Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Interrogating inequalities in Sports Media: Examining gender/race representation on ESPN.com

Source: ESPN Online
Category: Gender
Coverage: Front Page Headlines (Links)
Time Frame: 1 Day
48 Front Page Links: 4 about women, 44 about men

            To get a better understanding of the discrepancy in the media coverage of men and women, I monitored the front page of ESPN.com to see how many story headlines pertained to female sports. My findings were quite astonishing. Out of 48 clickable links (story headlines), only 4 where links leading to women’s sports, the rest were men’s sports—also, there were no pictures of women to be found. Near the bottom of the page, if you scrolled down far enough you can find EspnW. EspnW is a section just for women. To give you a context of the size of the space allotted for EspnW; an apple next to the tree it fell from would be the only thing comparable. The fact is, less than 8% of the front page was devoted to women. This by no means helps the media stigma that men hog all of the coverage. Yet, there is more to be observed.
            After clicking on every story on the side “ticker,” I noticed that a lot of these stories about men were written about women. In fact, women wrote nearly half of the dozen stories on the ticker. Thinking about that for a minute, I came up two schools of thought. The first and most obvious would be, “Do the writers get no say in what they write?” More specifically, do women writers get told by the presumably male editors to only cover male sports? The second school of thought would be to assume that like the writers, there is an equal female influence in the front offices of ESPN.com, but still neglects the coverage in the female sporting world. There is no thought process that leads you anywhere near gender equality, but there is claim behind how these stories get covered in the first place. I don’t have access to the employee list of ESPN, nor could I even come to a conclusion if I had it, but it is interesting to ponder the idea that woman are making decisions about coverage, and still ignoring the coverage of their own gender.

            I followed the link to EspnW, and I will admit, I was very impressed. It looked like another site entirely, built with light colors and smooth fonts. There were a variety of stories, written by both men and woman, and many other links to blogs and other media coverage for woman. The biggest concern? Why was this site buried so deep on the ESPN.com page? That to me seems to be the biggest issue. Why is it that we blatantly hide the female media coverage? Wouldn’t it be a quick fix to at least put some links higher up on the page? ESPN is the biggest sports media outlet in the world, so they will constantly be looked at and scrutinized for—not giving adequate coverage of both genders. There needs to be a change in the way we construct our online sources, and it starts with placing links at the top of the page. EspnW was great, where I found it was not.

No comments:

Post a Comment