fshorr's blog

The consensus that seems to have emerged from our seminar’s latest guests and instructor is that women’s progress in sports has a bittersweet flavor. I’d have to agree. Female sports journalists, coaches, and administrators who acknowledge overtones of social progress in their work are, regardless of their individual successes, tethered to the larger limitations leveed on their gender for entering a business traditionally dominated by men.

I thought our guests exemplified some of those limitations to a T, whether it was Alice’s issues with locker room credibility or Digit’s struggle securing the Brown men’s hockey job. Simply put, these hindrances were tied to their sex. And they were driven by an American society that has shown its reluctance to fully embrace and empower women the way Title IX proponents imagined. Not to detract from the many strides that have been made, but it’s only been four years since society consented to nominating a female vice presidential candidate.

In my opinion, outdated, unfavorable social customs and perceptions are the obstacles keeping women from attaining equal standing in sports journalism. Their diminished role has nothing to do with being dilettantes of the sport or lacking the poise and grit to deal with the giant egos of professional athletes. Rather, it stems from the fact that time-honored traditions are often respected and obeyed without question in American sports and business.

I’d cite ESPN.com columnist Jemele Hill as a woman who consistently brings in-depth knowledge of the sport, a larger understanding of what’s driving the story, and exceptional command of the language to her writing. When sports journalism is your job and you possess those tools, can anyone really make the argument that gender matters?

Digit espoused that women have had a hand in their own social marginalization, and Alice acknowledged that many female sports reporters “care about the story, not the stats.” These statements aren’t explanations or excuses for the problem, but acknowledgement that these trends simply are what they are. And they don’t preclude a successful career in sports. These ladies made solid guests because, combined with Amanda, they represented a variety of viable options for women seeking careers in sports.

In doing some research on the subject, I came across a good article touching on another important facet: the relative absence of leadership and management positions held by female sports journalists. While the number of female collegiate coaches is shrinking, as Digit noted, journalism remains the primary arena of working in sports where women are being denied leadership opportunities. To my mind, this story hit on some of the issue’s key points.

http://sportsjournalism.org/sports-media-news/panel-sports-coverage-hurting-from-lack-of-diversity-in-newsrooms/

As Digit Murphy responded to a question she was asked during the seminar, she said something along the lines of “women have not come nearly as far as they should have over the past 10 years.” Again, I’m just paraphrasing, but I have to completely agree with Murphy’s sentiment.

Back just 12 years ago, we thought the rise of women in sports would come with the 1999 World Cup and the amazing run of team USA. There are defining moments of women in sports, but people look at it just as that: women in sports. That’s part of the problem. It’s not really a sexist view on things as much as it is a human view. Since we’ve been younger we’ve basically been taught that men play against men and women play against women.

When it comes to women in sports journalism, I completely agree with Alice in that women have almost no room for error. If you hear a man screw up when asking a question in the locker room, he gets shrugged off or people just think he didn’t study enough on the subject. If a woman screws up when asking a question in the locker room, some will say she screwed up because she’s a woman.

Now this idea of women knowing sports has changed in the past several decades, but even to this day, some viewers and/or readers take women in sports less seriously. Women in sports have to work that much harder because of the social stigma attached to them.

In one of the readings titled, “Breaking News, Breaking Boundaries,” Susan Reed says, “examine women’s beat writers in basketball, football, any sport — they’re just as good.” This statement is completely true. The issue lies within the reader and whether or not they judge that the writer is female. It would be interesting to see people read articles without a byline and see how they judge a writer. Or for someone like Doris Burke to have a male voice, then would she be criticized for doing play-by-play?

It’s not easy to be a woman in sports. As Amy pointed out, Digit thinks that women in sports have just hit the tip of the iceberg. When people start to look at skill instead of gender, then women can finally overcome that barrier that some have created for them. It is still likely a long ways away, but with people like Digit, Alice and Amanda blazing the trail, hopefully it will become easier for those to follow in their shoes and take women in sports to another level.

At one point the panel spoke of women broadcasting sports, how women aren’t broadcasting sports and how it all depends on the voice. This shows exactly what the seminar illustrated: That women in sports haven’t come as far as they should have, and I agree completely.

I do believe women in sports have made considerable advances but, as many have already stated, there’s still a long way to go. Women still aren’t on the same level as men in sports because certain women in sports are blocking progress based on their actions and there are new challenges that women in sports face.

If no progress had been made, Digit Murphy, Amanda Braun and Alice Cook wouldn’t be in the positions they are now. Incidents depicted in Sherry Ricchiardi’s article for the American Journalism Review such as the taunts Lisa Olsen received by the Patriots in 1990 don’t happen as often as they used to, if at all.

Boston University, with softball and lacrosse, has more major women’s athletics programs than men’s. The women’s teams have also outshone the men’s teams in recent years in terms of success.

I believe women in sports still face issues though, whether it be dealing with a family life and reporting, as Cook pointed out, or being unable to coach men’s teams, as Murphy pointed out. And women are still being treated differently.

At one of my internships I was in situations where the people I was working with would always say, “Take care of her” or call me “dear,” which isn’t acceptable. I also mentioned in class how I was sent angry comments about a women’s lacrosse broadcast I did a few years ago. Every comment said, “She said this” or “She did that,” even if I wasn’t the person who said those things. The way the comments were worded really made it seem as if I was being targeted because I’m a woman.

I’ve also been the only woman at two of my previous three internships (in the department as a whole, not just among interns). It seems strange because I expect there to be more women in sports journalism, like one expects there to be more women coaching women’s hockey as opposed to fewer women coaching.

It doesn’t help that some women in sports are detracting from the progress women like Murphy, Cook and Braun have made. For example, Lena Sutherland and Jules Mancuso founded a site called While the Men Watch (http://whilethemenwatch.com/about/), where they provide “commentary that women actually want to hear.” My issue with this site is the women act is if they’re speaking for the entire female population, which gives other women a negative image in terms of their sports knowledge.

Kerry White also brought up in her article, Breaking News, Breaking Boundaries, that when women are hired for their looks over experience, it hurts the reputation of women in sports media as a whole. Then there are instances where women in sports journalism dress inappropriately, such as Ines Sainz.

As a woman with an aspiring career in sports media, it’s encouraging so see the positions Murphy, Braun and Cook have.

The theme of the women in sports discussion was quite resounding. Amanda Braun’s point on how the thinking of women is socialized resonated with me.

The book Sports Illusion, Sports Reality by Leonard Koppett makes a specific point regarding which specific activities fathers and mothers want their children to pursue. One line specifically addresses the issue: “if you had asked all American women in 1970, ‘Would you like yourself, or your daughter, to be a star athlete?’ the proportion of yes answers would be staggeringly smaller than among men”.

Although this book was written over 30 years ago, how much of that has changed? Do women who become mothers truly envision their daughters to be star athletes, reporters or work in athletic departments? It is a perplexing yet serious topic to tackle.

Overcoming societal norms correlates strongly with journalism.

Alice made a great point in terms of how women see journalism and or sports. “I was interested in telling the story, not just the facts”. Whether it is administration, coaching or reporting women capture attention; it is just in a different way.

Boom. Alice’s point was a key moment for me. The role of women in sports should not be a discussion of whether they diminish the masculinity of the sports arena.

How well a journalist, coach, or administrator, not the gender, positively effects the sports world should be the determining factor. Great journalistic work has a spoken or written voice but it should not necessarily belong to a man.

I respect Alice’s persistence even when professional athletes questioned her as to what she knows about sports. That takes guts. She is a great example. I would hope it motivated young women

The city of Boston faces a dilemma when it comes to representing women in the media. There are many print positions in Boston that are filled by women.

The same can not be said for on-air TV and radio talent. The 2011 article titled “Women Still Trying to Find a Place in Boston Sports Media” discusses that issue directly.

Is it due to women self-selecting themselves out of these positions or news networks not caring to fill the void?

Producers want great ratings and may not think a woman can do that. Athletic directors hire men to fill positions because social perception influences them to do so. Shame on them.

Women are capable at coaching males or in the booth doing play-by-play. The best sports moments should not solely praise “exceptionally gifted male athletes” or male journalists as Koppett said in his book. Look at Digit. Her work is exemplary for all sports enthusiasts. I would let her coach my son.

Women fight at an uphill battle. Hopefully young mothers can have the confidence to tell their daughters to become like Digit Murphy, Amanda Braun and Alice Cook. I hope my generation can be the one who sparks that change.

From the issue of Title IX, to the presence of “trail blazers” in men’s professional sports, women have come a long way. Alice Cook, Amanda Braun and Digit Murphy are living proof that women have broken barriers in a male dominated field. Although they have journeyed far from when they started their careers, they admitted that there is still progress to be made.

I agree with Professor Shorr, and thus I think Digit provided the best piece of advice for men working alongside women. She said “Treat them as your peers. Treat them with respect.” I believe that the biggest reason why women aren’t respected in the sports world is that men don’t find them credible. People’s responses are usually “she’s never played the game at that level, so she doesn’t know anything.” Although that may be true, it doesn’t mean it’s right. The truth is, there are a lot of males and females who have never played a game at the professional level or any level for that matter, but they still are very knowledgeable sportspersons.

Yes, there is still progress to be made, but it is happening. Below are two articles I have found where females become general managers and vice presidents of professional minor hockey and Major League Baseball teams.

Nicole Kupaks was named the first and only female president and general manager in professional hockey for the CHL St. Charles Chill. And although “the Chill” is a minor team, Ms. Kupaks is paving the way and breaking down barriers for females in the male dominated sport of hockey.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=641971

Kim Ng, female senior vice president of baseball operations for the Los Angeles Dodgers has broken down what have been termed insurmountable barriers for females in Major League Baseball. She is determined to become the first female general manager in the Major League.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/kim-ng-general-manager-aspirations-vp-baseball-operations-051012

I think the Kim Ng article, in particular Bob Daly’s part, best sums up the importance of this week’s seminar and the point our guests were trying to make.

“It’s going to take somebody — excuse my French, but somebody with a set of balls — to do it,” Bob Daly, the former CEO and managing partner of the Dodgers, told FOXSports.com. “Somebody who interviews her, checks her out, and does not get afraid.”

“When I think back to one of the biggest mistakes I made from personnel standpoint, it was not making Kim general manager before I left,” Daly said. “She can negotiate as good as anyone I know, and she does it without offending people. She deserved the job. And for whatever reason, it is a man’s world out there in baseball. But she is very, very qualified to be a GM. It’s a shame she hasn’t gotten the opportunity. I kick myself for not doing that.”

I think it’s terrific that Bob Daly admitted he made a big mistake by not making Ng a GM. It shows the struggle that I think a lot of managers face with a woman wanting to take a managing position. It’s not that they aren’t qualified, like Daly said, it’s about breaking the precedent and the “culture” that women aren’t supposed to run male professional teams.

Donna Lopiano, in the Ng article in reference to Alice, Amanda and Digit’s accomplishments, sums it up succinctly “they’re doing what they do, whether it’s trying out for a wrestling team or Kim with her aspirations in Major League Baseball, and they don’t see themselves in that context at all. They do what they do because they’re passionate about it.”

Professor Shorr opened Thursday’s discussion expressing a concern that hosting a class dedicated to women in sports effectively validates/perpetuates the notion that such a thing is noteworthy.

To that end, our panel of guests agreed that the true measure of progress would be the day when such a class felt unnecessary. Amanda Braun mentioned she found it heartening to hear some of Northeastern’s current female athletes aren’t fully aware of Title IX. To Braun, the fact that women’s athletics is something these girls take for granted is a testament to just how far we’ve come. It is an indication that the need for Thursday’s seminar may be fading.

What I found myself wondering throughout the discussion was how to reconcile two indisputable facts.

First, as evidenced by Digit’s failure to get the men’s head coaching job at Brown, women are often not getting a fair shot in the sports industry. (By ‘unfair’ shot, I simply mean that their gender is being factored into their evaluations.)

Second, compared to men, a far smaller percentage of women are interested in sports. For an industry in which every major sports league is played by men, and that caters to viewers/listeners/readers who are overwhelmingly male, it makes a great deal of sense that the majority of those coaching and covering the industry are also men. (Another note: I’m not suggesting this is a good or bad thing. Simply that it is not particularly surprising.)

In that context, the question I kept coming to was; what is “there”. Time and again I heard our guests and my classmates suggest that women are making progress but, as an industry, we’re not “there” yet. If we recognize that there are fewer women interested in sports, (something Alice acknowledged during our discussion) I wonder then, if we removed fact number one, what would the industry look like? That is, if women were treated completely equally and a true meritocracy existed, what would we expect? If every woman interested in working in sports were treated no differently than her male counterparts, what would the percentages look like?
And in what fields and at what levels would we see the biggest changes? I think that’s an important (and unfortunately, unanswerable) baseline to establish, when talking about “there”.

A final, and somewhat unrelated thought: Alice’s contention that most women don’t care about the stats but about the stories complicated the discussion for me. In her time as a sports reporter, Alice said she felt like athletes and other journalists didn’t take her seriously because she was a woman, and therefore, probably didn’t know as much about sports.

To then suggest that a sports website catering to women ought to shun statistical analysis and x’s-and-o’s-discussions in favor of stories that have more to do with, as Alice said “the player’s feelings” seemed dangerously close to reinforcing the very stereotypes Alice said she struggled to overcome.

What struck me most about this seminar was the wide range of opinions from our guests. It seemed like Alice Cook was on one end of the spectrum, completely opposite Digit Murphy, and Amanda Braun was perfectly neutral and frank about the issues at hand.

To elaborate on this point, Alice stated multiple times that the work should speak for itself when it comes to women as sports reporters. At one point she recognized that women are marginalized by their peers in the media because of certain prejudices, to which Digit interjected that (some) women marginalize themselves.

These disparaging opinions highlight the different approaches towards gaining equality for women in sports. Digit asserts that the problem is how women are presenting themselves, while Alice believes the problem is how society perceives these women.

Amanda touched on this issue many times when she talked about how the ‘socialization’ of women prevents them from assuming leadership roles in sports. She didn’t seem to lean to either side, she was just stating this as a fact.

Whatever we claim is the source of the problem, there have to be solutions to raise equality and awareness for women in professions related to sports. Both viewpoints maintain that it’s up to individual women to be ambitious, attentive, and excellent in their various fields. Every generation will look to the women who have succeeded in this regard, and perhaps this will positively affect the ‘socialization’ of young women and reinforce their own confidence in pursuing a career in sports.

What really struck me the most about this seminar is the drive and passion that Digit Murphy, Alice Cook, and Amanda Braun have for what they do. It’s not that I was surprised by it, but it’s more that I saw a drive that is really inspirational. This has already been discussed, but take Digit for example. I found myself rooting for her when she said she had interviewed for the men’s coaching job at Brown. I was disappointed to hear that she didn’t get it. Her efforts not just as a coach but also as a person became clear in the seminar that she is truly dedicated to what she is doing.

Furthermore, I really liked some of the advice that Amanda and Digit gave to the class that is great advice for men too. Amanda told us that making connections with people would get you a job regardless of your gender. I also thought Digit gave great advice that applies to both men and women. She said that, as a coach, it’s part of her job to convince her athletes that they have value as leaders.

Digit’s advice led me to a fact in an article entitled, “Women, leadership, and sports: Looking back on London 2012.”

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/09/26/women-leadership-and-sports-looking-back-on-london-2012/

The article says, “82% of women business executives played organized sports after elementary school, 20% more than the general population.”

I think this fact is directly related to Digit’s comments about empowering women through her job as a head coach of a women’s hockey team. It shows that women playing organized sports can be directly related to helping them grow as leaders. I also think it’s the same thing that occurs in men’s sports. Men as well become stronger leaders by playing organized sports.

The article also brings up a point that Ashley has already made, and that is that women have made great strides as athletes, especially in the Olympics. From my own personal experience, I actually enjoy watching the women’s sports in the Olympics more so than watching the men compete. Sanyin Siang, the author of the article, points out that women brought home 67% of the medals for the United States. I agree with Siang when she says that the Olympics will encourage women’s participation in sports and help advance them beyond sports. I also think that the Olympics help engage more men in women’s athletics and will continue to do so.

Overall, I really enjoyed the week’s seminar and hope to see women advance further into sports. I’m rooting for women like Digit Murphy to break down barriers and look forward to seeing the continued progress that women are making in sports today.

Since virtually everyone made the point that women have made progress in the sports world but still have a large amount of progress to make, I think it might be time to start talking about how we can, and should, help women get “there”(and by “we helping” I mean both men and women).

First, I think that, as long as they are qualified, women should apply for the jobs they want in the sports world. Ashley speculated that women might not even bother applying for available positions because they believe they won’t be granted the job due to their gender. I happen to agree with Ashley, and I think that if women are going to make progress in entering the sports world more, that has to change. Whether it’s the position of athletic director at a prestigious university, or a job as a beat reporter for the local newspaper, if a woman has the desire and is qualified for a position, she should apply.

The practical reason for this is that we can’t possibly expect women to move into higher positions, or to occupy more positions, in the world of sports if they don’t try to get those jobs. Yes, there are certainly other efforts that will have to be made, but I think that a woman should always try to get a job she is qualified for. While it may happen that she doesn’t receive the position she applies for, it may turn out that she meets a boss who believes people should be hired based on merit and not on gender. While being turned down for a job would certainly be disappointing, it would be more disappointing not to try. In order for women to make further inroads into the world of sports, they have to at least take the chance and apply for the jobs they want.

Second, I think that people should not only stop viewing females as less qualified in the coaching and administrative and journalism departments, but should also refrain from looking at them as inferior on the playing fields and courts.

One thing no one mentioned in response to Professor Shorr’s blog post is that not only are women marginalized as people who work in sports, but they’re marginalized as people who play sports too. If we are going to make it “there,” then people have to recognize that female athletes are just as talented and skilled as men are. Getting “there” will take more than just giving women more sports jobs; it will also take a change in the belief system of the country that celebrates its male athletes, yet pushes its female athletes to the back of the newspaper. We’ll have to look at elite female athletes as the equals of elite males, not as inferior, and I think it’s just as important for people to start viewing male and females as equal on the playing field as it is for women to aspire to higher positions in the fields of athletic administration. Otherwise, we wouldn’t really be “there.” We’d still think men were better athletes than women, and that’s still one step short of where we’d need to be.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I think that not only does the attitude towards women in sports need to change, but the attitude towards women in general needs to change as well. I think that the United States, and probably the rest of the world, still has a prevailing attitude that men and women are supposed to fill certain roles in their lives. Men are supposed to work and provide for their families. Women are supposed to stay at home and take care of the children. These beliefs may not be articulated, but I think they still exist even in today’s society.

In the book Sports in Society: Issues and Controversies, Jay Coakley talks about a study conducted by Mike Messner that examined a youth soccer league where, “Over 80 percent of the head and assistant coaches were men, whereas 86 percent of the team managers, or ‘team moms,’ as most people referred to them, were women.” Coakley goes on to note that in Messner’s study, “Men volunteered because they believed it was appropriate for them to play such a role, whereas the women felt less so,–and the men didn’t think they would make good ‘team moms.’”

The social spheres of the league Messner describes seems to suggest that people do, indeed, even at the level of youth soccer, believe there are well-defined social boundaries into which men and women should be placed. In order to allow women to make progress in the world of sports, they also have to make progress in the world as a whole. The lines that strictly divide the roles of men and women in the world have to be erased, or at least re-drawn, before women can complete their progress to make it “there” in the world of sports.

I have a confession, when I noticed this seminar on the syllabus I wasn’t happy. I thought why is it fair to give women an hour to complain about the lack of opportunities in sports. That sounds chauvinistic and frankly it is, but I’m so glad to be proven wrong and the “women in sports” seminar was easily turned into my favorite seminar.

I really liked the fact that there was this umbrella topic, but there were truly three different voices. They were honest even engaged with audience at some points and at the end of the discussion I came to two conclusions: one, I have so much more respect for the successful women in sports and that Title IX may not have been the answer.

Yes Title IX has done a tremendous amount for young girls and has opened avenues for women that were previously unjustly closed. That cannot be debated, but Title IX seems like it is just throwing money at the issue. Digit Murphy mentioned that there are fewer women coaches and Amanda Braun mentioned few administrators. So if Title IX is just helping the athletes is it worth it…probably not.

Please don’t mistake my position, thousands of woman athletes have the ability to compete across the nation and that is wonderful. However, due to the fact that the only pro- woman’s league that has been sustained is the WNBA, athletes play in college and then go on to jobs outside of athletics and that’s it. Why don’t more girls stay and give back to their sports?

I briefly spoke with Digit Murphy after the formal seminar ended and I asked her with sports being run as businesses now a-days is she fearful that her new league may not get the chance to solidify itself. Her response was that she hates how sports have become business and no she is not afraid. I disagree with her, but that kind of attitude is the attitude her new league needs to succeed an attitude that hopefully will rub off on more women in sports.

What I liked most about our three guest speakers was their honesty. Although Alice, Digit, and Amanda were each optimistic about the future of women in sports, they were also realistic when they admitted that we have a long way to go.

This timeline from the NY Times shows the vast growth that women in sports have experienced following the debut of Title IX.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/17/opinion/sunday/sundayreview-titleix-timeline.html#/%23time12_271

Isn’t it interesting, though, that each story depicted talks about participation in the game as a player and not as a coach or a manager? Braun, Cook, and Murphy all agreed that Title IX did amazing things for female athletes, but it negatively affected participation on the administrative side. Male administrators need to acknowledge the incredibly low percentage of their female counterparts so that it can be changed. According to the article below, “men have been hired for 68.5% of the college women’s team coaching openings filled since 2000.” Why are equally qualified women not occupying more of these positions? And why is the idea of a woman coaching for a men’s team even up for debate?

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/09/female_coaches_why_aren_t_there_more_women_in_charge_of_men_s_teams_.html

As an aspiring female sports broadcaster, I am also concerned with the issue of equality in the sports news industry. As Mary said, when you Google “Women Sports Broadcasters,” the first several results are variations of “50 Hottest Female Sports Reporters,” which is disheartening. Yes, many women occupy admirable positions in the sports broadcasting field, but they are still not always taken seriously by their primarily male audience. Alice mentioned that she was more scared to interview male players in a locker room than she was to cover the Olympics! Hopefully, as time goes on, women will be judged by their intelligence and qualifications before they are ruled out because of their gender or appearance. Either that, or men should be held to the same standard of “hot-ness” when acquiring a job!

Despite these challenges, Braun stated that your gender ultimately doesn’t matter in the networking process; you must make “genuine connections with those who share your values.” It may not be easy for a woman to succeed in the sports industry, but each of our guests proved that through hard work and networking, it is not impossible.

When I got to BU, I had my eyes opened with all the different girls sports there are here. Before college, I didn’t really have any interest of watching women’s sports at all. That all changed when I wanted to watch my fellow athletes, and my eyes were opened. Now there are several instances where I would rather watch the female sport than the male sport, in soccer more specifically.

The reason why I bring this up is because Digit and Amanda both brought up that interest in female sports has plateaued since the early 2000s. However, I still think that women’s sports have come a long way in that regard. For example, I know that BU attendance for men and women’s soccer games are very similar. Granted, they are both pretty low, around 200-300 fans a game, but I still think that the fact that they are even close to each other is remarkable.

I also wanted to touch on something that Alice said. My mom has gotten a lot more interested in sports, mainly because my family friends and I watch it nonstop and we have had Super Bowl parties during every Patriots Super Bowl appearance in the 2000s. I agree with Alice’s analysis on the spread of female interest, with 10% of women being interested in the number stuff, 35% being somewhat interested in the number stuff, and 55% being interested in just the stories and how hot the players look.

However, one point I wanted to see if Alice would make is how women IN JOURNALISM have created kind of a role for themselves. In my opinion, if there was a man as a sideline reporter at a football game, I feel like he would be more interested in the player’s performance and what numbers he put up. Conversely, as Alice eluded to, I think that women provide a much better dynamic on the sideline, providing more of a quality story and something that I think viewers might be interested in.

That role of being more of a quality reporter rather than a quantity reporter is something that is the next step for news directors to realize. I think that a female sports anchor would be able to do highlights like anyone can do, but also add more sidebar stories and general interest stories, which I think is a dynamic that is lost in the mostly-male profession. That I think can gain women sports reporters more credibility, and I think that they have a great opportunity to grow the female presence in the world of sports.

I’ve been pondering this in my head for a few days now, but I still haven’t come to a very clean conclusion. Sitting in Thursday’s seminar, I was so encouraged because at the front of the room were three extremely successful, knowledgable women who have really excelled in a career field that is predominately male. But then again, I really keep going back to the fact that the female presence in the local tv market for sports is non-existant at this point – and it’s not just Boston. The sports department I interned with during my undergradate
years in Ohio and the surrounding local stations were all entirely male. Since the time of my internship, two positions have opened up and both were filled with a man.

This leads me to the confusion I’ve been feeling since Thursday’s seminar. Are the doors really open for women in sports journalism? After listening to the three panelists speak, I’m uncertain as to how far we’ve really progressed as a society. I think the three women panelists have gained success by being persistent and by working twice as hard as their competition. But I think some changes to the social norm, such as a female coaching a men’s team, will require more time.

In my opinion, it’s sometimes harder for a woman to be taken seriously in this field, because of the number of women who DON’T take the job seriously. Alice had a great example of this when she mentioned the girls in the locker room who would be asking questions that just didn’t make any sense. Additionally, the ‘Women Breaking Boundaries’ article on blackboard focused on the issue of sex symbol vs. journalist. The article describes the hiring process of attractive females, who in turn do not have the knowledge to compete.

So have we made great strides? Yes. But it’s clear we still have a very long road ahead of us. Digit, Alice and Amanda were great examples of what can be achieved, and we can all use their stories as inspiration for our career paths.