The Politics of Determining Difference

Many media scholars use the percentages of newsroom positions that women hold to be an adequate measure of gender equity. The reasoning is that equal numbers of women and men in journalism not only itself represent equity，but also will produce equity in content. Women are said not only to cover different things，but to do print or broadcast journalism differently. According to this logic，greater percentages of women will result in more women being the subjects of news articles；and more women，including a diversity of ordinary non-elite women，being interviewed，quoted，and used as sources. When women hold half of the newsroom jobs （especially if this is both horizontal and across beats，as well as vertical，meaning that women are also in executive and leadership positions），the logic continues，the result will be more pronounced focus on features and news about or important to women audiences，and greater sensitivity to women’s voice（s），perhaps different，or even superior ethics. Other outcomes include depicting women and men in equivalent ways in photographs and not using condescending，infantilizing，or sexist language in describing women or women’s issues. Thus，for example，women’s marital status and physical appearance would be described only when these would be mentioned about men. More specifically，equity in hiring and promotions would result in many more women in management and leadership positions. In turn，women publishers and especially editors would cultivate more family-friendly newsroom cultures，hire more women，and assign reporters by criteria other than conventionally gendered assumptions about soft and hard news.

This kind of teleological reasoning has been extended to advocate on women’s behalf by referring to the impact of the content：Women-produced content would，it has been argued，be more useful and satisfying to women audience members，and would in turn promote both women’s self-esteem and overall status in society，such that they would get more respect. Theories about lack of equity for various social identity groups （and ethnicity and race also are often treated one “variable” at a time） suggest that any content that is not produced by that group will ignore or trivialize that group，which in turn will undermine the group’s sense of what they can accomplish.

For a number of reasons，the logic described above overstates the power of mainstream media to cultivate attitudes and opinions. First，audiences are stubbornly and even oppositionally creative. Other factors include is the proliferation of and variety in channels，the shift to the do-it-yourself consumer production，the increasing ability to use technology to produce and distribute “alternative” media cheaply，and the use of social media to critique mainstream productions. Nonetheless，advocacy and professional organizations，as well as academic researchers collect quantitative data indicating presence or absence in mainstream media fields. For example，Asian American Journalists Association （AAJA） and the Media Action Network for Asian Americans （MANAA） as well as organizations such as the National Organization for Women （NOW） look at numbers. Since 1995，the Global Media Monitoring Project （GMMP） has been periodically documenting what it calls “the deep denial of women’s voices” by the world’s news media. The GMMP regard such silencing as violating women’s freedom of expression and information. （In 2010，monitors across 108 countries found that women were 24 percent of the newsrooms，up from 17 percent in 1995.） Of course，part of the GMMP’s goal is participation per se：The activity involves citizens and activists，as well as researchers，thus developing media literacy and advocacy skills.

In the case of gender in journalism，the theories have failed，usually because they are grounded in static，universalized notions of womanhood that neither explain nor predict how，and why，real people work and that ignore how sexism，racism and even ethnocentrism remain pervasive. This is not to deny that women journalists have complained about a masculinized newsroom culture. For broadcast journalists，ageism and “lookism” have been problematic. Thus，black women have endured particularly acute and vicious discrimination；women who fail to meet certain beauty standards can also suffer. But while women especially experience these as double （or triple） inequities，racism，ethnocentrism，and even the exaggerated attention to physical appearance can sideline men，too. More to the point，the fact that ugly，old or non-white women （and men） may suffer discrimination does not mean they have highly specific，non-overlapping perspectives in reporting. Unwarranted or undeserved prejudice is morally wrong，even if correcting the discrimination produces little or no visible