the audience has to tell us what they want… Our first job 
is to generate the highest rating we can for the program, and to do 
that, we're going to put on the sports that more people want to see 
(Adams & Tuggle, 2004).
But, although ESPN says it increases its coverage to meet the 
increasing audience interest, there has been a decrease in the 
proportion of women's coverage on SportsCenter (Adams & Tuggle, 2004).
	In addition, even when the audience is expected to be mostly female, 
the coverage still does not compare proportionally.  NBC executives 
expected the 2000 summer Olympics audience to be a majority of women, 
however women's coverage still decreased from the 1996 games (Tuggle 
et al., 2002).  Plus, although Sports Illustrated for Women, a 
magazine designed for women, covers more women than men, it still 
does not give women the same proportion of coverage that men receive 
in Sports Illustrated (Fink & Kensicki, 2002).

Marketability of Sexuality
	Female athletes are often marketed on sexuality because "sex sells" 
(Shugart, 2003).  In 1999, Anna Kournikova was second in endorsements 
for women's tennis with 11 million dollars in endorsements without 
ever having won a major tournament (Spencer & McClung, 2001).  This 
was possible because of her strong sex appeal.  According to Spencer 
and McClung (2001), sex and scandal get viewers to tune in for better 
or for worse.

How the Media is Funded
	The gender of the audience and the media's emphasis on sex appeal 
are both market-driven explanations for coverage.  Any market-driven 
media outlet follows these preferences.  This is why the mainstream 
media is far more likely to give women inequitable coverage when they 
feel the audience is primarily interested in men's sports (Higgs et 
al., 2003).  This is clear in the status section of this paper in 
terms of the quantity value of Olympic coverage, network sports 
casts, cable sports shows, and mainstream magazines.  Women receive 
far more equitable coverage in not for profit media because the 
coverage is not market driven and has the freedom to be more fair 
with its coverage (Cunningham, 2003; Cunningham et al., 2004).  This 
was especially apparent in coverage by the NCAA News and university 
tennis web sites.

Awareness of Inequity
	The NCAA is not just a leader in equitable coverage for male and 
female athletes.  It also leads the way in media inequity awareness 
and education.  Awareness of inequity is, at the very least, an 
important step in improvement of coverage, however, in an analysis of 
the available research, it also appears to be a factor of its own in 
promoting more equitable coverage.  The NCAA regularly holds Title IX 
seminars on gender equity in the media, promoting awareness of what 
problems exist, and as a result, the NCAA News and many university 
web sites are far more equitable in their coverage than the average 
media outlet (Cunningham, 2003; Cunningham et al., 2004).

Traditional Gender Constructions of Sport
	Some factors affecting gender bias in the media are not entirely 
market-driven.  Research suggests that there has been an emphasis on 
"socially acceptable" sports for women.  Individual sports may 
receive the majority of women's coverage because they allow for more 
traditional roles of femininity (Spencer & McClung, 2001).  In 
addition, the fact that there is virtually no coverage of women's 
sports that require physical power or hard body contact is likely 
because these are traditionally masculine roles of sport and do not 
fit within stereotypes of femininity (Tuggle et al., 2002).  The 
emphasis on femininity has also been suggested to come from the 
"lesbian taboo" in sports, where there is a stigma in elite female 
sports that the athletes are homosexual.  Because of this, women are 
covered in the media in terms of their heterosexual characteristics 
to debunk the taboo (Christopherson et al., 2002).  Shugart (2003) 
refers to this media practice as "vigilant heterosexuality".  In 
these cases, the coverage of the sport is determined by a cultural 
comfort zone held by both the audience and the media.


SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

	The majority of the research in the area of gendered media coverage 
has been confined to content analyses of either the quantity or 
quality of media coverage of women.  This focus has left 
investigation of the factors to primarily two areas, the gender 
makeup of the media, and the traditional socio-cultural ideas of 
sport and femininity.  The first factor is regularly disproved and 
the second factor is often no more than speculation.  I would suggest 
that future research would be best served trying to determine 
specific problem areas in the effects of sports media, especially in 
terms of the gender of the viewer, the gender of the athlete, and the 
type of sport.  It would also be immensely valuable to have research 
in the available audience of women's sports.  Several questions need 
to be answered in order to argue that women's sports coverage should 
be increased including "is there a large audience with the desire for 
more coverage?" and "will the audience demand increase to meet or 
exceed an increase in coverage?"  These are important in order to 
prove to the market-driven media that women's sports coverage can be 
profitable.
	Further research is necessary to improve the situation in sports 
media for the female athlete.  At current standing, women's sports 
receive proportionally less coverage than their male 
counterparts.  Although interest and participation in women's sports 
continues to increase, the amount of time and space devoted to the 
female athlete in the media has begun to decrease over the past 
decade.  Quality of coverage appears to be improving for the female 
athlete at a better rate than quantity, however, market forces are 
perpetuating the emphasis on femininity and sexuality.   There are 
significant benefits to pursuing more equitable coverage including 
improving female sports participation and body image and increasing 
professional opportunities for female athletes.  However, without 
further evidence that change is needed, what changes are needed, and 
why they are needed; tennis, intercollegiate sports media, and 
women's magazines will remain the only even playing fields for female athletes.













REFERENCES

Adams, T., & Tuggle, C.A. (2004). ESPN's SportsCenter and coverage 
of 		women's athletics: "It's a boys' club". Mass Communication & 
Society, 7(2),	237-248.

Billings, A.C., & Eastman, S.T., (2002). Selective representation of 
gender, ethnicity, and
nationality in American television coverage of the 2000 summer Olympics.
International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 37(3/4), 351-370.

Billings, A.C., Halone, K.K., & Denham, B.E. (2002). "Man, that was a 
pretty shot": An
analysis of gendered broadcast commentary surrounding the 2000 men's and
women's NCAA Final Four basketball championships.  Mass Communication 
& Society, 5(3), 295-315.

Bishop, R. (2003). Missing in action: Feature coverage. Journal of 
Sport & Social Issues,
27(2), 184-194.

Bissel, K.L. (2004). Sports model/sports mind: The relationship 
between entertainment
and sports media exposure, sports participation, and body image 
distortion in Division I female athletes.  Mass Communication & 
Society, 7(4), 453-473.

Christopherson, N., Janning, M., & McConnell, E.D. (2002). Two kicks 
forward, one
kick back: A content analysis of media discourses on the 1999 women's World
Cup soccer championship. Sociology of Sport Journal, 19(2), 170-188.

Cunningham, G.B. (2003). Media coverage of women's sport: A new look at an old
problem. Physical Educator, 60(2), 43-59.

Cunningham, G.B., Sagas, M., Sartore, M., Amsden, M., & Schelihase, A. (2004).
Gender representation in the NCAA News: Is the glass half full or half empty?
Sex Roles, 50(11/12), 861-870.

Eastman, S.T., & Billings, A.C., (2001). Biased voices of sports: 
Racial and gender
stereotyping in college basketball announcing. Howard Journal of
Communications, 12(4), 183-201.

Fink, J.S., & Kensicki, L.J., (2002). An imperceptible difference: 
Visual and textual
constructions of femininity in Sports Illustrated and Sports 
Illustrated for Women.
Mass Communication & Society, 5(3), 317-339.

Hallmark, J.L., & Armstrong, R.N. (1999). Gender equity in televised sports: A
comparative analysis of men's and women's NCAA Division I basketball
championship broadcasts, 1991-1995. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 43(2), 222-235.

Higgs, C.T., Weiller, K.H., & Martin, S.B. (2003). Gender bias in the 
1996 Olympic
games: A comparative analysis. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 27(1), 52-64.

Huffman, S., Tuggle, C.A., & Rosengard, D.S. (2004). How campus media 
cover sports:
The gender-equity issue, one generation later. Mass Communication & Society,
7(4), 475-489.

Messner, M.A., Duncan, M.C., & Cooky, C. (2003). Silence, sports 
bras, and wrestling
porn: Women in televised sports news and highlights shows. Journal of Sport &
Social Issues, 27(1), 38-51.

Pedersen, P.M., Whisenant, W.A., & Schneider, R.G. (2003). Using a 
content analysis to
examine the gendering of sports newspaper personnel and their 
coverage. Journal
of Sport Management, 17, 376-393.

Sagas, M., Cunningham, G.B., Wigley, B.J., Ashley, F.B. (2000). 
Internet coverage of
university softball and baseball web sites: The inequity continues. 
Sociology of
Sport Journal, 17(2), 198-205.

Shugart, H.A. (2003). She shoots, she scores: Mediated constructions 
of contemporary
female athletes in coverage of the 1999 U.S. women's soccer team.  Western
Journal of Communication, 67(1), 1-31.

Spencer, N.E., & McClung, L.R. (2001). Women and sport in the 1990s: 
Reflections on
"embracing stars, ignoring players". Journal of Sport Management, 15, 318-349.

Tuggle, C.A. (1997). Differences in televsion sports reporting of 
men's and women's
athletics: ESPN SportsCenter and CNN Sports Tonight.  Journal of Broadcasting
& Electronic Media, 41 (1).

Tuggle, C.A., Huffman, S., & Rosengard, D.S. (2002). A descriptive 
analysis of NBC's
coverage of the 2000 summer Olympics.  Mass Communication & Society, 5(3),
361-375.

Whisenant, W.A., & Pedersen, P.M. (2004). Analyzing attitudes 
regarding quantity and
quality of sports page coverage: Athletic director perceptions of newspaper
coverage given to interscholastic sports.  International Sports Journal, 8(1),
54-64.

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main AEJMC Page

Permalink



LIST.MSU.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager