Preseason? WNBA?
With the WNBA preseason underway, ESPN's Women's Basketball Webpage is looking a bit stale with a lead story from April 28 - granted it's a good one by Mechelle Voepel on the business of coaching.
With the WNBA preseason underway, ESPN's Women's Basketball Webpage is looking a bit stale with a lead story from April 28 - granted it's a good one by Mechelle Voepel on the business of coaching.
Finally had some time to digest the news on radio host Don Imus' racist comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team. The latest is his recent attempt at an apology/explanation. All these apologies always sound the same with the "I'm friends with African-Americans, we hang out, etc." - didn't "comedian" Michael Richards say the same thing?
I think what bothers me more is all the regular Imus guests - many who are journalists, who are grasping at straws as they defend him and their decision to still appear on his show. Here is a quote in David Carr's NYTimes piece from a former Boston Globe op-ed columnist who was to be a guest on today's show.
“Whatever problem there was, I think that he took care of with his statement of Friday,” said Mr. Oliphant, one of the guests scheduled for this morning. “It was classic Imus. He said he screwed up and he was sorry. Bang. Bang. It was very much to the point, and did not offer any excuses.”
And this from at Evan Thomas of Newsweek.
“ He should not have said what he said, obviously,” said Mr. Thomas of Newsweek. I am going on the show, though. I think if I didn’t, it would be posturing. I have been going on the show for quite some time and he occasionally goes over the line.”
Maybe he should view it as protesting, not posturing. Have some balls people.
Also, in the NYTimes, but buried behind the Times Select wall (they are now letting university students and faculty have free access) is a great article titled "The Unpleasant Realities for Women in Sports" by William Rhoden.
"Imus’s comments highlighted age-old, deep-rooted stereotypes that seem to surface whenever African-American women excel in sport." (NYTimes, 4/9/07)
And he ends the piece with:
"Whether a foul-mouth radio host stays or goes, the larger issue is that sexism and racism are very much alive."
Over at Women's Hoops Blog there is also a nice wrap-up of all the Imus chatter.
Well, I've been AWOL for a while. This semester has been a doozy. I'm actually presenting that paper I wrote about women's basketball blogs, message boards, etc. today at a conference here in Boston. It's the Popular Culture Association and they have a Sports division. I've also finally finished a study on women's sports coverage in newspapers and submitted that for another conference. And after putting the book about the WNBA and the media to the side for a bit while I finished up those papers, I'm back to it. And once the semester ends in a few weeks, it will be all writing the book all the time!
I stumbled across this letter to the editor in the Quad City Times referring to a sports editor's letter response that their lack of coverage of Iowa State's women's basketball team compared to the men's is because of the lack of interest in the women's game. This letter writer begs to differ. This debate and the range of attitudes (see the comments section after the letter) is reflected across the board in all media markets - big and small. In my own research, I have heard the 'lack of interest" argument from some sports editors and that it's not the sports section job to promote women's sports and there is truth to this. But I think the issue is more complicated and this is what I'm hoping to tackle with my book - sports coverage brings exposure to a sport (sometimes good exposure, sometimes bad) and this exposure is a two-way street - possibly bringing new fans to the sport, increasing the popularity of the sport. If a media outlet ignores or barely covers a local women's team because they think no one cares, then many people will not care because they will see that the media outlet isn't bothering to cover it, they can't find the games on TV - there are no images or words out there on these athletes.
There is also an extra burden in women's team sports - media coverage comes with success - you must be super successful in order to generate media coverage. No one will care if you suck. Where as established men's teams, get coverage whether they're winning or losing. Look at the Boston Celtics this season - still getting local front-page coverage as they lose and lose badly. Although, they are starting to get bumped inside the sports pages as the Red Sox start their "will Manny stay or go" routine. I think for individual women's sports such as tennis or golf - it's a bit different. And part of that difference is s-e-x. The successful players get media coverage. However, so do some of the unsuccessful ones - if they are attractive, etc. Although, I think this is more of a TV/magazine thing than newspaper thing. Okay- -that's my two cents. Back to correcting final papers....
Helen Wheelock does a great job on Women's Hoops Blog of comparing NYTimes coverage of the U.S. men's basketball team bronze medal win to the U.S. women's basketball team bronze medal win. As you can guess the word count difference is significant. I'm going to give a look at USAToday and see what's there.
Yes, I was there last night when the Sun lost Game 3 to Detroit. It wasn't pretty and I felt so awful for the team, the coach, the whole organization, etc. It was a great season and I had a fun time tagging along and watching the Conn. media do their thing - which is excellent women's basketball coverage. Now I need to start writing the book about it. I've been on a bit of a hiatus from the blog - took a bit of vacation time the past two weeks in between travel for Sun games. Now it's back to work. School starts with a meeting this week and then classes right after Labor Day. It already feels like fall here - the summer dropped off quickly this year.
The Boston Globe has a 3-part series on young basketball players (boys) and the amateur basketball recruiters and sneaker companies who woo them.
I was at the WNBA All-Star game last week in New York for the book I'm working on about how the media covers women's sports. I've been focusing and following the Sun around this season and it's been great. I've also grown used to the dedicated group of press that cover the Sun, so the All-Star game was a bit of a wake-up call - not that there aren't dedicated media in other WNBA markets but I did get a taste of some of the press hostility to the league, etc. I think the New York Post column that ran the next day (which Women's Hoops Blog pointed out) gives a sense of what I'm talking about. I was also surprised by the focus on dunking - lots of questions about dunking, lots of talking about dunking, and then if you watched the game - the dunking maddness that ended it. And although the league kept stressing that they have a "unique fan base" - the other message seemed to be "once we dunk than we'll be accepted by you the press, by you men's sports fans, etc." But that's just my read on it- other than that it was a lot of fun and of course, I was thrilled for the Sun.
I'm headed down to the WNBA All-Star game tomorrow. Looking forward to meeting fans, seeing who shows up media-wise, etc. I was at the amazing Sun comeback game on Saturday - lots of fun. Here are some All-Star preview pieces - the West will dominate,
Margo is pysched, Catchings is out,and watch out for the rookies. And here is a great piece on Taj.
Catching up after the long holiday weekend. I'm headed to the Sun vs. Sting game tonight and the Sun vs. Phoenix game on Saturday. Still waiting to hear if I have credentials for All-Star game - keeping my fingers crossed.
Women's Hoops Blog has a good review of Seattle Times reporter Jayda Evans new book on the Storm. Evans is the only WNBA beat reporter who travels to almost every away game.
Helen Wheelock, who writes for Women's Basketball Online, wrote on a Christian Science Monitor blog ("We're Just Fans" is title of blog) about women coaches and the WNBA.
