14. United States of America

Home , 1998 Winter Olympics

NANCY E. SPENCER

Content Analysis of US Women in the 2004 Athens Olympics in USA Today

Women from the United States have played a prominent role in the Olympics since 1900 when they first competed in the modern games. Indeed, five of the first 11 female athletes to enter the Paris Olympics were from the US. In 2004, the United States Olympic team included 257 women, out of more than 4,000 total female athletes (Wallechinsky, 2004). Women comprised 48% of the total 531 athletes on the US Olympic team as well (Shevin, 2004). The increasing number of US female participants in the modern Olympics may be attributed to two factors: the Cold War and passage of Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act in 1972. Prior to World War II, girls were rarely encouraged to play sports unless they were ‘female-appropriate’. However, as tensions between the US and U.S.S.R. escalated during the Cold War, the Olympics became recognised as a symbolic site of contestation for global supremacy (Cahn, 1994; Rader, 2004). In 1960, a turning point occurred when Doris Duke Cromwell donated $500,000 dollars to the USOC to support training of female Olympians (Rader, 2004). Women in the United States also benefited from the passage of Title IX which aimed to eliminate sex discrimination in education (Carpenter & Acosta, 2005). One unanticipated consequence of Title IX was the proliferation in sport participation opportunities for girls and women. During the 1990s, the benefits of Title IX became evident when US women attained unprecedented success and media attention in global sports. In 1996, women’s Olympic teams won gold in basketball, gymnastics, soccer and softball at the Atlanta Olympics (Jones, Murrell & Jackson, 1999). Two years later, the women’s hockey team captured the first gold medal ever awarded in hockey at the 1998 winter Olympics in Nagano (Longman, 2000). Perhaps the ‘watershed moment’ for US women’s teams occurred when the US soccer team defeated China in the 1999 World Cup. The final that was viewed by 90,185 fans at the Rose Bowl remains the “largest crowd ever to watch a women’s sporting event in the United States” (Longman, 2000, p. 3). Even though US women athletes have obtained more participation opportunities and greater visibility on the international stage, they continue to lag behind in the political arena. Admittedly the political status of women in the US improved considerably after 1920, when they received the right to vote (Rowe-Finkbeiner, 2004). However, according to the Global Gender Gap Report released by the

World Economic Forum, United States women ranked only 22nd out of 115 countries (Hausman, Tyson & Zahidi, 2006). A significant wage gap persists as well, where females receive on average 60% of the wages earned by males (Hausman et al., 2006). The political status of US women is reflected by their media coverage in international sports.

UNITED STATES MEDIA COVERAGE OF WOMEN’S SPORT Extensive scholarly literature has documented the quantity and quality of media coverage of US female athletes (Andrews, 1998; Billings & Eastman, 2003; Cahn, 1994; Daddario, 1994, 1997; Duncan, 1992; Eastman & Billings, 1999, 2000; Hardin, Chance, Dodd & Hardin, 2002; Higgs & Weiller, 1994; Higgs, Weiller & Martin, 2003; Jones et al., 1999; Vincent, Imwold, Masemann & Johnson, 2002). Numerous scholars have specifically explored coverage of female athletes during the Olympics (Chisholm, 1999; Eastman & Billings, 1999, 2000; Hardin et al., 2002; Higgs & Weiller, 1994; Higgs et al., 2003; Jones et al., 1999; Tuggle & Owen, 1999). The 1996 Atlanta Olympics were of particular interest since they were popularly referred to as the ‘year of the woman’ (Chisholm, 1999; Eastman & Billings, 1999, Tuggle & Owen, 1999). Studies that examined coverage of women’s sports in the 1996 Atlanta Olympics revealed mixed results (Eastman & Billings, 1999; Higgs et al., 2003; Tuggle & Owen, 1999). For example, Eastman and Billings (1999) observed that televised coverage of women’s sports was comparable to men’s sports, although favoritism was still shown toward men. Tuggle and Owen (1999) reported that “women in sports that involved power or hard physical contact between athletes received almost no attention” (p. 171). Higgs et al. (2003) also found notable improvements in coverage of women in the 1996 Olympics, but noted disparities in programming with coverage skewed toward gymnastics. While the coverage of women athletes in the Atlanta Olympics reflected positive gains, Tuggle and Owen (1999) suggested that the true test of equitability was how it translated into daily sports coverage. Regrettably, studies that measure coverage of male and female athletes continue to reveal disparities that are greatest during non-Olympic times (Duncan & Hasbrook, 1988; Higgs et al, 2003; Vincent et al., 2002). More specifically, analyses of non-Olympic coverage indicate that females rarely receive more than 20% of print or electronic media coverage and are more likely to receive around 5% (Adams & Tuggle, 2004; Bishop, 2003; Bryant, 1980; Duncan, Messner & Cooky, 2000; Duncan, Messner & Williams, 1991; Duncan, Messner & Willms, 2005; Duncan, Messner, Williams & Jensen, 1990; Eastman & Billings, 2000; Reid & Soley, 1979; Tuggle, 1997). Eastman and Billings (2000) also studied the power of gender bias in sportscasting and sports reporting and found that it was more prevalent in electronic media than newspapers. Whereas men’s sport received 95% of coverage on ESPN’s SportsCenter and 93% on CNN Sports Tonight, women’s sport received 4% and 6%, respectively; however, print media provided slightly more equitable treatment (Eastman & Billings, 2000). In USA Today and The New York Times, women received 16.5% and 9% of space, respectively, and a slightly higher percentage of photographs than space in each newspaper (19% USA Today, 11% New York Times)

184