John Vincent Reading Response

In John Vincent's article he compares the coverage of male athletes verses female athletes in the media. In his research he unearths that although female sports are currently on the rise, only about 10% of media coverage is directed toward female sports. Not only that but the majority of the coverage is focused on sports that are seen as more gender appropriate, like swimming, diving, and tennis. Team based sports seemed to be glazed over in coverage of female's as well, which is interesting since team sports in the male arena are the most prominent and are used as a symbol of "brothers" going into battle together for each other. This shows a definite bias toward the idea that males are interconnected within a society, while women are isolated from the "system." This further perpetuates the idea that the males role is to be in an active public role with other males, while females are suppose to be in less influential domestic settings.

Not only is the amount of coverage not equitable, but the type of coverage focused on women is less about their athletic achievements. Especially the so called more feminine sports often focus on sexuality. A good example of this is the last year of commercials based around Danica Patrick, where few have any mention or even hint that she is an athlete and focus only on her appearance. Male athletes are almost never used in this way, most likely because they are usually being covered by other males who write as if their entire audience is male. One of the biggest indicators of the inequality in coverage that bothered me was the idea that the it appears that most writers are performing with only a masculine male audience in mind.

Vincent points out the underlying situation this whole problem is taking place in early in the article.

"To meet their financial objectives, newspapers generally try to attract the largest and

most affluent readership possible.

This frequently translates into newspapers reinforcing traditional

cultural mainstream values rather than act as engines of social change"

Money drives everything even at a newspaper which is suppose to be objective in their coverage and analysis. This happens not only in the sports section but often results in consistently underwhelming material. In a market where they are not going to be protected from a possible hiccup in readership as people adjust to a more accurate demonstration of the happenings in sports, the news sources on the fringes who have more flexible ideologies will likely have to be the ones who deliver this social change.

His recommendations for more equal coverage, based on space and coverage of certain sports, etc., is intriguing and something that should be worked toward. I think the best first steps that can be made are, focusing on in competition photos, defining through athletic feats and not gender roles,avoiding sexist portrayals, giving equal coverage to the so called less feminine sports and focusing more on stars who are the best in their sport and can be role models, instead of Michelle Wie's and Anna Kournikova...anytime the sports world can name more of your boyfriends than athletic feats, maybe it is time to cover someone else.

The best part of this article for me was the end where he focuses on changing the mindset and expectations for female's in athletics. The benefits of a healthy relationship with sports are huge for children as far as developing social skills with peers and learning healthy behaviors and relationships. Opening that door fully to all children should be something as a society we should strive for. And providing a whole host of new role models that are not based on gender stereotypes would help breakdown the inequality that still is rampid within our society.