Not the Same Story:
Differences in Sexual Harassment
of Women Who Work in
Newspaper and Television Newsrooms
by
Lori Bergen
Assistant Professor
A.Q. Miller School of Journalism and Mass Communications
105 Kedzie Hall
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506-1501
office: (785) 532-2369
fax: (785) 532-5484
e-mail: <[log in to unmask]>
Presented to the Media Management and Economics Division
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Annual Convention
Baltimore, Maryland, August 1998
Running Head: Sexual Harassment of Newspaper and Television Journalists
Introduction
This study examines the peculiar working conditions many female journalists
find themselves in, which can make the persistent problem of sexual harassment
difficult to control, much less stop. Yet the culture defines the problem, and
seeks remedies for it, in part, from research that assumes institutional
parameters that have very little resemblance to the conditions within which
female journalists work. More specifically, most studies examine a venue that is
enclosed spatially, has distinct temporal boundaries (i.e., 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.),
and more or less presents the same cast of characters -- the employee base --
over an extended period of time under varying degrees of professional pressure.
Within this environment originates the predicate for what most of us think of as
sexual harassment.
The female American journalist, on the other hand, lives in a different world.
From a national study conducted previously, we know that the nature of sexual
harassment in newspapers, for instance, is typically non-physical[1] (as
opposed to the physical nature of harassment identified in other workplaces,
such as the military[2] ), and that harassment is most likely to be committed by
people outside the office: by news sources, not by a female journalist's
co-workers. Moreover, newspaper journalists do not work 9-to-5 jobs, but jobs
that often have no de facto defined working hours.
The nature of the job difference between that of journalists and other American
workers is even noted in the way the laws are written that mediate harassment.
The law finds employers liable for sexual harassment by non-employees only if
the employer has the ability to stop the improper behavior.[3] Otherwise, most
sex harassment laws govern the traditional venue of defined space, set hours,
and a well-defined employee base.
Because journalists operate outside the boundaries of the typical organization
to conduct much of their work, the nature of the journalistic role is what
organizational theorists refer to as the "boundary spanning role." This means
that they frequently leave the real confines of their organizations to conduct
their business.[4] Reporters and photographers leave their offices and the
protection of their organizations' sexual harassment policies behind and enter
the public environments of the streets when they cover crime stories and spot
news, or the private environments of people's homes and offices when those
people are intentionally or inadvertently thrust into the public eye because of
their centrality to news events. Policies that govern the behaviors of
employees with regard to sexual harassment obviously no longer apply when only
one party is an employee, and the other is a news source.
Complicating this further is the nature of the relationship between journalists
and sources--a power relationship which frequently, although not always,
reflects a balance of power in which the source holds the upper hand. That is,
the source controls access to the information that a journalists seeks to do his
or her job well. Reluctant--and even recalcitrant--sources are not a rarity. And
most journalists are aware that part of the exchange between information seekers
and reluctant information providers is often resistance, obfuscation, or worse.
Since the underlying motivation for sexual harassment is often not sexual
desire, but a power-play, it may be no suprise that a source would use one more
method at his disposal if the gender orientations line up (male source, female
journalist).
Women journalists are uniquely positioned to be particularly vulnerable to
circumstances and situations conducive to sexual harassment, so the nature of
sexual harassment in these instances requires our scrutiny. We are particularly
interested in examining this phenomenon that holds the potential to erode the
quality of the work environment for women, because women's presence in the
newsroom is a significant contributor to the diversity of both work environments
and the resulting content produced. [5]
Because replication can contribute to the validity of findings from an original
investigation, we modeled our study after the nation-wide study of women
newspaper journalists conducted by Walsh-Childers, Chance and Herzog two years
earlier.[6]
We also wanted to move beyond the individual level of analysis by conducting
this replication with women who work in similar, yet different organizational
settings. We included respondents from the newsrooms of daily newspapers and
from local television stations in one Midwestern state to allow us to examine
differences that might be grounded in the constraints and routines of different
kinds of media organizations.
As mass communication scholars, our ultimate focus in studying the media is on
content in one way or another--its characteristics, its creation or its impact.
Many content studies are concerned with effects, and a growing body of research
has focused on the sociology of the production of messages.[7] We locate our
study in this theoretical landscape at the point of the framework where effects
and influences on the production of media content are considered. Although we do
not address the issue of content at all in this study, our interest is on
influences operating inside of media organizations that do affect media content,
including organizational constraints and the routines of newsgathering.
Our survey instrument followed the format used in the national newspaper study
we replicated, and our research questions were modeled on those that directed
the previous study, but with the added intent of determining whether journalists
employed in different kinds of media organizations would experience sexual
harassment in different ways and under different conditions. In addition, we
were interested in determining whether women journalists who cover the news in
the state of Kansas were any more or less affected by sexual harassment in their
work than journalists in the national sample. Thus, we were particularly
interested in addressing the following research questions:
1. Are the percentages of women in Kansas newspaper and television newsrooms
who have experienced sexual harassment during their careers, or believe it is a
problem for other women in their profession, any different from the national
sample of women newspaper journalists?
2. Are there differences in the incidences of sexual harassment as experienced
by newspaper women and television women who work as journalists?
3. What is the nature of the sexual harassment that newspaper and television
women journalists may have experienced in their careers, and how have they and
their news organizations handled these situations if and when they occurred?
4. What behaviors do women journalists identify as constituting sexual
harassment? And do journalists from newspaper and television newsrooms agree or
differ on these definitions?
Methodology of the Empirical Study
The population for this study consisted of women journalists employed by daily
newspapers of at least 10,000 circulation and television stations with local
news programs serving the state of Kansas.[8] The researchers compiled a list
of all newspapers meeting these criteria from Bacon's media guide[9] and
contacted newsroom managers at each location to provide lists of female
reporters, editors, photographers and graphic artists on newspaper staff.
Reporters, anchors, producers, editors, videographers and news directors at
local network affiliates in Topeka, Wichita and Kansas City were also
identified. In all, 10 newspapers and nine television stations were contacted. A
list of 231 journalists was compiled through this process, and surveys were
distributed during the month of March 1997 to all women included on the list .
One hundred and three surveys were returned for a response rate of 45%.
The data from the surveys were analyzed using SYSTAT 7.0.
Because this study was a replication of a national study, we used the same
measures and response options to operationally define the concepts and variables
of interest in our survey of Kansas journalists. Although the original study was
conducted by telephone interview, our mailed survey included the following
measures:
Evaluation of Sexual Harassment as a Problem. Respondents were asked to
indicate whether sexual harassment, defined as "any physical or verbal contacts
that make the workplace inhospitable for women because of their gender," was a
problem for women journalists in their profession and for them specifically.[10]
Because we contacted journalists from both newspaper and television stations,
two versions of these questions were used, specific to the media organizations.
For both, we used a 5-point scale, with response options of: "no problem at all,
not much of a problem, somewhat of a problem, a significant problem, or a very
serious problem." The questions were worded as follows:
For television journalists: "In your opinion, how much of a problem is sexual
harassment for women as television station reporters, anchors, producers,
editors and videographers?" and "In your own career as a TV reporter, anchor,
producer, editor or videographer, how much of a problem has sexual harassment
been for you personally?"
For newspaper journalists: the questions' wording was changed to reflect the
different job descriptions: "newspaper reporters, editors, photographers, or
graphic artists."
Experience with Sexual Harassment. Each respondent was asked to indicate on a
5-point scale (with response options of: never, rarely, sometimes, often, and
nearly always or always) how often she had been "subjected to sexual harassment
that did not involve physical contact, such as inappropriate sexual comments,
suggestions, or gestures" made to her or in her presence. A second question
asked how often she had been "subjected to physical sexual harassment (unwanted
physical contact)." For each of these two questions, four categories of
individual potential sources of harassment were listed. These were: "supervisors
or others in positions of authority at your newspaper/television station; other
co-workers at your same level; other co-workers at levels lower than yours, and
news sources or employees of news sources."
Definitions of Sexual Harassment. We asked respondents to indicate how strongly
they agreed with statements about behaviors that might constitute sexual
harassment. Respondents indicated their agreement on a 5-point scale (strongly
agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree or strongly disagree) with
the following statements:
It is sexual harassment when a man. . .
* frequently makes uninvited and unnecessary physical contact with a woman who
works with him
* tells jokes to a woman co-worker who has never told the same kind of joke to
him
* makes uninvited remarks that have sexual references or double meanings to a
woman who works with him
* flirts with a woman who has not flirted with him before
* displays sexually-oriented pictures or calendars in places where women also
work.
Organizational Policies about Sexual Harassment. We asked respondents if their
employers had a written policy statement dealing with sexual harassment, and
whether women or men were more likely to be aware of such a policy, or if both
are equally aware.
Demographic and Organizational Information. Respondents were asked to provide
year of birth, marital status, job title, the number of years employed as a
journalist, the number of employees in the current newsroom where she works,
what percentage of those are women, and whether her main supervisor is a man,
woman or one or more of each.
Near the end of the survey, we also asked a series of open-ended questions that
revisited several of the above issues, including a question about the
respondent's personal experience of sexual harassment, how complaints about
sexual harassment are handled in her newspaper or television station, how
instances of sexual harassment involving news sources are dealt with, and how
management has responded to complaints or requests for changes in the workplace
because of sexual harassment.
Results
Of the 103 women who responded to this study, 53 respondents were newspaper
journalists and 50 were from television stations. The largest number of
respondents were newspaper reporters (n=35), followed by television station
anchors (n=18). The remainder of the newspaper respondents were editors (n=12),
and photographers (n=6). Of the television journalists, 11 were reporters, 10
were producers, 9 were editors and 2 were videographers.
Table 1 reviews the demographic characteristics of the sample for this study,
including age; years of journalistic experience; number of newsroom employees;
percent of newsroom employees who are women; whether the respondent's immediate
supervisor was male, female or both; and the respondent's marital status. Also
included in this table are total means and percentages from the Walsh-Childers,
Chance and Herzog study on these same variables for comparative purposes.
Although we were not able to test for significance, these numbers indicate no
significant demographic or newsroom environment differences between the national
data and the state-wide data gathered in this study. [11]
Evaluating the Problem of Sexual Harassment. Table 2 provides results of
respondents' descriptions of sexual harassment both as a problem for women in
their field, or in their own careers. Respondents were first asked to tell us
how much of a problem sexual harassment is for women in their own fields (no
problem at all, not much of a problem, somewhat of a problem, a significant
problem, or a very serious problem). There was no difference here between
newspaper and television journalists. A total of 43.7% of the Kansas journalists
reported that sexual harassment is at least "somewhat of a problem," but none
indicated it was a very serious problem for women working in their field. These
results are also consistent with the results of the previous national study of
newspaper journalists.
The second question asked the respondent about the problem of sexual harassment
in her own career. Again, the state-wide results from our survey mirror those
from the national study, and there was little difference between the newspaper
and television journalists' opinions. Of those responding to the Kansas survey,
about 20% said sexual harassment had been "no problem at all" in their careers.
While just over half said it was "not much of a problem," about 27% said it was
at least "somewhat of a problem" in their careers as newspaper or television
journalists.
With regard to the first research question, we concluded that Kansas women
newspaper and television journalists are no different from their colleagues in
the rest of the country in their opinions about the prevalence of sexual
harassment as a problem in their profession, nor do they differ in the incidence
of experiencing sexual harassment in their own careers.
Media Industry Differences in Experiences with Sexual Harassment. We asked
respondents to indicate how frequently they had been subjected to physical and
non-physical sexual harassment by several potential sources of harassment. The
results of those responses appear in Tables 3 and 4. We have included results in
these two tables from the national study parenthetically below our results, and
once again we find there are similar patterns to the frequency of sexual
harassment reported by both samples. Considered together, Tables 3 and 4
indicate that journalists in Kansas are far more likely to report experiences of
non-physical sexual harassment than harassment of any physical nature, as were
the newspaper journalists in the national study.
Table 3 provides frequencies of non-physical sexual harassment, which were
defined as inappropriate sexual comments, suggestions, or gestures directed
toward the respondent or made in her presence. Our results indicate that over
half of the respondents (54.9%) said they had "never" experienced any
non-physical sexual harassment from a supervisor, about one quarter (24.5%) said
such harassment happens "rarely," and about one fifth (20.6%) reported
non-physical sexual harassment from a supervisor at least sometimes (includes
combined options for responses: sometimes, often, and nearly always or always).
This distribution pattern is reflected in the respondents' assessments of the
frequency of harassment from subordinates, with a somewhat greater frequency of
harassment from co-workers and news sources.
Table 4 presents the results for physical sexual harassment, and is a clear
indicator that very little unwanted physical contact is made toward women
journalists by any of the possible sources of harassment. At least
three-quarters of all respondents said they were never subjected to unwanted
physical contact from supervisors (85.3%), same-level co-workers (75.7%),
subordinates (82.5%) or news sources and their employees (74.8%). Again,
considering Tables 3 and 4 together gives us a clear picture that sexual
harassment perpetrated against women journalists in Kansas newspapers and
television stations is almost always non-physical in nature.
The second part of our overall research question inquired as to the differences
that might obtain between journalists employed by different media
organizations--television and newspapers. We conducted a series of cross
tabulations to determine if there were any notable differences in our own data
set in the nature of sexual harassment (physical or non-physical) experienced by
TV versus newspaper women, or of the perpetrators of harassment (supervisors,
co-workers, subordinates, news sources), if and when sexual harassment might
occur.
Results from the series of eight cross tabulations were all non-significant,
with the exception of two: significant differences existed in the incidence of
non-physical sexual harassment by sources and same-level co-workers when cross
tabulated with the media organization where the journalist was employed. These
results are illustrated in Tables 5 and 6.
Women employed by television stations serving the state of Kansas were
significantly more likely to experience non-physical sexual harassment from a
same-level co-worker than their counterparts employed by Kansas daily
newspapers. Table 5 illustrates that 38% of television journalists reported
experiencing the kind of sexual harassment defined as inappropriate sexual
comments, suggestions and gestures either directed at her or made in her
presence at least sometimes; yet only 24.5% of newspaper journalists reported
the same. Table 6 presents the second notable finding--that Kansas newspaper
women journalists are significantly more likely than their counterparts in local
television stations to be subjected to non-physical sexual harassment by news
sources.
Responses to the Open-Ended Questions about Sexual Harassment from Sources.
Respondents gave detailed examples of incidents of sexual harassment that they
had experienced personally in response to our open-ended questions . Included
were comments about harassment perpetrated both by sources and co-workers.
Some of these comments illustrate the kinds of harassment perpetrated by news
sources. In response to our question, "while working for a newspaper/television
station, have you personally ever experienced sexual harassment?" several
responses mirrored those of a newspaper reporter, with a decade of professional
experience: "Yes, but not in the office. I have experienced harassment from
sources often, particularly police officers [and] attorneys, in the form of
suggestive remarks and unwanted touching." Another newspaper reporter of 12
years said: "Only from news sources who would touch me or make inappropriate
sexual comments in an attempt to shock or intimidate. This is very common when
dealing with law enforcement."
Our respondents cited several examples of sexual harassment perpetrated by news
sources who are police or law enforcement officials. Another newspaper reporter
wrote: "[I've] not [experienced sexual harassment] at the office, but some
police officers I have interviewed have made crude remarks in my presence or
asked me out continuously. The only problems I've had were with sources out of
the control of my newspaper's management."
A veteran newspaper reporter wrote, "the mayor of the city government I once
covered asked a male reporter if I was 'a good f - - -.' I also weathered
numerous inappropriate comments while covering the police beat. My problems have
been with sources, not co-workers." Another newspaper reporter wrote, "at
another small Kansas paper, I was interviewing a school district official when
he reached out and touched my breast. I glared at him, and he stopped. We had
been talking only about the budget. He moved out of state a few months later."
Yet another newspaper reporter wrote that "a source asked me if he could lick
my feet." Another wrote that "a county commissioner grabbed my behind."
Other examples of source-based sexual harassment included a comment from a
newspaper sportswriter who said, "the harassment did not take place at the paper
. . . athletes have made lewd comments, and other members of sports media have
done the same. Nothing major, but they did make for uncomfortable situations."
That sentiment -- that "nothing major" has occurred when such incidents of
sexual harassment take place -- suggests the coping strategy that many of our
respondents offered: they handle the problems without formal complaints, and
they handle these situations themselves.
We asked our respondents how these instances of sexual harassment involving
news sources are dealt with, and received comments like these: "Reporters
generally handle such problems on their own. If it exacerbates, the reporter can
switch beats or ask an editor to intervene."A newspaper photographer wrote:
"Remarks have been made, not by people in the workplace, but by the subjects I
photograph. It [how to handle harassment by news sources] all depends on the
situation and comments. I can usually play it off as a joke to smooth things
over and get through the assignment." Another respondent wrote: "I usually don't
react at all or remind them I'm a professional and expect to be treated in a
businesslike manner. I don't have many repeat offenders and find the women
reporters who do have trouble act and dress unprofessionally." Another responded
like this: "it's considered par for the course."
A reporter from a newspaper with 200 newsroom employees wrote: ". . . reporters
are not required to deal with sources who harass them in any way if they mention
it to an editor." Another respondent from a smaller newspaper (with 40 newsroom
employees) wrote that the issue of how to handle sexual harassment from news
sources ". . . is not addressed in our handbook. When advances are made toward
me on assignment, I just blow them off or turn it into a joke. It would take a
lot to offend me to a point where I got angry or upset."
Many respondents said the simply didn't know how instances of sexual harassment
regarding news sources are handled or should be handled, and many mentioned they
had never had to face such a situation. 'I don't know," one anchor wrote in
response to our question about how such cases are dealt with. "Could you
publicly call them a schmuck?" she asked, and then drew a happy face in the
margin of the survey.
But of those who did mention harassment from sources, most suggested that these
instances are either handled by the women, or with some back-up or follow-up
from an editor or supervisor. One newspaper editorial page editor's comments
illustrate this approach: "I had one incident when a source was asking me out or
wanting me to meet him so he could give me information. It became clear that his
intent wasn't just business and it was an intimidating situation. [M]y managing
editor offered to intervene and was very upset, but I told him I preferred to
handle it myself and was able to do so."
Responses to the Open-Ended Questions about Sexual Harassment from Co-Workers.
Comments about the sexually harassing behaviors of co-workers illustrate further
the nature of a different kind of sexual harassment of women journalists.
Several women employed in television station newsrooms reported the frequent,
unwanted back rubs given by male co-workers, suggesting a pattern of behavior in
television stations that is particularly offensive to women journalists. One
such comment from a TV producer: "I had a news director who was very rude and
intimidating. He would ask me things like, 'did you get laid last night?' He'd
also rub my shoulders and make me uncomfortable."
Some of the more outrageous examples of sexual harassment perpetrated by
co-workers were mentioned by our respondents who were television journalists. An
anchor/producer with 7 years experience wrote: "A photographer pinched my nipple
once while in the car. He said he did it as a joke to get me to quit biting my
nails." Another wrote: "I've had a previous manager make unwanted passes, set up
dinner dates [and] call them business 'appearances' when it was really a date
with him, had a manager mark my period (yeah, menstrual flow) on the company
calendar in the lobby of the newsroom as a warning to watch out for me on those
weeks."
Work Inside and Outside the Newsroom. The study of national newspaper women we
replicated found that reporters and photographers--those employees most likely
to be working outside the newsroom--were significantly more likely to report
being sexually harassed by news sources when compared to copy editors, graphic
artists and others working primarily inside the newsroom. We expected to find
the same differences in our study, so we created a new variable based on the
inside/outside dichotomy. The new variable did not distinguish between
television and newspaper employment, but instead split our sample according to
whether one worked primarily outside the newsroom (consisting of newspaper
reporters, newspaper photographers, television reporters and television
videographers) and those working inside the newsroom (consisting of newspaper
editors, television anchors, television producers and television editors). The
cross tabulation we conducted to determine if "outside" journalists were more
likely to tell us they had been harassed by news sources was not significant.
Organization Policy Prohibiting Sexual Harassment. We also asked our
respondents if their news organization had a policy prohibiting sexual
harassment. We report those results in Table 7. The national study of newspaper
women journalists had found that 70.5% of newspapers had policies in place, and
our study found that 83% of newspaper journalists in Kansas reported the same,
with 90% of television station journalists reporting organizational policies on
sexual harassment. A few television respondents said their organization had no
policy, but 8% of them, and 17% of newspaper journalists in our study, said they
didn't know if their organization had a policy or not.
Defining Behaviors of Sexual Harassment. Table 8 presents the degree of
agreement that journalists in our study reported on five behaviors representing
sexual harassment. The opinions of our respondents about these behaviors
(unwanted physical contact, telling sexual jokes, making sexual remarks or
double entendres, flirting with a female coworker and displaying
sexually-oriented posters or calendars) mirror the national study of women
newspaper journalists.
Our results indicate that about 70% of Kansas women journalists agree strongly
that one behavior--unwanted physical contact--is sexual harassment. But they are
less likely to agree that telling sexual jokes (where 14.9% strongly agreed) and
flirting with a female coworker (where 4.9% strongly agreed) constitute sexual
harassment. On one behavior our respondents seemed to depart from the national
sample, although we were not able to test the significance of the finding.
Telling sexual jokes was strongly endorsed as a sexually harassing behavior by
more than a third (34.4%) of the national newspaper journalists, but fewer than
15 percent of our respondents agreed strongly. We thought that the inclusion of
television journalists in our sample (who in written comments highlighted the
prevalence and acceptance of sexual jokes in their newsrooms) may explain that
result, although a test of the differences between newspaper and television
journalists on that measure was not significant.[12]
Only one measure was significantly different for newspaper and television women
journalists--the behavior of displaying sex-oriented pictures or calendars in
places where women also work. These results are presented in Table 9. Over 50%
of newspaper journalists thought strongly that this behavior was sexually
harassing, while fewer than half that number (23.5 percent) of television
journalists agreed.
Discussion
This article addresses a phenomenon--sexual harassment--with implications for
the creation of news content. Although is is a phenomenon that occurs in many
settings in our culture, when situated in a media organizational setting, it
ssumes a different meaning and requires a different interpretation.
We suggested certain assumptions at the outset--that systematic underlying
structural factors within media organizations ultimately have an impact on the
media product, that the presence of women in newsrooms leads to greater
diversity amongst those who work in the production of news content and will
enhance the media's ability to reflect a multicultural society. It was our
purpose to examine a particular phenomenon with impact on the way that
journalists gather, produce and present the news at the confluence of
organizational policies and individual practice, incorporating both individual
level and organizational level analyses.
It is within that theoretical context that we suggest our finding that Kansas
newspaper women journalists are significantly more likely to be subjected to
non-physical sexual harassment by news sources and that their counterparts in
local television stations are more likely to be harassed by their coworkers is a
powerful discovery, with implications for media organizations, journalists and
the content they produce.
There are several possible explanations for these findings. With regard to
newspaper journalists, we know these results are consistent with those of the
national study of newspaper women, which found news reporters and photographers
who spend more time outside the newsroom are more vulnerable to being sexually
harassed by news sources. Results of that study showed that nearly 60% of
reporters and photographers reported being harassed sexually by sources, while
only a third of copy editors, graphic artists and others who worked primarily in
the newsroom reported harassment by sources.[13] But when we conducted cross
tabulations of our data to see whether all journalists, regardless of media
type, who work outside the newsroom were more likely to report being subjected
to sexual harassment than those working inside, our results were
non-significant.
It is difficult to interpret the results here without making some assumptions
that we do not have the empirical data to support. However, our explanation
draws on some commonly observed behaviors that call attention to the differences
in the nature of the work routines that journalists employ with respect to the
medium they work for, and also to the differences in the organizational climates
and work environments in these two media settings.
The reader will recall that we found significant differences between media
organizations with regard to the frequency of news source harassment--newspaper
women were significantly more likely to report harassment by news sources than
were television journalists. However, we can't presume that newspaper
journalists are more likely to work outside their newsrooms as opposed to
television journalists. Television reporters are at least as likely to work
outside the newsroom as newspaper reporters, and maybe more so.
The differences are possibly these: that newspaper journalists working outside
the newsroom do so as lone reporters or photographers, as opposed to the
television videographer and reporter who travel in pairs to conduct interviews
with news sources. It may be that the mere presence of a third person mitigates
the likelihood that a source will engage in inappropriate behavior. It may also
be that with the presence of a video camera and its concomitant ability to
record behaviors on videotape, sources may simply curb inappropriate behaviors
directed toward television reporters, since they could be witnessed either by
the second party, or recorded. This "witness" presence removes the possibility
for a "he said/she said" defense based on the word of one party against another.
Clearly, with regard to our second and third research questions, there are
significant and compelling differences in the nature of sexual harassment
experiences of newspaper and television women who work as journalists. And, we
suggest that these results are consistent with those studies that have
identified content as a variable, and have found that organizational and
occupational influences are greater than individual characteristics on news
content.[14] Our results bring into high relief, in one very narrow realm, one
of the points where organizational differences seem to be most extreme. We
believe that understanding what influence these systematic underlying structural
factors may ultimately have on the media product requires this kind of
fine-grained examination of points where organizational characteristics are
brought into focus. Obviously, the next step is to formally link these
differences we have identified between women working in these two media settings
with the products of their work.
Additionally, the written comments of our respondents show that situations of
sexual harassment are as individual as the people involved and they illustrate
the range and variability in the nature of these experiences for women working
in both professional media settings. Organizational responses to sexual
harassment are varied, too, but even in news organizations where policies are in
place, significant numbers of women still report sexual harassment is a problem.
With regard to the final research question, our results suggested that
television journalists may be somewhat less likely to find sexually-oriented
jokes, remarks and displayed images to be sexually harassing but only one of our
behavioral variables was significantly different for women working for different
media organizations. However, the comments of television journalists underscore
the distinct occupational environment and culture of the television newsroom,
and the tolerence of employees of both sexes for the overtly harassing behaviors
that occur there.
We return to responses to our open-ended questions to further illustrate this
point. Several television journalists wrote that the non-physical sexual
harassment represented by inappropriate sexual comments is simply routine in
their newsrooms. One anchor/producer with 14 years experience wrote: ". . .
things are said and accepted in a newsroom that might be considered 'sexual
harassment' in other places. Sexual innuendoes and comments are very common."
Another TV reporter with six years of experience told us "jokes are the most
common, frequent example [of sexual harassment]. They aren't directed at
specific people, they're just inappropriate comments."
An anchor/reporter with seven years experience noted: "The newsroom is a work
environment of its own kind. Sex talk, profanities, etc., are sometimes
commonplace. If people are offended, others will hopefully not 'talk the talk'
around that person -- but, you probably shouldn't go into news if this bothers
you!!"
Another television journalist who works as a special projects editor wrote:
"The newsroom is by nature a hostile environment. Most of it is not directed at
anyone nor intended to insult. If something is offensive you say so, and people
back off. That's the environment at our station because that's what the
male-dominated management supports."
None of the comments of our newspaper journalists offered a "that's the way it
is" explanation for their newsroom environment. We can't help but be concerned
with this tolerance for a hostile work environment in local television station
newsrooms, and wonder if it will continue long. The work atmosphere there seems
to encourage harassment, so much so that many television journalists in our
study acknowledged that harassment is a widely-accepted norm of behavior. When
we run the risk of assuming sexual harassing behavior is too common to matter,
we make a serious mistake. This should be of particular concern to educators
working with broadcast students, who have an obligation to prepare their
students for this reality of work in television news.
One theoretical explanation for why sexual harassment occurs was advanced by
Guten[15] who argues that sexual harassment is explained as sex-role spill over.
His theory is that gender-based expectations about behavior outside the
workplace "spill over" in the work environment so that women working especially
in male-dominated occupations and settings are the most likely to be sexually
harassed. It is not difficult to extend the spill-over theory to television
newsrooms, which is reflected in the gender-based assignment to important jobs.
The television news program formula relies on a structure that mirrors a
heterosexual relationship, and the anchor desk is routinely occupied by a male
anchor and a female anchor. These "on-air families" are unique to television,
didn't exist before the early 1970s, and quite possibly contribute to the
atmosphere and discussion that would be more appropriate to the bedroom than the
newsroom.
We also note the retention consequences of sexual harassment, which the
comments from one newspaper reporter with nine years of experience
illustrate--that the harassment respondents experienced in their careers had
occurred when they were employed by another news organization. That respondent
wrote: "while covering the Kansas Legislature, two legislators made passes. When
my editor heard about it, he called me in and said he could understand why they
might do that because I was an attractive woman! (This was at my previous job.)"
We can only speculate here how much the incidence of sexual harassment, and they
way it is handled by management, might contribute to the departure of employees
who chose to leave rather than stay and endure or confront such behavior.
We are equally concerned at the incidence of news source harassment of
newspaper journalists especially, and hope that the results of this study should
alert managers in each media setting to the unique problems specific to their
organizations. While we know most already have sexual harassment policies in
place, it may be that managers could use the findings in this study as a reality
check to reevaluate their policies. In some cases, training programs for
employees that both sensitize them to the behaviors that constitute sexual
harassment, and that provide coping strategies for employees--especially those
who work alone as reporters and photographers for newspapers in those boundary
spanning roles--are needed.
Finally, if there is a pattern to these differences in the experiences of
television and newspaper women journalists, it is that journalists are most
likely to be harassed where the behavior is accepted. As one scholar has noted,
"Perpetrators only break the rules and harass where they think they can get away
with it."[16]
We conclude our discussion of these results on an upbeat, however, with a
comment made by one of our respondents, a newspaper reporter with 16 years of
experience. She wrote that most men in her newsroom "support a harassment-free
newsroom. But journalism, I suspect, is no different from other professions:
there are still some clueless Neanderthals out there. It's better than it used
to be, but not as good as it could be."
Table 1
Age, Years as a Journalist, Number and Gender of Newsroom Employees and
Supervisors and Other Demographic Characteristics Among Women in Kansas
Newspaper and TV Newsrooms Compared to U.S. Daily Newspapers
Means
KS Television KS Newspaper KS Total U.S. Newspapers*
(n) (50) (53) (103) (227)
Age 31.8 33.9 32.9 38.4
Years as a Journalist 8.9 10.5 9.7 11.6
Estimated Number of
newsroom employees 46.6 103.9 76.1 61.2
Percentage of female newsroom
employees 39.3 39.8 39.6 46.6
Percent
Women whose immediate
supervisor is:
Male 78.0 69.2 73.5 67.0
Female 18.0 30.8 24.5 30.8
One or more of each 4.0 0.0 2.0 2.2
Other personal characteristics
Marital Status:
Never married 49.0 46.2 47.5 41.0
Married 43.1 50.0 46.6 47.6
Divorced 7.8 1.9 4.8 9.3
Other 0.0 1.9 1.0 2.2
*Percentages given in this column are from Walsh-Childers, et. al. , 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
Table 2
Evaluation of Sexual Harassment as a Problem for Women Journalists and for
Respondent's Own Career
How much of a problem is sexual harassment for women as newspaper/television
journalists?
Percent
KS Television KS Newspaper KS Total U.S. Newspapers*
(n) (50) (53) (103) (227)
No problem at all 10.0 3.7 6.8 18.1
Not much of a problem 50.0 49.1 49.5 21.7
Somewhat of a problem 36.0 39.6 37.9 48.7
A significant problem 4.0 7.5 5.8 9.3
A very serious problem 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2
How much of a problem has sexual harassment been for respondent in her own
career?
Percent
KS Television KS Newspaper KS Total U.S. Newspapers*
(n) (50) (53) (103) (227)
No problem at all 24.0 17.0 20.4 29.5
Not much of a problem 48.0 56.6 52.4 34.4
Somewhat of a problem 24.0 24.5 24.3 28.6
A significant problem 2.0 0.0 0.9 5.7
A very serious problem 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8
*Percentages given in this column are from Walsh-Childers, et. al. , 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
Table 3
Frequency of Non-Physical Sexual Harassment by Types of Possible Perpetrators
Percent of Women Reporting Non-Physical Sexual Harassment
Nearly always
(N=103) Never Rarely Sometimes Often or always
By supervisors 54.9 24.5 17.6 2.0 1.0
(46.3) (28.9) (20.3) (4.8) (0.0)*
By same-level
coworkers 27.2 41.7 24.3 4.9 1.9
(38.3) (32.6) (22.9) (5.3) (0.9)
By subordinates 45.1 28.4 21.6 3.9 1.0
(52.7) (23.7) (21.0) (2.2) (0.4)
By news sources or
employees of news
sources 37.9 32.0 22.3 7.8 0.0
(25.1) (27.3) (34.4) (8.8) (0.9)**
*Percentages given in parentheses are from Walsh-Childers, et. al., 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
** Numbers in this row from the national study represent news sources only, not
news sources and employees. These numbers do not total 100% because some
respondents in the national study reported they had no contact with sources or
their employees.
Table 4
Frequency of Physical Sexual Harassment by Types of Possible Perpetrators
Percent of Women Reporting Physical Sexual Harassment
Nearly always
(N=103) Never Rarely Sometimes Often or always
By supervisors 85.3 9.8 3.9 0.0 1.0
(89.0) (6.6) (4.4) (0.4) (0.0)*
By same-level
coworkers 75.7 18.4 3.9 1.0 1.0
(80.6) (14.5) (4.8) (0.0) (0.0)
By subordinates 82.5 12.6 3.9 0.0 1.0
(86.8) (10.1) (3.1) (0.0) (0.0)
By news sources or
employees of news
sources 74.8 19.4 4.8 0.0 1.0
(71.4) (19.4) (5.7) (0.4) (0.0)**
*Percentages given in parentheses are from Walsh-Childers, et. al., 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
** Numbers in this row from the national study represent news sources only, not
news sources and employees. These numbers do not total 100% because some
respondents in the national study reported they had no contact with sources or
their employees.
Table 5
Percentages of Women Journalists Experiencing Non-Physical
Sexual Harassment by Same-Level Coworkers, by Media Employment Type (Newspaper
or Television)
Women Journalist Employed by Newspaper or Television
KS Television KS Newspaper
(n=103) (50) (53)
Percent experiencing harassment
by same-level coworker at least sometime 38.0 24.5
Chi-square (d.f. = 4) = 12.32, p < .05
Table 6
Percentages of Women Journalists Experiencing Non-Physical
Sexual Harassment by News Sources or Employees of News Sources, by Media
Employment Type (Newspaper or Television)
Women Journalist Employed by Newspaper or Television
KS Television KS Newspaper
(n=103) (50) (53)
Percent experiencing harassment
by news sources at least sometime 22.0 37.7
Chi-square (d.f. = 3) = 8.37, p < .05
Table 7
News Organization Has Sexual Harassment Policy
Percent
KS Television KS Newspaper KS Total U.S. Newspapers*
(n) (50) (53) (103) (227)
Employer has a written policy?
Yes 90.0 83.0 86.4 70.5
No 2.0 0.0 1.0 13.2
Don't Know 8.0 17.0 12.6 16.3
*Percentages given in this column are from Walsh-Childers, et. al. , 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
Table 8
Women Journalists' Definitions of Behaviors as Sexual Harassment
Percent of Women Reporting Physical Sexual Harassment
Strongly Strongly
(N=103) Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree
Unwanted physical
contact 69.6 23.5 2.9 2.0 2.0
(79.3) (19.4) (0.9) (0.4) (0.0)*
Telling sexual jokes 14.9 35.6 20.8 25.7 3.0
(34.4) (46.3) (9.7) (9.7) (0.0)
Making sexual remarks
or double entendres 32.7 42.6 14.9 7.9 2.0
(48.0) (39.6) (8.4) (4.0) (0.0)
Flirting with a female
coworker 4.9 19.4 25.5 44.7 5.8
(7.9) (30.0) (28.2) (33.0) (0.9)
Displaying sex-oriented
posters or calendars 37.9 33.0 18.4 7.8 2.9
(47.1) (39.2) (8.8) (4.4) (0.0)
*Percentages given in parentheses are from Walsh-Childers, et. al., 1996,
provided for comparison with Kansas data.
Table 9
Women Journalists Who Say Sexual Harassment is Defined by Displaying
Sex-Oriented Posters or Calendars by Media Employment Type (Newspaper or
Television)
Women Journalist Employed by Newspaper or Television
KS Television KS Newspaper
(n=103) (50) (53)
Percent who strongly believe
displaying sex-oriented posters or
calendars is sexual harassment 23.5 51.9
Chi-square (d.f. = 4) = 11.96, p < .05
[1]
Notes
. Kim Walsh-Childers, Jean Chance and Kristin Herzog, "Sexual Harassment of
Women Journalists," Journalism Quarterly 73 (autumn 1996): 559-581
[2] . See U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, Sexual Harassment in the Federal
Government: An Update. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1988), where 26 percent of women respondents reported undesireable touching,
leaning over, surrounding, or pinching.
[3] . Commerce Clearing House, Sexual Harassment Manual for Managers and
Supervisors: How to Prevent and Resolve Sexual Harassment Complaints in the
Workplace. Chicago, IL,: Commerce Clearing House, Inc., 1991).
[4] . See James D. Thompson, Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of
Administrative Theory (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967).
[5] . See Kay Mills, "What Difference Do Women Journalists Make?" in Women,
Media , and Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997) 41-55.
[6] . Walsh-Childers, Chance and Herzog, "Sexual Harassment of Women
Journalists."
[7] . See Pamela J. Shoemaker and Stephen D. Reese, Mediating the Message
(White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers).
[8] . This allowed us to include both newspapers and television stations from
Kansas City, MO, which have significant circulation and audience in the state
of Kansas.
[9] . Bacon's Information Inc. Bacon's Newspaper Directory: Directory of Daily
and Community Newspapers, News Services, Syndicates. 45th ed. Chicago, 1997.
[10] . Please note that our survey introduction and questions were worded so as
not to suggest an expectation on our part that the respondent HAD been
harassed sexually. We provided response options FIRST that indicated no
problem with sexual harassment, or that respondents had never experienced any
of the possible types of harassment.
[11] . We did not have access to the raw data generated by the Walsh-Childers,
Chance and Herzog study so that we could create a data file with both our data
set and their data set. Thus, we were unable to make a statistical comparison
between the two. Nonetheless, as the tables reported at the end of this
manuscript show, the percentages reported in the nation newspaper women
journalists study and ours are very close in most instances. Where there are
large numerical differences between our reported percentages and theirs
(i.e., 20 percentage points or greater), we are assuming that the percentage
gap likely exceeds the random error variance found in our study and the
national study. Consequently, we are assuming that any large gap is very
likely statistically different.
[12] . We would note that although these results were non-significant, they
were each in the direction that would indicate greater tolerance for these
behaviors by the television journalists than by the newspaper journalists.
[13] . Walsh-Childers, Chance and Herzog, "Sexual Harassment of Women
Journalists," 571.
[14] See Lori A. Bergen, "Testing the Relative Strength of Individual and
Organizational Characteristics in Predicting Content of Journalists' Best
Work," Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University-Bloomington, 1991; Paul M.
Hirsch, "Occupational, Organizational, and Institutional Models in Mass Media
Research," in Paul M. Hirsch, Peter V. Miller, and F. Gerald Kline, eds.,
Strategies for Communication Research, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1977); and
Shoemaker and Reese, Mediating the Message.
[15] . B.A. Guten, Sex and the Workplace (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985).
[16] . Fiona M. Wilson, Organizational Behavior and Gender (London: McGraw Hill,
1995), 230.
ABSTRACT
Not the Same Story:
Differences in Sexual Harassment
of Women Who Work in
Newspaper and Television Newsrooms
by Lori Bergen
This study examines the peculiar working conditions that many female journalists
in television stations and newspaper newsrooms find themselves in. Sexual
harassment of newspaper journalists is most likely to be committed by people
outside the newsroom: by news sources. But television journalists are more
likely to endure harassment perpetrated by their co-workers. This is a
replication of a national study of newspaper women in which we report findings
from TV journalists as well.
Bergen is Assistant Professor in the A.Q. Miller School of Journalism and Mass
Communications, 105 Kedzie Hall, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
66506-1501, office: (785) 532-2369, fax: (785) 532-5484, e-mail:
<[log in to unmask]>
Paper presented to the Media Management and Economics Division
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Annual Convention
Baltimore, Maryland, August 1998
|
