Why the apathy about women's sports coverage?

In a column published this morning, longtime journalist Eric Deggens addresses the lack of attention paid to a new study that empirically verifies what women's sports fans have suspected: Despite Title IX and the soaring numbers of girls and women participating in sports, mainstream coverage of women's sports continues to diminish.
Deggens rightly points out that the study has generally been greeted with apathy. He also rightly points out that media organizations have an obligation, based on their responsibility to address what he calls "an essential journalism failure," to provide fair, plentiful coverage of women's sports.
Of course, he's right.
I suggest, however, that blame the lack of women's sports coverage cannot be placed solely on journalistic organizations. Deggens seems to dismiss what he called "insulting rationalizations" for the lack of coverage, including "this is what the sports audience wants."
Unfortunately, because of the role (entertainment) and the values (masculinity) that we've placed on spectator sports as a culture, sports coverage -- even though considered "news" in many respects(on newscasts, in newspapers)-- tends to be much more audience driven. The powerful, unquestioned association of sports with masculine values has a negative impact on the potential of women's sports fandom to flourish on a mass scale.
In other words, lack of women's sports coverage a cultural problem -- not one that can be blamed solely on media organizations.
The solution is not as easy as "build it, and they will come." Fans won't come in the numbers media organizations see as sustainable until we, as a culture, move away from adhering to gender norms that make the sidelining of women in sports seem "common-sense" -- drawing nothing more than a yawn when it is pointed out to us.
-- M. Hardin

Preps sports reporters beat differ in values

A recently published survey by the Curley Center has found that sports reporters differ on the way they see the role of sports coverage and on their views of ethical norms on the job -- based on beat. Although reporters who cover high school sports are more likely to report friendships with sources and a preference for "homerism" on the sports pages, they are also more likely than their counterparts on the pro beat to say they believe coverage should be in the public interest and involve an investigative element.

Kagan once played softball, which means she's gay?

Ever since President Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, questions about her sexuality have figured into the overall news narrative. Recently, news sources have begun showing a picture of Kagan playing softball, and suggesting that her affiliation with the sport shows that she is indeed lesbian. (Pat Buchanan, the MSNBC pundit, provided particularly insightful commentary, stating that playing softball is a lesbian “signal,” just like “two guys sunbathing together” brings the “immediate implication that they’re gay.”) Aside from the problematic ideology that an out lesbian is somehow a mark in the negative column in evaluating this potential justice, the implication draws from an age-old stereotype about female athletes. News media own the responsibility of ethically informing the public so that we may become better citizens equipped to make educated decisions. What Kagan’s short-lived amateur softball career has to do with her potential as a Supreme Court justice is unclear. What is clear, however, is the persistent stigmatization of women who do not conform to traditional notions of femininity, including those who have the gall to use their muscles and swing for the fences on a softball field.

--Erin Whiteside

Reporter honored for youth sports coverage

Bob Holher, former Red Sox beat reporter at The Boston Globe who now works as an investigative reporter in the paper's sports department, tonight will receive the Curley Center's inaugural award for outstanding coverage of youth sports. Holher's series, which focused on the abysmal conditions for student athletes in Boston city schools, has made a difference -- sparking intervention from the public and private sectors to improve sports programs and academic success rates for athletes.
The Curley Center has launched the award in recognition of the growing spotlight on prep sports -- and in recognition of the important journalistic work on a beat that is often overlooked (although highly visible in every sports section in the country).
We hope youth sports coverage doesn't fall into the trap of putting a glaring spotlight on young phenoms (the Lebron effect) while failing to examine the serious issues involved in the use of public funds and resources and the health issues involved in high-level competition by young athletes. Hohler's series is an example of reporting on prep sports at its finest.

Television: Medium of choice for sports fans

Glenn Enoch, vice president of integrated marketing research at ESPN, presented interesting data from ESPN’s research operation during a special sports symposium Thursday at the Broadcast Education Association’s annual meeting. The research confirms that the rise of new media platforms haven’t dethroned television. Among the most interesting ideas he presented:

• Sports fans are heavier users of all media than are non-sports fans.
• TV is still king for sports fans.
• The higher the household income, the more time spent with sports television. For instance, in households with more than $125K in annual income, about 15% of time with television is with sports programming.
• The older the sports fan, the more time spent with sports television.
• Men are far more likely to watch sports programming alone than are women.

The last point on this list was one of the few comments Enoch made during the presentation about gender differences related to sports consumption. Gender and race are two identity factors that influence consumption patterns. – M. Hardin

Ethical issues in sports reporting: A primer

Penn State honors student Ryan Wood has launched a blog about ethical issues in sports journalism. Available at the Web site is a radio documentary he produced that includes interviews with sports journalists and academics. It's a great overview of the topic.

Another national basketball championship

Although it would be impossible to tell based on media coverage, competitive college basketball didn't finish with the highly publicized games last week for Duke and Butler (men's), and UConn and Stanford (women's).
The National Wheelchair Basketball Association national championships -- including women's college championship games -- wrapped up yesterday in Colorado. The Alabama Crimson Tide handily beat the University of Illinois, coached by former Tide player (and Paralympian) Stephanie Wheeler.

Search begins for the newest Nike Field Reporter

Nike launched the 2010 Nike Field Reporter contest this week and is seeking 18-24 year olds with "crazy charisma and sports savvy." Contestants are asked to write an essay explaining what makes them perfect for the job. The winner and next NFR will travel the world interviewing top athletes, artists, musicians, and designers, documenting all of her experiences through videos, photos, and blog postings. Her 8-month Nike contract will provide her with opportunities that will bolster her resume and give her a head start in a competitive job market. Entry rules and information about the contest can be found on the Nike Women Web site. The deadline for entry is April 30, 2010.

UConn women vs. a top high school boys team: Who would win?

My former colleagues in Pittsburgh are at it again. The “question of the week” on the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’s Varsity Blog is this: If the top-ranked and undefeated Connecticut women’s basketball team played the Mt. Lebanon High School boys’ team, which has been ranked in the top 10 nationally this season, who would win?

They had a similar debate in the mid-1990s. When the Penn State women’s team was ranked No. 1, the sports staffers debated whether the Lady Lions could beat the boys’ team at Shaler High School. Among the Shaler players was eventual NBA first-round draft pick Danny Fortson.

I always made the case for the women—superior teamwork, pinpoint passing, less ego involved, etc. Did I think they would win? Honestly, I didn’t know and I didn’t care.

But the question bothers me; it always has. I know such debates are part of sports, and it’s fun to compare teams from different eras, argue over which players are best. This debate, however, seems silly at best, sexist at worst. Check out the poster who noted that "men have no time of the month" and added, "that can lead to a real 'off' day."

Does anyone expect that a top-ranked welterweight boxer could beat a top-ranked heavyweight boxer? Even if that welterweight is Oscar de la Hoya? No. But fight fans don’t think that way. They rank the all-time greats “pound for pound,” virtually leveling the playing field.

Perhaps that explains the poll results as of Wednesday evening. Sports writer Mike White writes, “There are over 500 people who already have voted on this subject. It's shocking to me that 75 percent say the Connecticut women would win. Wow. Hard to believe. Maybe it's just me but when the other team is a lot bigger, stronger, quicker, faster and shoots just as well as the other team, who do you think will win?”

On the court? If the Mt. Lebanon boys are bigger, faster and well-coached, they'll probably win. But does that matter? Is that the way to determine who’s best? “Pound for pound,” I’ll take the UConn women any day.

-- Lori Shontz

Sports Information Divided Along Gender Lines

As the NCAA men’s and women’s basketball tournaments start this week, CBS and ESPN, respectively, will air a steady stream of segments on various coaches and teams. A sports information director (SID) for each team will help the media coordinate interviews, behind-the-scenes footage and those ubiquitous promo segments we will come to know through the course of these tournaments. On the men’s side, few of these SIDs will be women, part of a bigger trend in the sports information industry, according to a recent study by researchers at the John Curley Center for Sports Journalism appearing in the current issue of the Journal of Sports Media.

Sports information directors handle media relations for college athletic departments and are often assigned to work with specific teams. Using a survey of 775 sports information directors across the nation, the study showed that work assignments were sharply divided along gender lines. In particular, men composed 86 percent of all the SIDs in charge of working with football and 79 percent of all those assigned to men’s basketball. Conversely, the top seven sports most often assigned to women are women’s sports: women’s basketball, women’s volleyball, softball, women’s soccer, women’s tennis, women’s cross country and women’s outdoor track.

We applied Joan Acker’s theory of gendered organizations to sports information as an industry to suggest that the practices and norms of the organization reproduce socially constructed gender differences as a natural component of sports. Biologically, women are just as capable of working with football or men’s basketball, but the implicit idea that men are better able to handle these “tough” and high-profile sports, regulates the division of labor in this industry.

Furthermore, in the current sports media climate, sports like softball, women’s soccer and the like simply do not receive the exposure and visibility of a men’s basketball or football. If women are relegated to spaces where they work with “lower profile” sports, we naturalize the idea that women belong on the fringe of sports.

The survey showed that women are generally leaving the profession between six and 10 years of service, preserving sports information as a male-dominated industry. Those in hiring and decision-making capacities (mostly white men, according to the study) should interrogate sport assignments. A more equitable distribution of responsibility may foster a more optimistic career outlook for women, leading to longer job tenures and a more diverse profession in general.
--Erin Whiteside

Loved the action in Vancouver? Tune in again

This time, though, you'll have to do it completely online because it's likely that the 2010 Paralympics -- which will run for the next two weeks using Olympic venues -- will receive little-to-no coverage in the U.S.
I've posted before about the reasons we turn away, as a culture, from adapted sport.
That's too bad, because the stories are incredible and the competition is outstanding and entertaining. (If you've seen Murderball, you've gotten an idea of the intensity with which these athletes train and compete.)
To catch the action: See ParalympicSportTV. Another site for updated coverage is the BBC.
--Marie Hardin

UConn's record: Reason to worry about women's sports?

As any women's sports fan knows, the past 24 hours have been unusual for the amount of attention that has been paid to a group of female athletes outside the Olympics. The big news: UConn's 71st consecutive victory -- an NCAA record.
The news, unlike most events in women's sports, made at least a mention on many sports pages, Web sites and blogs.
It's also spurred a lot of hand-wringing about: a.) the state of women's basketball; and b.) the state of coverage of women's basketball.
The first concern -- that somehow, UConn's dominance is a sign that women's basketball is plagued by untalented, inferior players -- isn't surprising. But the fact that this storyline was prominent on a site (Deadspin) with little regard (putting it mildly) for women's sports ought to tell us that it should be scrutinized. As a women's sports advocate, I grimace when I see mainstream journalists contextualize the story in the same way.
I saw Christine Brennan raise the concern on News Hour (and follow up with a column). "I'm a little worried about women's basketball, when you have got this kind of dominance," she said.
Brennan, who's covered women's sports for decades, did add important context to her concern: This is a “time of the most balance in women's sports…. to think that you have got this kind of dominating team at this time in women's sports history, it's extraordinary,” she said.
Others in the mainstream press in well-read blogs, though, were less nuanced in their assessment -- and I had to wonder whether their concern was really with the welfare of women's sports. For instance, one wrote, “Auriemma's top-ranked juggernaut is making a mockery of the alleged depth of women's hoops.”
UConn isn't the first team (or the last) to experience a period of tremendous dominance in its sport. These periods are finite. There are great players sprinkled among many D1 teams in the field.
And: Sometimes this kind of record-making draws attention from people who otherwise might not have paid attention. In other words, it can attract fans.
The hand-wringing about coverage of women's sports is justified by the fact that paltry and demeaning coverage has always been the norm. UConn's short burst of fame -- although not accompanied by much "buzz" in coverage, as one writer pointed out -- has been unusual. But even this phenomenal accomplishment has been buried underneath stories dissecting every move by men's "bubble teams."
Judy Woodruff asked Brennan about the "ongoing struggle" of female athletes to gain media attention.
Brennan responded: "It just hasn't equated to great television ratings day in and day out for women's sports. Maybe it never will."
Brennan, Bob Costas and others have suggested that perhaps participation – not spectatorship -- will have to be the gauge by which the success of women’s sports is measured. I understand their assessment -- every step has been a struggle.
I’d like to think, though, we’ve cleared that bar -- or that we're very close. I would also argue that spectatorship drives participation – thus, we’ve got to keep advocating for better coverage of women’s sports, even when records aren’t being broken.
-- Marie Hardin
(Note: I edited this blog post after it was (rightly) pointed out to me that I had failed to contextualize Brennan’s comments on NewsHour. The focus of this post was on storylines around UConn that trouble me, not about Brennan's comments in particular. I've edited this post in an attempt to better reflect that intent.)

NBC: World's best girls give it their all in the women's downhill

As Julia Mancuso whipped around the gates during the women’s downhill at the Vancouver Olympics, the NBC announcers noted the icy and difficult conditions. “She likes a course that is rough and bumpy,” said analyst Christin Cooper. “She says that it eliminates some of the advantage of the larger girls that have more mass that can kind of go like freight trains down a smooth course.”
Later, Cooper said during Elisabeth Goergl’s bronze-medal run, “These girls have got to really nail it aggressively all the way down the course.”
In fact, Cooper repeatedly referred to the women’s skiers as girls, something that also appeared on NBC’s liveblog of the event, which noted that “it's scary to see these girls go down at such speeds.”
Calling the women’s skiers girls trivializes and delegitimizes women’s sports participation in two ways.
First, each instance in which the skiers were labeled as “girls” came at a time when the related description violated gender norms in some way. For example, femininity is at odds with the notion of a “big” female moving like a “freight train.” In the same way, aggression is culturally marked as masculine, and attacking a mountain at break-neck speed is hardly a traditional feminine quality. Calling the skiers girls in a context where they are being described in terms that often reference masculinity neutralizes that apparent oxymoron – and ultimately preserves a more traditional representation of gender.
Second, “girls” playing sports don’t violate gender norms in the way that “women” playing sports do. When you are a “girl,” it’s okay to engage in trivial and fun pursuits like sports; women, on the other hand, are expected to perform traditional forms of femininity, which is at odds with the masculine notions of competition and sports.
This logic also adds another level of explanation to Deford's question about the lack of attention given to the UConn women's basketball team. The undefeated Huskies do not enjoy the fan adoration Lindsay Vonn receives, which Marie Hardin notes is largely because Vonn participates in a sport that doesn't challenge gender norms in the way that contact sports like basketball do (see below).
Still, the Huskies have a much stronger following than any WNBA team -- after all, they're still college "girls," which makes their violation of gender norms in a contact sport less egregious than the professional women.
--Erin Whiteside

Answer to DeFord: Why we're likely not to notice a women's basketball team excel

NPR commentator Frank DeFord today asked why women in individual sports more often get widespread public attention (and favorable media coverage) than do women in team sports.
Deford contrasted the recent hype around Olympian Lindsay Vonn, tennis star Serena Williams, and racing driver Danica Patrick against that surrounding the UConn women's basketball team to support his thesis that we're generally not willing to support women in team sports.
Deford is right -- women who play in team sports in the U.S. generally don't reach the same kind of "star" status as those who play in individual sports such as tennis. But the issue is more than whether women compete as a team or as individuals.
Team sports are usually contact sports, and that's the bigger issue, I think. Women in sports that involve varying degrees of contact -- from the individual sports of boxing and wrestling, to team sports such as basketball -- challenge traditional ideas about femininity. And that's why they don't get the media attention or public attention they might otherwise deserve. (Danica Patrick, who participates in a highly masculine, contact (car-to-car) sport, gets attention primarily because of her foray into a men's arena. Would we expect that an all-female auto racing circuit would get much media coverage?)
Sports like figure skating, gymnastics, tennis, skiing and snowboarding don't challenge gender norms for women nearly as much. To varying degrees they support them, from an emphasis on aesthetics in performance to the allowance for athletes to dress in feminine attire when they participate in these sports.
And that makes many people far more comfortable watching -- and cheering for -- these athletes.
-- mh

Commentary on SI's Vonn cover: Why the outrage?

A blog post earlier today by Nicole LaVoi, a researcher at the Tucker Center for Girls and Women in Sport at the University of Minnesota, has drawn a great deal of attention from national and international media.
It has also drawn a great deal of rage aimed directly at LaVoi. To summarize the LaVoi's post: She suggests -- based on research and a well-documented pattern by SI -- that the magazine's cover photo of skier Lindsay Vonn continues a pattern of general objectification and sexualization of female athletes.
LaVoi's observation isn't a stretch at all for women's sports advocates well versed in the ways female athletes have been depicted for decades.
The vitriol aimed at her in response to the post has been swift and ugly, however. I won't belabor it here (You can read it yourself.)
Although some of the comments clearly reflect -- in a civil tone -- disagreement with LaVoi about whether this particular shot of Vonn is meant to objectify or sexualize her, many comments aim to completely discredit LaVoi with a range of ridiculous accusations.
The fact is that women who attempt to speak with authority about sports have often been the target of sexist attacks. That's because sports have been primarily defined as a male domain -- a place where traditional "tough guy" masculinity is reinforced. The rights provided to girls and women via Title IX have certainly started to challenge that assumption, but scores of studies show that we're far from equitable on many fronts.
Women's sports advocates who speak out, then, run the risk of drawing a great deal of criticism because they are asserting their voices -- against the grain -- in an environment where women generally sidelined from having any real power.
But it is the voices of LaVoi and many others -- including those on the Women Talk Sports network -- that continue to challenge the norms and chip away at constricting gender roles for men and women in sports and the larger culture.
They may make many people uncomfortable -- even outraged. But they are essential.
--Marie Hardin

When Sports Stars Become Authority Figures, Women Lose

By now anyone interested in sports knows about the upcoming Tim Tebow ad set to appear during the Superbowl. Feminists and other activist groups have critiqued the ad for providing unsafe and misleading information to women about their reproductive health (see here, here and here for more on that). But this is more than just an anti-choice ad: it’s the manifestation of a hegemonic system that creates male sports stars who in turn seem perfectly natural choices to sell any product or in this case, speak on any issue from the biggest mediated platform in American sports.

Tebow is a known social conservative, but just as importantly for this message, a star football player. There’s a reason Focus on the Family isn’t simply airing an ad with James Dobson discussing abortion. Rather, it’s because he is a football star that Tebow is the star of the ad. And it is because of his exploits on the football field, combined with a media system that privileges “power” men’s sports, that Tebow is a recognizable star in the first place.

And herein lies the problem for women: As long as sports – and especially football – are culturally understood as a space only appropriate for men, female athletes will simply never earn a comparable type of hero status, and therefore cannot enter the discourse to speak on political issues with the same kind of impact– even those central to women’s lives.
--Erin Whiteside

Women breaking barriers: A milestone

From the Association for Women in Sports Media: Today marks the 35th anniversary of Robin Herman and Marcel St. Cyr becoming the first female sports reporters to enter a locker room for post-game interviews.

Herman was a reporter at The New York Times and St. Cyr was working for CKLM Radio in Montreal when the two women broke the locker room barrier after the National Hockey League's All-Star game.

"This is a significant day in the history of women in sports media," AWSM president Jenni Carlson said. "All of us celebrate the courage that Robin and Marcel showed 35 years ago. Without them and other pioneers like them, we would not be where we are today."

Los Angeles Times columnist Jerome Crowe mentioned the anniversary in today's paper.

Herman also shared her memories in her blog.

A new low in coverage of Tiger Woods...in Vanity Fair?

The cover on the latest Vanity Fair, which includes a story by Buzz Bissinger with sordid details about Tiger Woods' extramarital affairs, plays so baldly to racist stereotypes about black, male athletes that the infamous 2008 Vogue cover pales in comparison. A shirtless, sweaty Woods (in skull cap, staring blankly at the camera) is typical of images of African-American athletes, playing to the stereotype of dark-skinned men as hypersexual, deviant and -- to use the magazine's coverline about Woods -- "raw."
Woods -- for all his flaws -- seemed to understand the (negative) power of these kinds of images, as evidenced in his advice to Charles Barkley years ago to avoid a controversial shirtless cover in Sports Illustrated.
It's surprising, then, that Woods posed for these pictures -- but the fact that they were for famous photographer-of-the-stars Annie Leibovitz a number of years ago likely had something to do with the decision. It's regrettable that VF decided to strategically dredge up these photos now, in a context that makes them even more stereotypically potent.
-- Marie Hardin

Sports Journalism, Athletes in for a Big Challenge

TMZ.com, a leading gossip and celebrity news web site, has entered the sports media market, launching TMZ Sports at the start of the year. And if its recent coverage of the Gilbert Arenas story is any indication, established sports media outlets are facing a legitimate contender in this saturated industry. Already the web site scooped everyone from ESPN to the Washington Post by first reporting that Arenas does not have a license to carry the firearm he is accused of brandishing in the Wizards’ locker room, and that according to “law enforcement sources,” the locker room is monitored by surveillance video, making it a real possibility that footage of the incident exists.

As a gossip web site, TMZ Sports will have to prove its reporting accuracy in order to solidify a reputation as a reputable source for sports media news. But TMZ Sports isn’t just covering sports in the traditional sense; rather, it is building off what TMZ.com does well: gossip. In doing so, the web site is challenging unspoken agreements between athletes and media that private lives generally stay private. The site has held no punches in its Tiger Woods coverage, even posting grainy cell phone photos of Woods in various nightclubs, which directly contradict the pristine image Woods has worked so hard to create. In just a few short weeks, the site has posted everything from documents in Shaquille O’Neal’s divorce proceedings to pictures of baseball player Matt Kemp grabbing the backside of his girlfriend, Rihanna.

If TMZ Sports stays on this course, major athletes will have a major problem. Without a free pass from the media, the private, sometimes unsavory and always un-manufactured side of our “All-American” athletes will be on full display for the world to see. Considering that a carefully guarded image is critical for marketing (and financial) success, athletes have a real reason to be nervous: After all, if TMZ Sports been around 20 years ago, everyone’s favorite Nike pitchman might not have enjoyed such public admiration had stories and pictures of his now-infamous gambling habit been so readily available.

--Erin Whiteside

People Who Use Walkers Need Not Apply

In Denver, taking shots at the Oakland Raiders is as much a pastime as hitting the slopes during the winter. So it came as no surprise that prior to Sunday’s Oakland-Denver game, the Denver Post ran a piece detailing the recent declining success of the Raiders under the leadership of owner Al Davis. And Davis, writes author Jim Armstrong, has lost “it”:

He doesn't look the part these days, but Davis was the driving force behind what once was one of the most successful franchises in sports. No, really, we're not making this up. An 80-year-old man confined to a walker once ran circles around the competition.

Of course, Davis is not a player and doesn’t actually need to “run in circles” to effectively do his job. And it’s not clear how using a walker keeps Davis from success in the front office.
Armstrong’s comments – and a related front-page picture showing Davis using his walker – are part of a bigger cultural narrative that suggests sports are not a place for people with disabilities. It’s especially prevalent in the United States, where images of athletes with disabilities are rarely published or broadcast. The end result is a constant stream of images that define the ideal athletic body: a powerful, heterosexual, able-bodied male. The text and images in the Davis story help normalize this idea, and further suggest that whether it’s on the field or in the front office, sports are reserved for the able-bodied.
--Erin Whiteside

Women in the Tiger affair: 'Usual suspects'?

Robin Givhan of The Washington Post, in a column today, points out the stark differences in the way Tiger Woods and the women who have been involved in the story of his affair have been considered in coverage.
She writes: "While Woods is being portrayed as complicated and troubled, the women are merely types... The golfer has been called a dog, a liar and worse. But he still gets the benefit of being perceived as an individual."
Givhan suggests that the way the women in the Woods' story have been characterized -- as simply "waitress" or "model" (it doesn't take much modeling experience for women, including his wife, to get this label) -- has been done with a "kind of wink and a nod."
It's as though mere mention of these types of jobs -- commonly associated with women -- are enough to indicate a low moral fiber. As Givhan writes, "For the women connected to Woods, their fairly mundane 9-to-5 gigs serve as a smoking gun of bad behavior."
Evidence of Givhan's observation -- the way these women have become objects in the hand-wringing about Woods ("What do we do about Tiger?") is evident in the celebrity press and the mainstream sports press.
An example of an especially troubling storyline is the suggestion that the women with whom Tiger has been involved "set women back" as a group. Would anyone argue that Woods represents all athletes, much less all men? It's a ridiculous assertion and a lazy, ill-informed broad brush with which to approach this story.

What The Blind Side is blind to

The film The Blind Side is the most recent sports-themed movie to hit the box office. The film tells the “true” story of Michael Oher, an overweight, black teenager with a tragic background who is taken in by a white, middle-class family, the Touhys, and makes it out of the projects and into the NFL.

The Blind Side’s reviews were mostly favorable. Rotten Tomatoes, a reputable movie review compilation site, included reviews that called the film , “incessantly positive because it's about good deeds and its ripple effects” and “potentially culturally offensive and overly schmaltzy, The Blind Side instead threads an almost impossible needle, pulling off a surprisingly moving and inspirational story of compassion, self-discovery and hope.”

Oher’s story as depicted by the film certainly is a touching one. However, aspects of the film are problematic, as critics have pointed out. Christopher Chambers, a guest columnist for the ColorLines blog, called the film “an obvious appeal to white guilt” and asserts that the Blind Side is simply the latest “feel good” film in which “white characters become immersed in and changed by loving blackfolk.”

Melissa Anderson, columnist for the Dallas Observer, makes a similar argument writing that the movie, “peddles the most insidious kind of racism, one in which whiteys are virtuous saviors, coming to the rescue of blacks who become superfluous in narratives that are supposed to be about them.”

These critiques can be taken even a step further. Movies like The Blind Side make an argument, although subtly, that existing institutions meant to help people in Oher’s situation are failures. They promote the idea that private acts of “good” are the only successful means to pull people by their bootstraps and out of poverty. The Blind Side includes scenes of the neighborhood where Oher comes from, a ghetto filled with drug dealers and the threat of violence, a mother who is a crackhead. Oher also has flashbacks of being taken from his mother by (assumedly) social services. A move that, at least according to the film, brought him nothing more than continued misfortune.

So who does save Oher? Well, a rich, white family with charitable hearts, a private (mostly-white) Christian school that gives Oher a chance, a university that gives him a scholarship, and finally the National Football League. Now that’s something whites, especially those who denounce public welfare and social services, can feel good about.

--Erin Ash

"Sports Jobs" and Social Relations

Versus Network will premier a new show tonight named “Sports Jobs.” The host is veteran NFL linebacker, Junior Seau, and the concept is a sporting take on the Discovery Channel’s “Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe.”

Dirty Jobs has gained tremendous popularity, and a good bit of that is certainly attributable to the program’s grime, guts, and goop (I’ll admit, I had a little Dirty Jobs addiction for a while). However, shows like this also serve an important, even progressive function: they shine light on the labor that makes contemporary society “work,” and they provide a glimpse of social relations often hidden behind market exchanges. As the intro to dirty jobs explains:

"My name is Mike Rowe, and this is my job: I explore the country looking for people who aren't afraid to get dirty—hard-working men and women who earn an honest living doing the kinds of jobs that make civilized life possible for the rest of us. Now... get ready, to get dirty."

I think Rowe has done a terrific job humanizing those individuals he works with on Dirty Jobs. He’s treated people with respect in jobs that few of us would jump at the opportunity to take up. In it’s own way, the show provides a place where everyday work can be appreciated and reflected upon.

Sports Jobs, however, will need to navigate an interesting tension between glamour and labor. “UFC cornerman” will put Seau in the best seat in the house and will literally make him part of the action. The job may lend itself more to “cool” than “confronting,” and—unlike many of the occupations on Dirty Jobs—it may be something many viewers would like to do. “Stadium construction” and “arena floor crew” may be just as interesting, but they also provide a great opportunity to connect our experiences as fans and spectators to the often hidden, working-class commitments that make those experiences possible.

In short, Versus has an opportunity and a responsibility. I’m excited to see a side of sports we rarely get to see “up close;” however, I’ll be equally excited if the show facilitates reflection on the social dynamics that make spectator sport possible.

--T.C. Corrigan

Blogs to Tiger: We will decide how to cover you, not the other way around

The recent Tiger Woods car crash created a media firestorm—and not just in traditional sports journalism outlets. Celebrity and sports blogs were on the story, as well, and the differences in coverage illustrated the changing sports media landscape.
While traditional media outlets continued to report the “official” statement released by Woods’ web site along with an interview given by the local police, gossip and sports blogs like tmz.com, gawker.com and deadspin.com used a litany of unnamed sources to tell a much more sordid story from the beginning, something Woods is clearly not happy about. After all, the golfer is known for taking great lengths to protect his privacy – and his pristine, non-controversial image.
Traditional sports media outlets have a lot to lose in covering an unflattering story about Tiger Woods – they need access to him in order to be successful, and risking that access has a high cost. Given some of the commentary from sports journalists advocating Woods’ personal life be off limits, it’s safe to say they are aware of those costs. But blogs like tmz.com or deadspin.com don’t need such access, and that separation gives them a freedom that other outlets do not enjoy. Journalism purists may not like the very flimsy attitude such blogs take toward ethics and journalistic standards, but one thing is for sure: these new media outlets are changing the way sports stars are covered – not to mention the dynamics and unspoken rules in the sports media industry.
--Erin Whiteside

Caster Semenya, the gender binary, and a case for the ‘sport continuum’

If you’re only vaguely familiar with the troubling case of sex-testing in sport and the Caster Semenya case, a new article in The New Yorker by Ariel Levy may offer the most incisive, comprehensive look at the case and the issues around it. Levy masterfully underscores the issues of racism and the power of the gender binary that underpin the tragic events around an 18-year-old South African runner.
In a Q-&-A about the article on the New Yorker Web site, Levy drives home her point about the myth of the gender binary -- and the ways this case has clearly upset it. She writes, “I think what has really got people worked up in the Semenya case is gender, not fairness. I think the idea that ultimately the boundary between male and female is porous is deeply destabilizing … our whole world is organized around gender.”
In the article, Levy addresses the problem – made abundantly clear by the Semenya case -- that the gender binary (defining male and female as rigidly defined, oppositional categories) presents for organizing sports. It has worked masterfully at reinforcing a hierarchy that has positioned women as the athletic underclass. But it’s not truthful, realistic or fair.
This is a case that has been made by sports sociologists for decades. Perhaps the most thought-provoking alternative to understand women and men in relationship to sports has been suggested by Mary Jo Kane, who in 1995 wrote about what she called the “sport continuum” – where we allow fluidity in our understanding of women and men and we also understand that men and women individual may outperform one another and possess varying degrees of strength and speed.
Accepting sport and gender on a continuum would force us to re-organize sport – a Herculean task, as Levy points out in her well-written piece. But as the Semenya case demonstrates: the gender binary as an organizer for sports simply doesn’t work – and the results are unfair and even devastating for the most vulnerable. -- Marie Hardin

Re-framing Title IX

Women’s sports blogs have been abuzz recently with the news that an Alabama softball coach has filed a Title IX complaint against Mobile County schools. In the complaint, coach Tyler Murray alleges that girls sports are denied access and facilities given to the boys football team and also questions the extra summer pay given to football coaches. It will be interesting to keep an eye on the news coverage of this complaint, given the opportunity it provides sports journalists to address the unquestioned cultural superiority of football.

We have argued that in Title IX news coverage, most mainstream news outlets agree with the law’s underlying basic premise: everyone deserves equality and justice. In fact, in our analysis of Title IX op-eds written by national newspapers over a recent three year period, not one opposed the law.

Good news, right?

But even while supporting the idea of Title IX, the op-ed authors in our analysis often described sports as a space naturally owned and defined by men. As one stated, it is time for boys to “share, not surrender, their field.” Narratives within arguments touting the law’s righteousness also saw women as naturally less interested in sports, allowing the writers to develop an argument that essentially positioned Title IX as right and just but not really needed. Why should we dedicate equal resources (and take away from men who naturally deserve them) if there isn’t equal interest and aptitude among women?

In order for opinions on Title IX to change in a way that benefits women’s sports along with “minor” men’s sports, advocates must go beyond simply arguing for gender equality. Suggesting only that women and men deserve equal money does not challenge fundamentally patriarchal ideology that undermines the logic of Title IX. Rather, we must speak about Title IX and sports in ways that disrupt troubling taken-for-granted notions of sports, like the unquestioned supremacy of football in our culture or the idea that boys and men are naturally suited for sports.

Supporting equality is still critically important, but only part of the necessary rhetorical equation. And unless new frames enter the debate, Title IX will continue to be viewed as something that is good in theory but illogical in practice.

-Erin Whiteside

College football promotes military values

When Maryland’s star receiver Torrey Smith caught a pass in the second quarter of the Terps’ game vs. Virginia Tech Saturday, fans saw the familiar No. 82 streak past his defender for a 21-yard gain.
Above that No. 82, though, was not “SMITH,” but the word “COURAGE.”
Maryland’s players were wearing special military-style uniforms as part of a promotion for the Wounded Warriors project, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping veterans transition to civilian life. The uniforms, also worn by South Carolina’s players in a separate game, featured camouflage sleeves and various military ideals printed on the back, such as “DUTY,” “COMMITMENT” and “COUNTRY.”
In some ways, the promotion was similar to the WBCA Pink Zone campaign, which raises awareness about breast cancer with the help of various college women’s basketball teams who wear pink uniforms and shoes on a designated “Think Pink” day.
What’s different is that the pink uniforms and shoes relate directly to the organization. The uniforms worn by the football players, however, promoted military ideals and gave no hint to fans or media members about the actual Wounded Warriors project. In fact, the Wounded Warriors project has its own set of core ideals, such as “FUN,” “INTEGRITY” and “INNOVATION,” but those words were not on the jerseys.
The Wounded Warrior project is not about blind commitment to country, but about helping soldiers re-adjust to life after perilous combat experiences. As scholar Michael Butterworth argues, such promotions are seemingly “innocent” displays, but position the United States’ military as good and just, while at the same time silencing critique of American military policies. In the case here, media accounts were more about uplifting stories from the battlefield and less about the problems soldiers face in returning from war, such as high rates of suicide or post-traumatic stress syndrome. As the Associated Press wrote:

[The Terps' Matt] Grooms spent six months in Kuwait outfitting and fixing transport trucks in Iraq. He was nearly killed by a virus and was rattled by an American missile that exploded too close to camp. Still, he said it was “the best four years I’ve had.”

No one will argue with the value of the Wounded Warrior project. And considering various reports about the struggles soldiers face in readjusting to civilian life, it’s clearly a badly needed program in need of visibility and support. Too bad the promotion forgot to focus on the soldiers who need that support.
-Erin Whiteside

Media execs, Aresco and Bergofin talk at Penn State this week

This was a tremendous week to be a Penn State student if you’re interested in the sports media industry. On Wednesday, Penn State’s Center for Sports Business and Research hosted a talk and Q&A by Versus Network Senior VP, Bill Bergofin. And today the John Curley Center for Sports Journalism hosted a “conversation” and Q&A with Executive VP of Programming for CBS Sports, Michael Aresco. Here’s a quick run-down of the two talks.

Aresco began his lecture by outlining facets of his job, including negotiations, dealing with the press, and the pressure of production and programming decisions. He then jumped into a particularly well-informed philosophical discussion concerning the relationship between sports and society. Drawing on a variety of thinkers, he pointed out that sports provide a “framework for fairness” and “have a fundamental linkage with morality”—they’re “contributors to society’s values, both good and bad.”

This provided a nice launching point for a discussion of the state of college sports. Pulling from work by Paul Gallico, Aresco noted that “big time” college sports didn’t have to develop the way they did. He said that the level college games are elevated to is not inherently bad, but that issues like the facilities arms race and the struggles to keep the student in student-athlete aren’t going away; “If you continue to deny it then you’re going to have issues,” said Aresco. “You need to deal with it.”

Aresco then provided some perspective on the state of broadcast rights, the demand for sports content, and the impact of new media on the sports media landscape. Broadcast networks, he pointed out, don’t have the benefit of cable’s dual revenue sources in subscription and advertising. For the broadcast networks, this has made revenue from new media offerings an imperative area of focus. He provided the network’s shift from subscription to ad-based March Madness On Demand as a great example of the business models that are being worked out in the online environment.

Aresco complimented the questions articulated by the audience during the Q&A session. On the topic of a college football playoff, he discussed the various economic factors that would have to be considered—most importantly the impact of a playoff system on college football’s season-long interest. On the role of the media in shaping the norms and values of sports, Aresco said that CBS is “very conscious of our role as custodians of the games we produce, especially at the college level.” He closed by commenting on the decision of CBS Sports to distribute SEC football on the national level (rather than regionally), noting the interest in regions outside the South and the network’s savings on rights purchases and production.

On Wednesday, Bill Bergofin of Versus discussed the marketing strategies surrounding the 2006 rebranding of Comcast’s Outdoor Life Network as Versus, as well as the differentiation Versus has tried to create between its offerings and ESPN. The senior VP focused on the network’s attempts—successful, judging from Versus’ growth—to tap into cultural and economic currents pertinent to its target demographic. When the economy and the management class were booming and competitive in 2006, Versus was positioning itself and its content as hyper-competitive and testosterone-driven (not a stretch when you’re pushing bull-riding, NHL hockey and cage fighting). With the financial crisis, Bergofin indicated a need to maintain their image, but to recognize the search for meaning and personal fulfillment in uncertain times. A series of entertaining promotional spots for the Network reflected these differing perspectives.

Bergofin was critical of ESPN's treatment of sports. Drawing from blog posts, he suggested that sports fans are tired of ESPN's emphasis on negative stories (Versus doesn't have news and information offerings, so it's not confronted with the same struggles over news and entertainment at ESPN). Further, he described ESPN as the "McDonalds or Walmart of sports", pointing to their massive expansion in channels and offerings. Ultimately, for Bergofin, the hope is to provide the depth of sports at Versus' to match ESPN’s breadth.

Again, this Q&A session was well-informed, and Bergofin even offered some speculation on the impact a potential Comcast/NBC deal might have on Versus. He said that the NBC Sports connection would bring tremendous assets to Versus, but that the slow process of major media mergers means that noticeable changes at the network wouldn’t be apparent for close to two years.

On new media, Bergofin indicated that he hoped Versus could take a different direction than the news and information style familiar on most major sports media sites, perhaps toward more original programming. Depth of experience, again, rather than breadth.

--T.C. Corrigan

Reebok to women: Get the body that men want

In a new series of provocative ads, Reebok tells women in no uncertain terms what other apparel companies often only suggest under the guise of empowerment: that exercising in the company’s new shoe will make them more sexually desirable to men. One features only a shot of a woman’s breasts “talking” about the woman’s now toned backside -- which came courtesy of the shoes. The slogan: “Make your boobs jealous.” Another features a woman talking about the shoes, only to have the camera leave her face when she bends over to lace them up and pan down to her backside, akin to a pair of roving male eyes. Focusing only on a woman’s breasts, or positioning the camera to resemble wandering eyes are what media scholars call the camera’s “male gaze,” a concept that suggests patriarchal power relationships are reproduced through mediated images. In Reebok’s ads, women are reduced to a series of body parts and rewarded for appealing to the camera’s eye. The (male) camera tells women that exercising will make them objects of male desire. When women began playing organized sports in the early 1900s, critics said sports made women too manly; today Reebok tells women that exercise will make them more desirable. The message may be slightly different, but the end goal of appealing to men is the same. These new Reebok ads, then, are nothing new at all. Rather, they are part of a centuries-old narrative that polices women’s bodies to the benefit and pleasure of men, while denying women a space to find their own motivation for engaging in sports and other forms of exercise.
-Erin Whiteside

Images that "sell" to young female athletes

Researchers at Bowling Green State University, the University of Memphis and the University of Iowa presented results of a study during the annual NASSS conference today suggesting that adolescent girls involved in sports are generally attracted to images of sportswomen that are athletically oriented -- not those that emphasize traditional femininity. The study, led by Vikki Krane(BGSU) and Sally Ross (Memphis), has implications for the marketing of women's collegiate sports toward the girls these programs may someday try to recruit: active, sports-focused images may be the most effective in attracting girls to sports events and athletic participation. The marketing materials (posters, programs, guides) often used for women's collegiate programs now often downplay these types of images in favor of more traditionally "feminine" photos of athletes.

Net Neutrality and Online Sports Media

With the FCC entering a public comment period on the subject of Network Neutrality, I’ve been thinking, “What would a repeal of Network Neutrality mean for online sports media?” If you’re not familiar with the concept of Net Neutrality take just two minutes to watch this video from SavetheInternet.com (it’s actually kind of entertaining).

So, let’s imagine--without the principle of Net Neutrality--how a telecom company might make bandwidth decisions concerning specific content. Take the Internet provider Comcast and their ownership of Versus.com. Were the guiding principle of Network Neutrality to be removed, Comcast could restrict the bandwidth for consumers accessing sites that are competitors of Versus. Consumers using FOXSports.com, for instance, might have their bandwidth reduced to a level that would make its multi-media offerings incommensurate with Comcast-owned sites.

However, the telecom industry is oligopolistic, meaning that consumers are limited in their choice of services to just a few large corporations. The telecom companies know better than to engage in cutthroat (i.e. genuine) competition. Restricting consumer access to a competitor’s Web site would only result in the same being done to their own. Instead, as an oligopoly, they’d prefer to squabble for market share and erect huge barriers to entry. By doing so they can actually secure near-monopoly-level profits while keeping up the façade of competition (think: Oil, Health Insurance).

Unfortunately for the sports media consumer (not to mention consumers of other cultural content), such arrangements often result in a lack of diverse content. Mainstream media outlets and major sports leagues would be able to leverage their large audiences and associations with telecom companies to make sure that the online experience for their digital offerings remains far superior to niche or marginal sports media outlets and organizations, including those of women’s and Olympic sports. A further possibility is that access to these niche sites could be walled off and restricted to subscription access. It’s one thing for a niche sports site to choose to direct its readership toward subscription-based content. It’s quite another thing if the telecom companies control the subscription system, access, and resulting revenue.

Sports and sports media are more democratic (small d) because of the Internet and the principle of Net Neutrality. The FCC should act in the public interest to promote competition, diversity and localism by standing behind Net Neutrality. This is an important protection for sports fans, sports media outlets, and sports organizations... not to mention businesses, organizations, consumers and citizens.

To get more involved in this issue, check out SavetheInternet, this informative update on the subject by Daily Kos, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, this FCC Blog where you can weight in on the matter...

--T.C. Corrigan

Flagging the NFL's homophobic culture

Kansas City Chiefs running back Larry Johnson recently made news when he used a homophobic slur in reference to his coach in several posts to his twitter account. The NFL is hardly considered “gay friendly,” and Johnson’s tweets are indicative of an ongoing homophobic culture in the league. To the NFL and Chiefs’ credit, Johnson was suspended for one game. However, as the Kansas City Star’s Randy Covitz writes, the reprimand is vague and notes only that Johnson was suspended for conduct “detrimental to the team,” leaving it unclear whether he was suspended for the slur or criticism of the coach. The NFL and the Chiefs had the opportunity to bring the problem of homophobia in the NFL to the forefront of public dialogue, but chose not to; their obscure language denied a voice to a persistent and troubling problem within the league. When team and league officials fail to acknowledge even the most overt gay-bashing, the persistent and dangerous homophobic culture remains unchecked . No one thing will change the hostile climate, but until a voice is given to the problem, we wonder if it’s reasonable to expect current gay players to come out of the closet.
-Erin Whiteside

Media coverage of Serena Williams' outburst emphasizes gender norms

Serena Williams, in her outburst at the U.S. Open, stepped outside the box of what is considered acceptable behavior for female athletes, according to the most recent report from the John Curley Center for Sports Journalism. We analyzed articles from both traditional and new media sources to answer questions about the way Williams was portrayed in coverage of her outburst. The most interesting findings concerned comparisons between Williams and other male and female athletes. We found that although Williams was more often compared to male athletes, comparisons between her and other female athletes were more likely to be negative. Further, in articles that did compare Williams negatively to other female athletes, Kim Clijsters' (her opponent in the match who went on to win the Open) motherhood was more likely to be mentioned. One Yahoo! Sports article went as far as to call Clijsters the Open's "silver lining" after the "stain" left by Williams' outburst.

This finding is, sadly, unsurprising. Gender norms are valued in our society, and while we might be able to stomach a male behaving “violently” during a sports match, females, even female athletes, are “supposed” to be -- above all -- women. Society needed a Kim Clijsters, a mother and wife who exemplifies our ideals of femininity, to put us at ease after the Williams outburst.

This is not to argue that Williams’ behavior was acceptable or undeserving of punishment. Any athlete who threatens an official should be rebuked. However, if it had been a male athlete, perhaps an opponent of Roger Federer (who recently become a dad), would the media be mentioning Federer’s fatherhood in negative commentary about the male offender?

Posted by Erin Ash

SI for Kids: Basic lessons in gender, sport

At the UM Tucker Center lecture Monday night on women's sports and social media, I suggested that the primary function of mediated/spectator sports in U.S. culture is to reinforce gender norms (apologies to Noam Chomsky).
It starts early. Just look at SI for Kids, which disproportionately focuses on men and boys (maybe "SI for Boys" would be a better title) and relies on gender stereotypes in relationship to sports. One feature in the magazine, the "Buzz Beamer" cartoon, is sometimes so overt in its use of gender stereotypes as to be laughable (maybe that's what supposed to be funny). Buzz Beamer's October entry (p. 56) is such an example: apparently Marial Zagunis, an Olympic gold-medal fencer, is capable only of carving "beautiful" pumpkins; her male counterpart (hockey player Alex Ovechkin), of course, is capable only of making the opposite (a scary one).
Obviously, the problem with this kind of message is that underlying it is the assumption of gender binaries. What do girls and boys take away from a cartoon that makes this point? Unfortunately, it's not a message that encourages girls or boys to move beyond traditional gender roles that hinder both from exploring sports activities they might otherwise pursue.

ESPN's 'Body Issue' does its job

According to a report by The Wrap about the Magazine Innovation Summit in New York this week, ESPN boosted subscriptions to its "Insider" (a companion to the magazine) by 400 within two hours of posting its "Body Issue" images online. Newsstand data wasn't released.
Of course. That was the point -- it doesn't take a genius to see how the SI Swimsuit edition and other flesh-baring editions of sports-related titles do on the newsstand: They sell.
ESPN's sex-sells issue was, in my mind, different in some significant ways from the SI swimsuit edition. ESPN had argued that the mag was driven by journalistic motives, and while that's highly debatable, the images do exhibit a range of athletic images. It is much more ambivalent than SI -- alternating back and forth between images that can be read as liberating because they challenge ideal-body norms, and those that reinforce a "hetero-sexy" apologia by female athletes.

HS sports: 'one of the next great markets'

According to rankings, the biggest high school football game in the country tonight will be played in South Florida tonight and will -- courtesy of ESPN -- be aired for the nation to watch. Marketers from Nike and other major brands will be watching because, as an article in the Sun-Sentinel notes, they have "targeted high school sports as one of the next great markets." Nike moved into one of the high schools this week with a full-force marketing campaign aimed at students.
The Sun-Sentinel article suggests that ESPN's exposure of high school sports on a national level may be a "win-win" situation, as schools' travel costs are covered and they get a small sum of money for playing. But Fred Grimm of the Miami Herald correctly takes ESPN to task for exploiting the cheap labor at the high school level. He points out the obvious: ESPN is cultivating a potential goldmine by contriving "big-time" high school matchups, selling the audience and avoiding the astronomical rights fees it pays for college sports.
The implications are sickening. Do we really want to import the problems with academic integrity we have at the college level into public schools? As Grimm writes, "On Friday night, during ESPN's Old Spice High School Showcase Presented By Nike, the commodities will be offered up on national television, along with after-shave and athletic apparel."
On a related note, ESPN has also announced plans to launch a Web site devoted to coverage of girls' high school sports (beyond what it provides on RISE). Again, such a branded ("W") site could be a moneymaker for the net by allowing it to sell eyeballs not typically attracted to its products in large numbers. But it is likely that this idea will end up on ESPN's scrap heap: Making a female-focused, sport-focused media product that sells is an exceedingly difficult proposition (just ask the editors at SI Women or at Real Sports, for instance).