English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study analyzed New York Times coverage in January 2008 and January 2016 of Hillary Clinton. Coverage of Hillary during these two months was compared based on the number of times the categories family and appearance were mentioned. In four of the subcategories, the results show that fewer stories mentioned aspects of Hillary’s family and appearance in 2016 than in 2008. These findings support the hypotheses and indicate a change in the way media is discussing female politicians, along with the country’s support of them. FUTURE MRS. PRESIDENT OR SIMPLY BILL’S WIFE? 4 Introduction Feminists have been fighting for equal rights for women for over 100 years now. Despite that commitment to change by a large mass of individuals, women still face many inequalities on multiple levels in this country. This inequality is present in politics and female representation in government of all levels. Women are not treated as equal to men in the political sphere and our country has made it especially challenging for females to be successful politicians. A contributing factor to this challenge is our media’s representation of women. In general, the media does not accurately represent the female gender as a whole. More specifically, female politicians are not represented accurately, contributing to our country’s resistance to female representation in our government. As these inaccurate representations continue to persist, people continue to believe that women are not equal and do not belong in governmental roles. There is a very distinct difference in the way female politicians are discussed in media versus male politicians. Women also face different pressures and critiques by the media. Female politicians are critiqued about everything from their clothing, to their hair, to the way they laugh. Why does it matter if our leader is wearing one color versus the other, don’t we just want someone to make the right decisions based on their education and experience? However, that is not the case and this unequal focus on appearance and factors unrelated to professional qualifications continues to persist. This study will narrow in on this idea of inequality, specifically with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It will look at the way the media has changed the way she is represented and portrayed, by juxtaposing coverage from the 2008 election with coverage from the 2016 election. This analysis will look to see if the focus on aspects of her identity outside of those that qualify her for the job of president still persists from one election to the next. FUTURE MRS. PRESIDENT OR SIMPLY BILL’S WIFE? 5 Literature Review News media are guilty of underrepresenting and misrepresenting women, especially those in the political sphere. News media also often focuses more on gender norms when it comes to their coverage of women. The existing literature on Hillary Clinton in news media demonstrates this misrepresentation, as well as the focus on her gender. Some research focuses on her level of power, some on her femininity and masculinity, some on her role in Bill Clinton’s life as well as his role in her life, and some on how she is portrayed in media. This literature will help answer the question posed, regarding specifically what the representation of Hillary looks like, how that is potentially specific to her gender, and how it has changed over time. The literature relevant to this topic fits into five main categories: equality in coverage, gendered language, campaign environment, clothing, and image production and power level. While each study has a different focus, there are similarities and trends among the research. Equality in Coverage The large issue at hand in this discussion is the lack of accurate and fair coverage the media gives female candidates/politicians in comparison to male candidates. Dunaway, Lawrence, Rose, and Weber (2013) state, “A basic hurdle historically faced by female candidates has been gaining equal news exposure to male candidates” (715). This study compared coverage of contests both with and without female candidates, finding that contests with females elicit more trait coverage than male-only contests, and races with females are more likely to elicit trait coverage than issue coverage. This shows that not only is there a lack of frequency of coverage of women, but also a difference in content, to the disadvantage of females. FUTURE MRS. PRESIDENT OR SIMPLY BILL’S WIFE? 6 Hayes, Lawless, and Baitinger (2014) discuss how stereotypes persist about what traits in women people should focus on. In cases where the media have drawn attention to these stereotypes in their coverage, they in turn become the focus of those consuming the media coverage. Their findings and those of past researchers in the field show that the media’s focus on looks and appearance traits takes away from potential coverage of the issues they are addressing and the way they can benefit our country as a leader. Gendered Language Research shows that the way male and female politicians are spoken to in the media and the way they are conditioned to speak differs from gender to gender. Suleiman and O’Donnell (2008) conducted research to answer the question: does gender make a difference in the way politicians speak and are spoken to in public? This study quotes Hall (2000), “[...] social identity (which includes gender identity) is a reflection of power relations in society” (17). This research looks to Hillary’s language and language spoken to her in comparison to her power level and gender to determine if there is a connection between these variables. Hillary follows, to some extent, “the historic designation of women’s language as the language of the non-powerful” (45). Utilizing research done by Lakoff in the 70’s, Suleiman and O’Donnell (2008) found the same result 30 years later, “[...] we do find many of the exact same features that distinguish men (powerful) from women (powerless) with respect to language choices more than 30 years later and with two of the most powerful contemporary politicians in the US” (45). This research shows these norms are embedded in the way politicians are spoken to and has created these unbreakable levels of power among genders. FUTURE MRS. PRESIDENT OR SIMPLY BILL’S WIFE? 7 Campaign Environment During elections, the media inadvertently creates a high-pressure environment for candidates and establishes high expectations of them. Lawrence and Rose (2010) address the idea of “exit talk” in their research. This is the pressure the media puts on candidates during elections to step down from the race once it becomes more apparent that they are not going to win. During Hillary Clinton’s campaign for presidency in 2008, the presence of exit talk was more frequent than for any other candidate in the past. As soon as it became apparent that she would not be in the running any longer, the media pressured her to step down, implementing more pressure than any other candidate in the past. In Ritchie’s (2013) research around the representation of Hillary Clinton in illustrations during her campaign, she was portrayed as a non-human cyborg. This research implies that the idea of a female running for president can be so abnormal to some people, that the media both pressures females to step down soon and points out how strange it is for them to be running in the first place. Research conducted by Hayes and Lawless (2015) actually presents an interesting counter or follow-up to the existing literature. This research found that voters were not influenced by the gender of the candidates but only by their ideologies. So while the media is constantly putting extra pressure on female candidates and presenting them in a negative light throughout their candidacy, the voters are still supportive of them and do not always take their gender into consideration when it comes time to vote. This research is important because it shows that we are getting closer to equality for all those in positions of power; the media is just behind on their representation of this. FUTURE MRS. PRESIDENT OR SIMPLY BILL’S WIFE? 8 Clothing In Flicker’s (2013) research, images of female and male politicians were analyzed using the Double-Bind theory. The study found that when female politicians dress within the feminine standards expected of them, they are not taken seriously. However, when they attempt to dress more masculine, they are judged for dressing outside the norm, and become trapped in the Double Bind. “The term ‘Double Bind’ refers to a situation in communication where two differing, conflicting messages are being received simultaneously” (Flicker, 2013, 203). In this case, females are conditioned to believe that being feminine is bad in the political world, and then attempt to act more masculine. This result, however, is also thought of as bad. So female politicians receive conflicting information from society about how they should dress and act in a powerful position. This study shows that there is a large emphasis on the masculinity of the candidates. The media focuses on the femininity and masculinity of female candidates and allows their clothing choice and the way they carry themselves to dictate what is covered about them. The emphasis the media puts on this aspect of the candidates dictates how the candidates choose to portray themselves and their identities. Image Production and Power Level The media has constructed a certain image of Hillary for consumers, especially when it comes to her power. Brown (1997) looks at the representation of Hillary Clinton in the media during the time she was First Lady. Brown explains that women are just shown in public as a sign for something, but are not allowed to be public speakers, “[...] women function as sources of meaning, carrying rather than creating meaning. They are to be seen but are not given the privilege of speaking for themselves” (257). The focus groups in Brown’s (1997) research found FUT

Future Mrs. President or Simply Bill?s Wife?: A Content Analysis of New York Times Coverage of Hillary Clinton in 2008 versus 2016