New York Magazine on Media’s Gender Bias Against Hillary and Her Supporters

By Brigitte L. Nacos
Thanks to John Heilemann and New York magazine, we finally get a serious journalistic treatment of the mainstream media’s gender bias that was unleashed against Hillary Clinton and her female supporters during this year’s primary campaign and continues to be evoked against women that refuse to forget the mistreatment of their candidate. Towards the end of his excellent article on “The Fall and Rise of Hillary Clinton,” Heilemann addresses the Clinton campaign’s and her supporters’ anger towards the media that differs from so many efforts by his colleagues to brush this issue aside as sour grapes by a flawed candidate and bitter female backers.

Here are some excerpts from Heilemann’s article that deserves to be read in full:

“For months now, my e-mail box has been full of messages from women across the country, explaining what Hillary’s run meant to them, why it was so important. The reasons vary depending on age and race and region, but the one element almost all my correspondents express in common is a furious resentment at the press for what they see as blatant misogyny in the coverage of Clinton.

When I mention this to Hillary, she laughs and exclaims, “I’d love to get a look at your e-mail!” And then, more soberly, she goes on, “There’s a reason for the resentment. The level of dismissive and condescending comments, not just about me—what do I care?—but about the people who support me and in particular the women who support me, has been shocking. Shocking to women and to fair-minded men. But what has really been more disappointing to me is how few voices that have a platform have spoken out against it. And that’s really why you seen this enormous grassroots outrage. There is no outlet. It is rare that you have anybody on these shows or in a position of responsibility at major publications who really says, ‘Wait a minute! What are we talking about here? I have a wife! I have a daughter! I want the best for them.’ ”

Clinton made a point of not naming names in the course of her media critique. But when I ask her former staff for particular examples of sexism in the press, they exhibit less restraint. “The whole MSNBC crew,” says [Ann] Lewis. “I mean, at what point in Chris Matthews’s career do we choose? Then there was night on CNN when [Republican strategist] Alex Castellanos said, Well, it’s appropriate to call some women a white bitch because that’s what they are.” What especially galls Clinton’s fans about her coverage is what they perceive as a double standard regarding race and gender that (among other biases, in their view) tilted the media playing field dramatically toward Obama. The argument, roughly put, is that whereas casual sexism takes place with impunity, the slightest hint of racial bias provokes gales of protest. ..”

Heilemann does not mention this but I need to add that Geraldine Ferraro was all along right when she pointed to the media’s double standard with respect to gender and race bias.

Finally, Heilemann is right, when he suggests that it is impossible to say how much this bias affected the outcome of the Democrats’ nomination fight. But given the close outcome in terms of delegates emerging from primary and caucus “elections,” it may well have been the decisive factor.

Comments

[PITA]

http://charlottefrontandcenter.com/post_card_project
We’re calling on you to join us in a nationwide demonstration of outrage
The scheduled mail date is July 3 an Independence Day declaration. Please post on your website. We have already established a mailing list for all of the states and possessions listing, the officers of the DNC, the media and some Super delegates. This protest uses the USPS website Click2Mail.

[fussball]

Gute Arbeit hier! Gute Inhalte.