from NewsOne.com
LEFT OF BLACK
Sexism, Misogyny and Sarah Palin
by Mark Anthony Neal
Much of the election news cycle these past few days has been devoted to wardrobe issues, specifically, the amount of money that the Republican National Committee has spent on clothes and makeup for the Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. In addition, questions have arisen regarding Palin’s use of Alaska state funds for travel with her family, travel that may not be related to her official duties as Governor.
That many cable news networks felt compelled to devote air time to speculation about the cost of Palin’s wardrobe and her family’s travel itinerary is the by-product 24-hour news programming. This incessant need to fill every hour with content, no matter how trivial, contributes to the dumbing-down of an American electorate salivating for information. But there’s something more troubling at play here, an issue that has everything to do with the brave new world that Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have ushered in.
Senator Hillary Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin share very little ideologically or politically, but during the 2008 election cycle, they will be forever linked by the palpable sexism that has accompanied mainstream media coverage of their campaigns. Frenzy over the cost of Palin’s RNC sponsored wardrobe is not unlike the mocking of Clinton’s pantsuits. In a society largely concerned with the physical attractiveness of women, it’s not surprising that women politicians with national constituencies would also be subject to beauty contest standards, even by so-called respectable journalists. Indeed, the lack of mainstream commentary about the not-so-hushed descriptions of Palin as a “MILF” and Clinton’s lack of so-called MILF appeal speaks to how insulated many of us are to how these dynamics function in media coverage.
LEFT OF BLACK
Sexism, Misogyny and Sarah Palin
by Mark Anthony Neal
Much of the election news cycle these past few days has been devoted to wardrobe issues, specifically, the amount of money that the Republican National Committee has spent on clothes and makeup for the Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. In addition, questions have arisen regarding Palin’s use of Alaska state funds for travel with her family, travel that may not be related to her official duties as Governor.
That many cable news networks felt compelled to devote air time to speculation about the cost of Palin’s wardrobe and her family’s travel itinerary is the by-product 24-hour news programming. This incessant need to fill every hour with content, no matter how trivial, contributes to the dumbing-down of an American electorate salivating for information. But there’s something more troubling at play here, an issue that has everything to do with the brave new world that Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have ushered in.
Senator Hillary Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin share very little ideologically or politically, but during the 2008 election cycle, they will be forever linked by the palpable sexism that has accompanied mainstream media coverage of their campaigns. Frenzy over the cost of Palin’s RNC sponsored wardrobe is not unlike the mocking of Clinton’s pantsuits. In a society largely concerned with the physical attractiveness of women, it’s not surprising that women politicians with national constituencies would also be subject to beauty contest standards, even by so-called respectable journalists. Indeed, the lack of mainstream commentary about the not-so-hushed descriptions of Palin as a “MILF” and Clinton’s lack of so-called MILF appeal speaks to how insulated many of us are to how these dynamics function in media coverage.
Read Full Essay@
No comments:
Post a Comment