Unequal treatment of women persists in election coverage of Hillary Clinton
By Kelly Fichtner and Alexis Guage
The low buzz of voices slowly starts to fill the Lombardo Student Center Conference Room at John Carroll University on Sept. 26, as students and professors congregate to watch the the two presidential candidates debate policy and declare why they think they are most fit for the presidency. The Democratic candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, has the opportunity to recover from unflattering media coverage she has been getting during this election year, and the college students, Democrats and Republicans alike, await what will unfold in the first presidential debate of this election year.
After the debate, several students, Democrats and Republicans, were asked a series of questions regarding media coverage in this election year. Many of them noted a tendency of the media to cover Clinton unfairly, while the debate gave them a chance to see her unfiltered.
Erin Feigel, a sophomore and registered Republican, said, “I don’t keep up that well with election drama. However, most if not all of the coverage I have seen [of Clinton] has been regarding her email scandal. I am not a Democrat, and do not support Hillary Clinton, but that still seems unfair and unethical to me.”
Throughout the 2016 presidential race, many political enthusiasts such as Peter Bienart, a columnist and journalist, and Professor Nina M. Lozano-Reich of Loyola Marymount University, have noted unfairness in the media coverage of each candidate, particularly Hillary Clinton.
A story by Daniel Bush on the PBS Newshour website took the time and space for an in-depth examination of “hidden sexism” in attitudes toward Clinton, concluding that although nearly all Americans tell pollsters they would vote for a female president, many don’t consider leadership roles of this sort appropriate for women. So whenever a particular woman comes up for a leadership role, many find reasons to dislike her.
The PBS article quotes research by Susan Fiske of Princeton University and Peter Glick of Lawrence University, which showed that many people who are not at all hostile toward women exhibit “ambivalent sexism” that, to put it simply, expects women to follow traditional gender roles. Being president of the United States is not one of those roles. This has led to a problem with white, male, working-class voters—of which there are many in Rust Belt states like Ohio. Atlantic magazine ran a cover story in October headlined “Fear of a Female President,” documenting that 52 percent of men hold negative views of Clinton and the social science research that explains this as a fear by men of “subordination” to female leaders and bosses.
And indeed,Clinton is worried about losing Ohio. Republican nominee Donald Trump has been increasing his ground game in Ohio, particularly in Democratic stronghold cities such as Columbus, Cleveland and Youngstown. After Clinton had to cancel a scheduled visit to Ohio in September because she was sick, Bob Pauduchick, whom Trump hired to manage and direct his campaign in Ohio, told Cleveland.com that he thinks Clinton’s campaign schedule shows the campaign is worried about “maintaining her base in Ohio.”
Not only have the media covered Clinton unfairly, but she has also had significantly less coverage than her opponent, Trump. John Carroll University political science professor Colin Swearingen says of the media coverage, “You’ll see that her media coverage was very negative throughout 2015 as she was battling Bernie Sanders in the invisible primary. On top of that, the Democratic primary was covered significantly less than the GOP primary.” This coverage, or lack thereof, affects her standing in the presidential race.
“There is no doubt there have been sexist stories, headlines, and even reporters covering Clinton’s campaign,” Swearingen said.
It is harder for Clinton to get her points across and have all Americans be aware of and understand her policies. Sexism in the media covering this race has made the focus of the race more about the novelty of the candidates rather than their policies, character and beliefs.
Maddie Loewenguth, a member of Clinton’s campaign team and a fellow for the Ohio Together coordinated Democratic campaign, explained that although Clinton has been under the scrutiny of the media and has been given unfair media coverage throughout her campaign, she does not let that set her back. “She is very focused and driven and she cares about the issues and the people. She chooses to focus on those things instead of the constant critiques,” Loewenguth said.
Why might this unequal treatment be? Could this be because of the history of sexism and unequal treatment in America? Or is Trump just better at publicity than Clinton? Loewenguth closely monitors Clinton’s campaign tactics, specifically in Ohio, and stated in an interview that Ohio, being such an important swing state for the election, has not had equal media coverage surrounding Clinton.
“The media doesn’t treat candidates equally because it’s impossible to, particularly in this election,” Swearingen said. People are more attracted to the drama of the race than the content of what the candidates are saying about policy.
There are also misconceptions in what is considered fair and equal treatment in the media, according to former John Carroll University political science professor Larry Schwab.
“Many reporters and editors try to show that they are treating both candidates equally by saying they both are facing scandals. However, it is wrong to conclude that these two situations are equal. Whereas there is no evidence in the hacked emails that Clinton was involved in unethical and illegal behavior, Donald Trump’s behavior was unethical and illegal. He bragged about sexually assaulting women and then several women declared that he had sexually assaulted them,” Schwab said.
Thus, Clinton is not in the same boat as Trump regarding her past scandals, and is being criticized for what Schwab calls “minor mistakes” while Trump’s major gaffes and sexual assaults, which are a criminal act, are treated as comparable.
The media played a huge role in this election year, and has had an effect on the outcome of the race. It is possible that Clinton’s campaign efforts and discussions about how she could benefit America by being president could be overshadowed by the media coverage she gets regarding her personal life and past mistakes.
