Three Networks, Two Candidates, One Problem: Sexist News Commentary During Hillary Clinton’s Presidential and Sarah Palin’s Vice-Presidential Campaigns Drue Marr | University of Nebraska – Lincoln This paper examines the political commentary of three major U.S. television news networks for their portrayal and criticism of and sexist commentary on Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin during their 2008 presidential campaigns and Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. I reviewed coverage by CNN, the news source “bordering the neutral zone” (Langlois); MSNBC, the news outlet with a “slightly more lib- eral audience” (Blake); and Fox News, the “perceived as right-leaning” media outlet (Rothwell). While I originally sought to assess imbalances in criticism of these women from opposing parties on each net- work (would one woman “catch a break” on a certain network but not from others), I instead found an even display of criticism and negative portrayal based on sexist commentary across all three. This find- ing suggests a connection between openly biased and sexist news media coverage of female candidates for national political office and underrepresentation of women in congressional and presidential politics. Through negative commentary on female politicians’ appearance, family roles, and competence based on stereotypes like “emotionality,” mainstream news media play a powerful role in women’s continuing struggle to occupy the White House. In 2013, the United States broke a record for number of women” (Zhou) with 117 women the highest number of women elected to the elected to Congress, totaling 127 seats held United States Congress. Out of the total 535 by female politicians. Even with this seats in Congress, 101 of those seats were ground-breaking surge of incredible women occupied by women, including 20 in the stepping into the political arena, a whopping Senate (Blackwill). Many commentators were 76 percent of our lawmakers are men, making quick to call these numbers and milestones it difficult for the rights, needs, and health of “ground-breaking” (Blackwill), and perhaps women to be sufficiently represented. This they were. Just two years before the 2013 shallow margin of gender representation is mid-term elections, the 112th Congress was also a testament to how slow-moving gender comprised of only 91 women, of whom only equality in the U.S. political arena truly is, 17 served in the Senate. In 2018, the United especially when it comes to obtaining the States Congress saw a “record-breaking presidential nomination. Marr | 39 In 1789, the United States elected George remains, why now? Why did it take so long Washington as our first president. In the for a woman to reach this historical milestone, 229 years since, only 19 women have run for and at what cost? Why is the gender balance the two highest government positions, among our public servants so uneven? What President and Vice-President. According to cultural, environmental, and social factors Rutgers University’s Center for American are keeping this country from reaching gen- Women and Politics, only five women have der parity and having a woman reside in the run for Vice-Presidential in our nation’s his- Oval Office? tory: Frances “Sissy” Farenthold (1972), When I was in grade school, family from Toni Nathan (1972), Geraldine Anne various career fields were asked to present Ferraro (1984), Winona LaDuke (1996, about their jobs and how they got where 2000), and Sarah Palin (2008). Fourteen they are. I distinctly remember one parent women have run for President: Victoria not looking like the rest: a woman dressed Woodhull (1872), Belva Ann Bennett in a suit. There were plenty of dads in their Lockwood (1884, 1888), Margaret Chase button-ups and dress slacks, but this was Smith (1964), Shirley Anita Chisolm (1972), the only mom dressed like the dads. She Patsy Mink (1972), Ellen McCormack was a defense attorney for the state of (1976, 1980), Sonia Johnson (1984), Patricia Nebraska, and her case load consisted S. Schroeder (1988), Lenora Fulani (1988, mostly of domestic violence cases. I remem- 1992), Elizabeth Hanford Dole (2000), ber listening to her speak and thinking Carol Moseley Braun (2004), Michele about how powerful and important she Bachmann (2012), Hillary Rodham seemed. Not only did her work sound so Clinton (2008, 2016), and Carly Fiorina impressive and important, but her suit (2016). Among these, Hillary Rodham made her look like a real-life superhero. Clinton was “the first female major party When my uncle picked me up from nominee in the country’s history,” in 2016 school that day, I told him about my plan to (Hayden). Although Clinton did not win, become a superhero defense attorney just her presence and persistence in the presi- like my classmate’s mom. He turned, dential race has forever made an impact on scoffed, and said, “yeah, good luck with women in politics. The New York Times that.” Just like that, my interests and aspira- reported that “Emily’s List, the largest tions were dismissed. I was not aware of it national organization devoted to electing then, but this interaction that I had with female candidates, said that in the 10 my uncle impacted me well into adulthood. months before the election in 2016 … 1,000 Through this one backhanded comment, he women contacted [the organization] about had convinced me that I was perhaps not running for office … and since the election cut out to be a lawyer. Whenever I share … that number has exploded to more than that story with fellow female colleagues or 22,000” (Tackett). Outrage over Donald friends, everyone seems to have a similar Trump’s victory has sparked a national call- story about “that uncle.” Whether it is truly to-action by women, and the outcome of an uncle or not, the universal experience of the 2018 mid-term elections suggests this “you are not good enough because ...” is momentum is not decreasing. The question widely felt by women. 40 | Young Scholars in Writing It was “those uncles” of the world, in the presidential primary and 2016 as the form of large news media organizations, that Democratic Party nominee for President, helped to reinforce similar harmful narra- and Sarah Palin in 2008 as the Republican tives during the 2008 and 2016 presidential Party nominee for Vice-President. I focused elections. Throughout the campaigns, on these networks’ commentary on the can- misogynistic undertones were wildly preva- didates’ appearance, family roles, and how lent. The idea that women do not look their display of emotions related to their presidential or are somehow unqualified for overall qualifications for office. These areas political office because of their gender is one were constantly raised during the 2016 pres- New York Times author Jessica Bennett is all idential election, in the form of comments too familiar with. In her 2016 article, “Girls on Clinton by opponent Donald Trump Can Be Anything, Just Not President,” she that she was a “nasty woman” or was “just states that women politicians are told that playing the woman card” to get votes. And, they “[need] to be nice,” and that “the aver- spoiler alert, these disparaging comments age person finds it easier to pair words like seemed to do the trick—Trump won. The ‘president’ and ‘executive’ with male names, negative portrayal of women politicians in and words like ‘assistant’ and ‘aide’ with news media is one we must not only address female names.” Bennett suspects this is why but overcome if we ever want to break the Hillary Clinton had such an uphill battle glass ceiling in national politics. during both her presidential campaigns. Bennett states that Clinton “represented Candidate Appearance female power in spite of the reality that a When it comes to media commentary on woman’s likability is inverse to her leadership these two women’s appearance, the types of status—that is, we like her less the more she comments made could not have been more rises—while the opposite is true for men.” different, yet still had the same detrimental This struggle with society’s perception of impacts. Clinton was seen as the pant- women in authority contributes greatly to suit-wearing, uptight candidate, while Palin the prediction that women will not “reach was portrayed in a much more sexually parity in electoral politics until 2121” objectifying manner. Diana Carlin and (Henderson). Kelly Winfrey, in “Have You Come a Long Coverage of female politicians by major Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, political news networks is partly to blame and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage,” for the perpetuation of these stereotypes. I explain that “sexist portrayals of Palin researched commentary from the three stemmed from her beauty queen back- major U.S. television cable news networks, ground, her youthful appearance, wardrobe, with three different positions on the politi- and her unabashed feminine nonverbal cal spectrum: Fox News, as the more communication such as winking,” and conservative news source, MSNBC for more “emphasis on her physical appearance began left-leaning coverage, and CNN as a source when news sources revealed she had partici- for more “unbiased” news coverage. I pated in beauty pageants” (330). Therefore, looked at these networks’ coverage of naturally, Palin would not be seen in some- Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic thing like a “plain navy pantsuit”; rather she Marr | 41 was praised by various Fox News contribu- a political makeover in a bid to show a tors for taking “pride in keeping herself in gentler, more personal side of the now- shape and presenting herself as someone Democratic presidential candidate” during interested in looking good” (McGevna). Fox the latter half of her second presidential News also described her as “the poster girl of campaign (“Clinton’s 2016 Makeover”).