Equitable media coverage of female and male athletes: Is there a solution?

The article by John Vincent, Ph.D diagnosing and prescribing treatment for the ills of media sports coverage seems to have been conceived of in a vacuum of academic studies. Judging simply from this paper, one might assume an egregious breach of civil rights, that men have yet to let women outside the kitchen of athletic subordination.

That the coverage of womens' athletics in the media is secondary to that of mens' shouldn't surprise anyone who reads the sports page of a major metropolitan paper. On that platform, professional and revenue driving college sports take precedent. In this respect Vincent's citation of political economy makes sense in that the paper seeks to cover what they perceive as their readership's top interests. Given the long endurance of self-sustaining male professional team sports in our country - and the lack thereof in womens' team sports - one has to give some credence to contemporary taste in the consumption of athletic competition. But, with the curve of women in the professional workforce trending upward over the past 50 years, so too have professional athletic opportunities for women. Is there equity? Certainly not. The NBA's decade-long effort to promote it's sister league, the WNBA, is testament to the struggles that come with attempting to manufacture public interest in a new sports league, male or female based. But Fledging independent womens' softball and field hockey leagues show that the grassroots desire to build wider national audiences for women team sports exists.

The feminist and cultural studies arguments cited by Vincent stereotype the sports media as much as it accuses the media of stereotyping and reinforcing said preconceptions to subjugate women in sports. Despite the juvenile tendencies of some sports pundits to write off womens' sports simply based on their popularity, it seems condescending to assert that male dominated sports media view women in athletic competition as anything less than strong and skilled competitors. That second-rate professionals such as Anna Kournikova grab more endorsements because of their perceived "Euro-centric heterosexual femininity" is a simple reality of advertising effectively packaging their products. No one would suggest that Venus or Serena Williams or Maria Sharapova have won major tournaments based on their looks. More likely the stories about them centered on their ability to beat down and dominate their opponents, just as if they were men. Ditto Anika Sorenstam of golf and your Lisa Leslies, Sherryl Swoopes and Rebecca Lobos of the WNBA. Are they women? Yes, empirically they are. But they are not seen as wayward housewives ala Thelma and Louise, but as athletes. Vincent seems to be looking to place blame for disproportionate coverage rather than to observe that it has improved and continues to do so as womens' athletics gain popularity among the consuming public who dictate what is on their newspapers' front pages.

Vincent's recommendations seem reasonable, but consider that news stories are placed and promoted with prominence to the reader's interests in mind, not a suggestion as to what the reader should want to read. That being said, coverage for all sports within the readerships' area should receive coverage, well written and - where space permits - well illustrated - in order the build the readership of those interested in the sport. This is the same treatment given to minor male sports like indoor soccer and lacrosse, not as a matter of gender but of prominence in the public consciousness.