Two major studies were conducted which showed that women are largely absent in news coverage.

The Global Media Monitoring Project held its monitoring day on February 16, 2005. Trained volunteers analyzed one day’s worth of stories from 58 newspapers, 6 radio stations and 16 television stations. They found only 21 percent of people featured in the news were women. Women were most likely to be the subject of celebrity and arts news (28 percent) and least likely to be the subject of political news (14 percent). They also found that women were disproportionately portrayed as victims – 19 percent of stories compared to 8 percent for men.

Also in 2005, the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) conducted a broad study of the American news media and found “men are relied on as sources in the news more than twice as often as women” (The Gender Gap, 2005, ¶2). They found that newspapers were the most likely to cite at least one woman in a story (41 percent stories), and cable news was least likely to use female sources (19 percent of stories).

This chart, created by PEJ, shows their findings on the number of male and female sources in the news. The study examined “16,800 news stories across 45 different news outlets during 20 randomly selected days over nine months” (The Gender Gap, 2005, ¶3).

Three studies which specifically focused on newspapers also found women were less likely to be used as a source.

Brown, Bybee, Wearden and Straughan (1987) analyzed 846 front-page stories from The Washington Post, The New York Times and four North Carolina newspapers and found that women only represented 10 percent of the sources identifiable by gender. Similarly, Armstrong’s (2004) analysis of 18 newspapers found men were mentioned three times as often as women. He also found that when women did appear in stories they generally appeared after a male source.

Zoch and Turk (1998 ) studied a sample of 10 years worth of stories from three Southern newspapers and found that 68 percent of sources were men. They also found that female sources were quoted more briefly and quoted in shorter stories than men.

Two studies examining television news further confirmed that women are under-used as sources.

Rakow and Kranich (1991) studied the evening broadcasts of CBS, NBC and ABC from July 1986 and found only 15 percent of the 1,203 news stories used women as sources. Of these women, about half appeared as unofficial sources and they were most often referred to as mothers or victims.

Taking into consideration the popularity of TV newsmagazine programs, Grabe, Zhou and Barnett (1999) examined the sources used in roughly 300 stories aired during 60 Minutes and Hard Copy. They found that across the shows, men accounted for 69 percent of all sources, however they found that Hard Copy was more likely to quote women (42.2 percent of stories) than 60 Minutes (22.5 percent of stories).

One argument made to explain the under-use of female sources is that journalists use male and female sources in proportion to the number of men and women who hold the government, professional and management positions most likely to be quoted in the media. However, Armstrong (2006) specifically examined the use and gender of these specific types of sources in 31 newspapers and found that even when “both men and women are in the same profession or position, men are still more likely to be chosen as sources” (p. 77).

One study did find an exception to the under-representation of women. Armstrong (2002) analyzed one week of content from 18 newspapers some which had ethnically diverse communities or a high percentages of black, Hispanic or Pacific Island residents. He found that newspapers in those communities were more likely to give attention and emphasis to women in their coverage than newspapers in more homogeneous communities.

It is clear from this evidence that the news media consistently uses more male sources than female sources. Although Armstrong (2002) found one example of communities where the trend is starting to be reversed, a broad cross-section of news reporting fails to utilize women for expert commentary, and has a tendency to stereotype women as victims.

References

Armstrong, C. L. (2002). Papers give women more attention in ethnically diverse communities. Newspaper Research Journal, 23(4), 81-85.

Armstrong, C. L. (2004). The influence of reporter gender on source selection in newspaper stories. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 139-154.

Armstrong, C. L. (2006). Story genre influences whether women are sources. Newspaper Research Journal, 27(3), 66-81.

Brown, J. D., Bybee, C. R., Wearden, S. T., & Straughan, D. M. (1987). Invisible power: Newspaper news sources and the limits of diversity. Journalism Quarterly, 64(1), 45-51.

Cann, D. J., & Mohr, P. B. (2001). Journalist and source gender in Australian television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 45(1), 162-174.

Global Media Monitoring Project. (2005). Who makes the news? Retrieved March 9, 2008, from http://www.whomakesthenews.org/who_makes_the_news/report_2005

Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2005). The gender gap: Women are still missing as sources for journalists. Retrieved March 9, 2008, from http://www.journalism.org/node/141

Grabe, M. E., Zhou, S., & Barnett, B. (1999). Sourcing and reporting in news magazine programs: 60 Minutes versus Hard Copy. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 293-311.

Rakow, L. F., & Kranich, K. (1991). Woman as sign in television news. Journal of Communication, 41(1), 8-23.

Zoch, L. M., & Turk, J. V. (1998). Women making news: Gender as a variable in source selection and use. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 762-775.

Armstrong (2004) analyzed one week of content from the first four sections of 18 newspapers from across the United States. He found “female writers were more likely to write about women and showcase women in news coverage” (p. 149).

Zoch and Turk (1998 ) analyzed a random sample of 1,126 stories from the Charlotte Observer, South Carolina’s State and the Augusta Chronicle. They also found that female reporters used more female sources. In stories which carried a female byline 26.5 percent of the sources were women, while in male bylined stories only 18.9 percent of sources were women. Additionally, Rodgers and Thorson (2003) found “that female reporters used more female sources (24 percent) than male reporters did (16 percent)” (p. 664) when they analyzed 21 issues from three different newspapers.

An analysis of TV newsmagazines also found female journalists were more likely to quote women than their male colleagues. Grabe, Zhou and Barnett (1999) said that stories by female reporters for the programs 60 Minutes and Hard Copy used female sources 38.3 percent of the time, while their male colleagues used female sources only 27.6 percent of the time.

Leibler and Smith’s (1997) found a similar pattern to the above studies when they analyzed stories broadcast on ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC, but none of their findings reached statistical significance. In the 159 stories they reviewed, they found that women used 4.5 male sources for every female source while their male counterparts used 5.5 men for every woman. They also found “female reporters were slightly more likely to allocate the first source position in a story to a woman” (p. 61).

Taken together these studies show that female journalists, while still quoting more men than women, are more likely to quote women than their male colleagues. This gives some weight to the argument that more women in the profession of journalism will lead to more women appearing in news coverage.

Armstrong (2004) speculated that the difference in source use may be partly due to the type of stories that women are assigned to cover. Traditionally more women have been assigned to write features and cover social issues than men. He also suggested that journalist’s sources may reflect their networks of associates and that may be why women are more likely to have female contacts. The next step is for researchers to conduct observational studies to help illuminate the reasons why women seem more likely to quote women.

References

Armstrong, C. L. (2004). The influence of reporter gender on source selection in newspaper stories. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 139-154.

Grabe, M. E., Zhou, S., & Barnett, B. (1999). Sourcing and reporting in news magazine programs: 60 Minutes versus Hard Copy. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 293-311.

Leibler, C. M., & Smith, S. J. (1997). Tracking gender differences: A comparative analysis of network correspondents and their sources. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 41(1), 58-68.

Powers, A., & Fico, F. (1994). Influences on the use of sources at large U.S. newspapers. Newspaper Research Journal, 15(4), 87-97.

Rodgers, S., & Thorson, E. (2003). A socialization perspective on male and female reporting. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 658-675.

Zoch, L. M., & Turk, J. V. (1998). Women making news: Gender as a variable in source selection and use. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 762-775.

In 1949, David Manning White studied the decision making process of a male wire editor at a daily newspaper he dubbed Mr. Gates. Bleske (1991) updated White’s study by observing a female wire editor he called Ms. Gates. He found that despite 40 years of changes in the newspaper industry, Ms. Gates chose stories very similarly to Mr. Gates. Although Ms. Gates said an interview that she might be more likely to choose a story about women if space opened at the last minute, only 18 stories she selected in the week she was observed “were directly about women’s issues or featured women as the main news subject” (p. 94).

Splichal and Garrison (2000) conducted a large telephone survey of newspaper editors in both 1993 and 1999 and asked them their opinions of whether 15 separate aspects of the private lives of public officials, such as past drug use or extramarital affairs, should be considered newsworthy. The results yielded few statistically significant differences based on gender; however, there was one issue which female editors were far more likely to want to cover than men. Female editors were much more interested in pursuing a story centered on allegations of sexual harassment by the official than their male counterparts.

A second survey of 25 male and 16 female senior editors found no significant difference in their responses when they were asked to rank a list of hypothetical news stories by importance (Lavie and Lehman-Wilzig, 2003).

Only one study suggested significant differences in newspaper coverage based on editor gender. Craft and Wanta (2004) examined a week of local news coverage in 30 daily newspapers and found newspapers with a high percentage of women in managerial positions tended to cover news in a more positive light” (p. 135). They argued that although crime news was an important staple of all the newspapers they reviewed, the cliché “if it bleeds, it leads” was reflected far more often at male-run publications.

Taken as a group, these studies struggle to find evidence that female editors would publish different content from newspapers managed by men. Craft and Wanta (2004) argued that female editors have likely been socialized to accept existing news values, and that these results may also be understood in the context that “women who achieve management positions, as their male counterparts, have been rewarded for conformity in addition to achievement” (p. 127).

Leibler and Smith (1997) offered further insight into the findings from interviews they conducted with journalists who work at the network television level. Importantly, they found that women in those positions “did not perceive themselves as agents for change” (p. 66). Despite the power these women may have had to alter they way news was covered at the networks, Leibler and Smith found their approach to journalism was not significantly different from their male colleagues because they were not inclined to push for new policies or practices.

References

Bleske, G. L. (1991). Ms. Gates takes over: An updated version of a 1949 case study. Newspaper Research Journal, 12(4), 88-97.

Craft, S., & Wanta, W. (2004). Women in the newsroom: Influences of female editors and reporters on the news agenda. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 124-138.

Lavie, A., & Lehman-Wilzig, S. (2003). Whose news? Does gender determine the editorial product? European Journal of Communication, 18(1), 5-29.

Leibler, C. M., & Smith, S. J. (1997). Tracking gender differences: A comparative analysis of network correspondents and their sources. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 41(1), 58-68.

Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content, 2nd edition. New York: Longman Publishers USA.

Splichal, S., & Garrison, B. (2000). Covering public officials: Gender and privacy issue differences. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 3, 167-179.

Everbach (2005) conducted a content analysis of the sources featured in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune which had an all-female management team from 1999-2003. She examined 326 stories and found that the Herald-Tribune still used a greater percentage of male sources than female sources, despite the female editors. She also found that several of the women featured were only interviewed because of their connection to men and were described simply as the man’s wife, mother or girlfriend.

Greenwald (1990) also found that female editors did not lead to significantly more women being quoted in the business sections of the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch or the Louisville Courier-Journal.

One of the main arguments these scholars made for their findings was that female editors are not able to change whether women are sourced in stories because they “have not been able to make significant changes in male-dominated news values, so [newsrooms] continue to emphasize masculine definitions of news” (Eberbach, 2005, p. 20).

References

Armstrong, C. L. (2004). The influence of reporter gender on source selection in newspaper stories. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 139-154.

Everbach, T. (2005). The ‘masculine’ content of a female-managed newspaper. Media Report to Women, 3(4), 14-22.

Greenwald, M. S. (1990). Gender representation in newspaper business sections. Newspaper Research Journal, 68-74.

Greenwald (1990) examined the business sections of the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch and the Louisville Courier-Journal and found women were underrepresented as subjects and sources. Of 180 articles coded in the Dispatch only one story and four briefs had women as the main subject and only 6.7 percent of stories quoted women. The Courier-Journal didn’t fare much better; while six stores and four briefs of 116 articles featured women as the subject, they also only quoted women in 6 percent of their stories.

In a similar content analysis of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Everbach (2005) found that 77.5 percent of the sources quoted in the business section were male. However, she argued that the business section was one section where women were quoted “primarily because of their positions of power and authority” (p. 18). She applauded that the women quoted were afforded the same status as the men quoted and were generally portrayed as important to the corporate world.

These two studies give clear evidence that women are not regularly sought as sources for the business section of the newspaper. Further research into the routines of business reporters would be useful to help illuminate the reasons for their absence.

References

Everbach, T. (2005). The ‘masculine’ content of a female-managed newspaper. Media Report to Women, 3(4), 14-22.

Greenwald, M. S. (1990). Gender representation in newspaper business sections. Newspaper Research Journal, 68-74.

Stone’s (1973-74) large study in Wisconsin found half of the respondents said it did not matter to them whether the anchor of the news program was a man or a woman. Additionally, less than 21 percent of respondents said they found a male newscaster to be more believable than a woman. When respondents did say they preferred a male reporter, the two reasons most often given were “the male voice and tradition” (p. 58).

In a second large study comparing two male and two female newscasters, Balon, et al. (1978 ) actually found that male newscasters were perceived as “less qualified than females” (p. 162).

Whittaker and Whittaker (1976) had Floridians rate audio recordings of two female and two male newscasters based on their “effectiveness, believability, and acceptance” (p. 179). The found no statistically significant differences in the ratings of the newscasters in any category.

One study did find mixed results. Tan, Raudy, Huff and Miles (1980) had Texas school children watch a 15-minute newscast and rate the newscasters based on “effectiveness and believability” (p. 205). While they did not find differences in the ratings for believability, they argued that the male newscaster was more effective than the female, because the students recalled more information from his newscast.

Unfortunately for female sportscasters, studies continue to find a preference for male reporting of sports content. Ordman and Zillmann (1994) had subjects evaluate sports commentary by male and female reporters. They found, “Female sports reporters are perceived as less competent than their male colleagues” (p. 73), even when reporting on women’s gymnastics. The reports also tried to convince respondents that a longshot team would win the championship and they found that the male reporter had more success in convincing the audience than the female reporter.

Shaw, Cole, Moore and Cole (1981) also found that men were more positively associated with stories about sports. They found that when stories about a golf tournament were by men they “were judged as more interesting, dramatic and active” (p. 104) than when the same stories were presented by women.

These findings make it clear that the public does not see gender as a negative impact on broadcaster credibility, except in the still stereotyped world of sports reporting.

References

Balon, R. E., Philport, J. C., & Beadle, C. F. (1978). How sex and race affect perceptions of newscasters. Journalism Quarterly, 55(1), 160-164.

Ordman, V.L., & Zillmann, D. (1994). Women sports reporters: Have they caught up? Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 18(1), 66-75.

Shaw, D. L., Cole, L. P., Moore, R. L., & Cole, R. R. (1981). Men versus women in bylines. Journalism Quarterly, 58(1), 103-106.

Stone, V. A. (1973-74). Attitudes toward television newswomen. Journal of Broadcasting, 18(1), 49-62.

Tan, A., Raudy, J., Huff, C., & Miles, J. (1980). Children’s reactions to male and female newscasters: Effectiveness and believability. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 201-205.

Whittaker, S., & Whittaker, R. (1976). Relative effectiveness of male and female newscasters. Journal of Broadcasting, 20(2), 177-184.

Craft and Wanta (2004) examined reporting in 30 daily newspapers and they found that female reporters were more likely to cover the same types of issues as male reporters when their editor was a woman. In contrast, male-led newsrooms tended to assign male reporters to political beats and female reporters to education beats.

Greenwald’s (2004) analysis of the business sections of the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch and the Louisville Courier-Journal found that the only difference in the coverage by the two papers was that the Courier-Journal, which had a female business section editor, had more stories written by women than the Dispatch, whose business editor was a man. Even though the Dispatch employed more women, “the Courier-Journal ran five-and-a-half times more stories bylined by women” (p. 73).

These studies argue that female journalists would be well served to work for a female editor.

References

Craft, S., & Wanta, W. (2004). Women in the newsroom: Influences of female editors and reporters on the news agenda. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 124-138.

Greenwald, M. S. (1990). Gender representation in newspaper business sections. Newspaper Research Journal, 68-74.

She Source is probably the easiest way to gain access to female sources. Journalists are encouraged to sign up to gain access to their database of female experts available to comment on a diverse portfolio of topics.

The White House Project is a non-profit organization working to elect women to office. They can put reporters in contact with women running for office as well as politically-active and politically-knowledgeable women involved with candidates.

GuestFinder is another site which connects journalist to sources. These people might be more likely to try and discuss their latest book, but they have several women authors and experts and if they fit your topic – go for it.

White Haired Women for Obama

North Carolina Women for Hillary Clinton