• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Who Was Really #StandingWithWendy: A content analysis of Canadian and American online news coverage of Senator Wendy Davis’s filibuster of Senate Bill 5 in the Texas Legislature Introduction On June 25th, 2013, the world watched as Texas Democrat Senator Wendy Davis exercised an amazing demonstration of physical and mental strength to delay the passage of Senate Bill 5 regarding abortion laws in a special legislative session in Texas. To do so, she staged a filibuster: a political technique used in parliamentary proceedings to extend a debate on a piece of legislature past a deadline in order to delay its passage. During a filibuster, politicians are held to very strict regulations in an effort to legitimize their actions as an acceptable political method; these regulations include lack of access to food, water, and washrooms, a requirement to continue relevant discussion uninterrupted, and an obligation to remain standing the entire period. This was a small price to pay for Senator Davis, who took both a literal and symbolic stand for what she believed in. With this filibuster of Senate Bill 5, which would severely restrict abortion accessibility in the state of Texas, she was able to prevent the passage of a piece of legislation that she believed was the “most anti-woman, anti-family legislation that Texas has ever seen” (Jennifer Quinn). Senator Davis proved herself a force to be reckoned with as she refused to compromise her efforts to represent women and advocate for gender equality. Originating from the hands of the Republicans, Senate Bill 5 would introduce new regulations on abortion procedures in Texas that would make it one of the strictest states in the country regarding abortion policies. In the United States, the legality of abortion operates under a federal system whereby each individual state has the authority to impose their own laws on the matter (Centre For Reproductive Rights 2013). Under this new legislation in Texas, abortion would be banned after 20 weeks of pregnancy, doctors performing the procedure would be required to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, and clinics would be held to the same surgical standards as other health centres in the area. Effectively this would result in a closure of the mass majority (37 of 42) of abortion clinics in the state and therefore severely restrict access for women (Chris Tomlinson and Jim Vertuno.) Senator Davis took to the floor to oppose this bill and these limitations, and to stand up for women’s health and women’s rights. As Senator Davis fearlessly protested away in her filibuster, the world began to tune in. Broadcast news networks were slower tuning into the spectacle but within hours Senator Davis became an international internet sensation especially on social media websites. This event went beyond an act of political theatre with citizens as mere spectators; it rallied citizen support and fostered active political participation both online and in person by organizing collective action such as protests in the legislature and letter writing campaigns to other public officials. Blue Knox and Erica Woolf describe this impact: “With all the ferocity of a lion she bravely stood; for choice, for women, and for our generation. Senator Davis couldn’t have predicted just how far her determination would resonate with others. From Austin to Edmonton, around the world and on the internet, her audacity was applauded.” Davis’ filibuster was very evidently an impactful event that permeated media and discussion of gender politics in current debate, and will continue to set a precedent for future generations. Because Davis became a headline across the world, her filibuster presents an important avenue for further research that examines the relationship between gender politics and the mass media. This research study seeks to examine how selected Canadian and American online news sources reported on Senator Wendy Davis’ filibuster of Senate Bill 5 on June 25th, 2013. It examines several elements of the coverage, including the visibility of Senator Davis in the coverage, the use of gender stereotypical descriptions of Senator Davis, the overall coverage of the abortion policy, and the overall tone towards Senator Davis. Examining North American media coverage of Senator Davis’ filibuster will cover two important topics in the subject of gender politics in the mass media: how women politicians are presented and how women’s issues are discussed. This analysis will determine how Canadian and American coverage converge and diverge, and the ways in which their national standards on the status of women influence the coverage. Significance and Literature Review Previous research on how female politicians are depicted in the media has revealed consistent discriminatory conclusions. Despite the advances women have made in society, specifically in the public sphere and in political arenas, societal attitudes have not kept pace. As such, females active in political positions are often scrutinized and criticized according to gender stereotypes, and this is proliferated in the mass media. Cindy Burke and Sharon Mazarella identify this issue: “Studies of news coverage of female political candidates provide compelling evidence of the gender biases in news reporting. This is partly because high-level participation in the political sphere by women across the globe is still a relatively recent phenomenon. .this non-traditional aspect that often leads to the tendency to frame women in a different light than their male counterparts” (398). For this reason, it becomes particularly important to dissect media practices and portrayals. The media remains one of the largest vehicles for the transmission of political information, and as such has a major effect on the socialization of political ideas. Rand Dyck stresses the importance of this feature of political socialization as it is what helps individuals build their political values, attitudes, information, and overall opinions (282). This includes socialization about both the players and the game: the politicians and the issues. Therefore, the ways in which media choose to report on female politicians has a great influence over political opinion and their overall success. By examining coverage of how Senator Davis was depicted as an individual, the use of gendered biases can be assessed in both Canadian and American coverage to reveal their impact on depiction of the event at large, and national attitudes towards gender. The depiction of political issues that are women’s issues is also an important factor to consider in the examination of media coverage. Senator Davis’s filibuster of Senate Bill 5 targeted legislation around abortion, a controversial and highly contested subject, which increases the significance of its framing in media representation. As Lance Bennet contends, “The American information system can produce impressive levels of good information and public deliberation, leading publics and policymakers to helpful understandings of complex social problems. Issues receiving such rich news deliberations most often tend to be personal matters, from moral values to jobs and taxes, over which there is considerable public conflict” (21). Next, it is important to ensure that the media plays a fair role in covering this topical issue, so as not to proliferate bias gendered attitudes that would render it inferior. Because women are still regulated to an ‘other’ position in the current heteronormative and patriarchal society, it would be reasonable to predict coverage around a women’s issue would not be portrayed as mainstream or significant. Craig Leonard Brians and Steven Greene note the importance of this: “With abortion policy presenting a highly emotional issue and continuing pitched battle over its future in this country, the degree of accuracy with which the press represents groups’ policy positions is of paramount importance” (3). For the media to give equal, balanced, and fair coverage to abortion policy would mean to give women’s issues proper treatment, and be a move towards ending gender discrimination. Looking specifically at Canadian and American coverage adds significant insight into the study of gender politics and the mass media, because it reveals North American gender ideals including a standard on the status of women. In general, Canada falls more to the left on the political spectrum than the United States, and as such Canada upholds a greater emphasis on particularism, diversity, tolerance, and the recognition of group rights over individual rights (Dyck 258). Another difference between the two countries is the heightened importance of egalitarianism in Canada, which suggests equality for all people in the face of diversity. Dyck highlights this difference: One striking example of the claim that Canada is more egalitarian than the United States is in the constitutional equality of women. In the United States a proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the constitution failed to pass, whereas at about the same time, Canada adopted a strong guarantee of gender equality (including affirmative action) in the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter also aims to guarantee equality and prevent discrimination on many other grounds such as ethnicity, religion, age, and sexual orientation (260). It is also crucial to recognize that Canadian women have moderately higher rates of legislative representation in parliament in comparison to women in the United States (The World Bank 2013). Indeed this signifies greater political representation of the female voice, and could imply more representation of women’s issues in Canada. Also important to note are the differences in abortion laws between each country; this proves to be one of the most significant differentiating factors in determining their attitudes toward women. Abortion has been decriminalized in Canada for over forty years, with full access being granted in 1988 during the Morgentaler case involving reforms to the Canadian Criminal Code (Dyck 159). In contrast to the federal system the United States maintains on abortion laws, this presents an advancement and recognition of women’s rights and asserts their bodily autonomy.

Load more

  23

Copy Link