Yes, someone has told me that before. And no, I’m not going to get into that story. But because of the way I identify myself as a female sportswriter, the whole Erin Andrews saga has hit very close to home for me.
My reaction to the nude video/pictures news was complicated. I read the news on Tweetie, my iPhone Twitter app. I saw that one of the many sports media people I follow had mentioned that seeing Erin Andrews naked “made his day.” I was really confused, but didn’t look into it until the next day. Then, I couldn’t avoid the words “Nude” “Naked’” “Pervert” “Erin Andrews” “ESPN” and “Sideline Princess.” All over Twitter. All over the Cape Cod Times newsroom. (Okay, okay, just sports. I don’t know if other sections know who EA is.)
Yes, I watched the clip before it mysteriously was deleted from many websites that posted it. I didn’t watch it because I wanted to see Erin Andrews naked, but because I knew everyone else would be critiquing specifics from it, and as a member of the sports media, I knew I should know what the video included.
Yes, she looked good in the video, and that’s absolutely irrelevant. We could have discovered that she had hideous moles on her stomach, and it wouldn’t have mattered.
I know a lot of people are saying the reason this is a big story is because it’s about sex, sex appeal, um, sex, and more sex. And while it’s hard to argue with Andrews’ status as a sex object/sideline reporter (simply after considering the multitude of comments made by players, bloggers and fans), that’s not why this story is a big deal. Obviously, because she’s hot and knows sports (both attractive qualities for men), she was a target for this kind of thing. Blogs had, for years, linked to pictures of her in short skirts and dressese without thinking twice. Other reporters had even bashed her for this (Mike Nadel, infamously). It’s not that shocking that this escalated to someone peeping on her naked in a hotel room. Really, it’s not shocking.
Other people have been saying this whole “situation” questions the idea of privacy and that’s why people care. I don’t buy that, either. Oh, it’s definitely disturbing thinking that you can be watched and videotaped by someone when you’re in a locked hotel room, don’t get me wrong. But if this happened to any of ESPN’s male reporters or a less attractive female reporter, this story would have blown through the news in one day, max.
The reason I care about the Andrews story is because it affects the way female journalists are perceived. In fact, her very existence affects the state of female journalism, especially in sports media. I’d written an essay for a sports writing class at the University of Michigan last fall about the rise of female sportswriters. I compared two female football writers from the student newspaper, the Michigan Daily — one covering the team in 2008 and one in 1968-70. The conclusion I had come to was that female journalists were now respected individuals who could cover whatever sports they wanted and weren’t forced to think twice about sexism and access. Well, that’s not quite the case anymore.
Andrews always brought up questions about sexism. When her colleagues would make comments about her on the air or other sports writers would question her attire, the debate would begin. Did Andrews bring it upon herself by wearing short dresses or did the male-dominated society create this culture? It was a tough call, and it appeared for awhile that Andrews didn’t exactly mind the attention. She wasn’t using her sex appeal to further her career by shooting pictures for Playboy or even trying to land acting gigs in movies or anything of the sort. But she didn’t cover up. She still touched players on the arm while interviewing them. It seemed like she was playing the game that the male sports world wanted her to.
She’d cover NFL games, college football games, the MLB All-Star game…everything. Who knew if ESPN was giving her these jobs because she looked good on camera of if she knew her stuff? Did it matter?
As a female sports writer, it sure did to me. I’ve only covered sports for two years. Two school years at the Michigan Daily, a summer at the New Jersey-based Trentonian newspaper and this summer at the Cape Cod Times. Most of the athletes and coaches I’ve covered have been male. Most of my colleagues have been male. I’m used to it.
I’m also used to the occasional comment. You know what kind of comment. Let’s call them locker room comments. I’ve learned to snap back with something quick or ignore it. But it exists, and I can’t really help that. This summer alone, a coach has spoken down to me because I’m a girl. I’ve been insulted behind my back with no substance backing up the claim. It’s part of the job. Apparently, it seems unnatural that a girl would want to live in the sports media world.
So when some pervert videotapes one of the most prominent female sports reporters in the world and turns her back into a mere sex object, I’m furious. It’s like a 30-year setback. Forgive me for not identifying with the privacy complaints or male excitement of a naked video. I care more about this situation’s impact on my profession and what it could mean for future women who want to get into this field. One creep just made it THAT much more difficult for us to be taken seriously, ladies. He made guys think those dumb locker room comments aren’t that bad. He just forced me to work that much harder at what I love to gain respect.
Don’t worry, though. I will do it.
First.
Well said, nice work.
Excellent analysis, Nicole. You really picked up on the most important issue.
Awesome post Nicole. My favorite one so far!
I feel your pain. I understand the hurt.
I just don’t think it sets you back 30 years.
Thirty years ago, Melissa Ludtke had just helped affirm the right of female reporters access to locker rooms to do their jobs. Is this right going to go away?
Far be it for me to say, as a man, that you won’t continue to endure slings and arrows and snide remarks and innuendo and rumors about who you slept with to get wherever you happen to be in your career at the moment. That happens because my gender happens to skew to the porcine. But that’s not going to be advanced or explode because of this, because ERIN ANDREWS DIDN’T DO ANYTHING WRONG.
Now, if you POSE for Playboy, like a Lisa Guerrero (who, admittedly, was no longer relevant at the time), you reduce your own credibility and you don’t help the progress of female journalists at all. But you become the victim of a crime and THAT’S going to set back the cause?
I don’t see it. I think you’re exaggerating in your anger. The anger is understandable, and this is a hot-button topic. Just take a breath. As all things in our society do, this will blow over. Erin Andrews will have to endure some remarks and signs and nonsense for a while, and the impact on her psyche for being violated is something anyone who’s not her can only speculate on. I hope she comes through it okay.
But if this is a 30-year setback, Lisa Guerrero being the sideline reporter on Monday Football for an entire season was a 50-year setback. And Carolyn Hughes shacking up with a married athlete she covered was even worse.
You make a good point about being a victim vs. reducing credibility by certain actions. In the past couple of days, speculation that Andrews filmed and leaked this herself (something I highly doubt happened) has been going around, and the “innocent victim” tag has been threatened. I hope that idea evaporates soon.
What I was getting at about losing credibility/the setback from this is related more to the audience/coworker effect than the female target. The way male sports fans or male media members have reacted to the leaked videos/pictures is the set back. The reaction is the objectification returning in full-force.
I don’t know how clearly this is coming across, but I’m trying to say that yes, she was a victim (most likely), but that the cultural reaction to the situation will still impact female journalists’ levels of respect in a negative way.
(That should have read Monday NIGHT Football, obviously.)
I was really digging this until the leap in the last paragraph.
“So when some pervert videotapes one of the most prominent female sports reporters in the world and turns her back into a mere sex object, I’m furious.”
OK, why?
“It’s like a 30-year setback.”
??? How so? How things now like they were 30 years ago? Perhaps some hyperbole here. Fine.
“Forgive me for not identifying with the privacy complaints or male excitement of a naked video.”
Sure. I’ll even admire you for it.
“One creep just made it THAT much more difficult for us to be taken seriously, ladies. He made guys think those dumb locker room comments aren’t that bad.”
Really? Isn’t this whole thing reported and understood as an outrage? Why isn’t it that this episode underscores how dumb those locker room comments really are?
“He just forced me to work that much harder at what I love to gain respect.”
Really not following here. If anything, “he” (do you mean to assume it’s a man here?) might have made it easier for certain women. Andrews’ profile has never been higher — rather than be diminished by these vids, her public image appears to have been enhanced. As for the rest, they can just be lumped in with the rest of us non-sexy/non-attractive journalists, who always had to compete with the likes of Andrews in the first place. All in all, this could be viewed as a net gain for journalists, however you want to cut them along gender lines. If anything, it just got harder for non-sexy jouralists vis a vis the sexy ones, which I suppose could be a net hit to journalism, but not sure. But that’s an entirely different issue.
Hope you can clarify what you mean to say here. I just don’t see the setback.
Very impressive site, anyway. Impressive writing. Keep up the good work.
Pete
Cleveland Frowns
I think I just clarified some of your questions with my response to KHT…but here’s a little more.
30 years is probably an exaggeration. But this does feel similar to the situation described here (http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=3788) and experienced by Paola Boivin – getting jock straps thrown at her and comments hurled her way in the St. Louis Cardinals’ locker room in 1985. Thats what I was thinking in my mind when I threw out the 30 year set back line. So, not quite 30, but the comments/innuendos of 1985 are the same sort of thing that will likely increase after this Andrews episode. Or at least, there’s a good chance of that happening.
Question for you, now. What exactly do you mean when you say that this situation might help female journalists? I couldn’t follow your train of thought there…
Paola Boivin actually happens to be a friend of mine. She can laugh about that incident now and roll her eyes, and, luckily, an incident like this today probably wouldn’t be met with “So? You shouldn’t have been in there in the first place, missy” comments from men. At least not as many. That’s progress.
Women are (likely) always going to have it tough in this business (as in any business that has been dominated by males). I think Erin Andrews’ life has gotten harder (her comments after the sentencing of the perpetrator lend credence to that), but I’m not sure your life or Lesley Visser’s life or Paola Boivin’s life has gotten that much harder because someone saw nude video of Erin Andrews.
Should have refreshed the page. Hadn’t seen KHT’s comments, which I generally agree with. But I do think that if Lisa Guerrero were still relevant, and did decide to pose for Playboy, that that shouldn’t necessarily set even her own career back (would depend on her reasons for doing it), and certainly not the cause of female journalists, generally.
What I think it would do (Guerrero posing for Playboy while MNF’s sideline reporter, for instance) is erode her own already-thin credibility.
I think there’s a reason that you don’t see someone at the top of their games, so to speak, pose for Playboy. Ashley Harkelroad did it. Who? Exactly. Sharapova did not and would not. I can’t think of someone who didn’t do it because they needed a bit of a career boost.
(Also, in a few years, we’re going to have to explain to people what Playboy was.)
Again, far be it for me – as a man – to really understand, other than obliquely or through female colleagues, how another random female sports reporter either feels or is made to feel by fans, viewers, listeners and male pigdog co-workers if another woman chooses to pose nude.
As I understand it, one of the very fundamental principles of feminism is being able to make your own choices. It would seem dichotomous to me if a woman begrudged another woman the right to make those choices, but, as we all know, all choices have consequences. Some unintended.
Some female sports reporters may feel like collateral damage in such a situation. And I can’t say that I possess the proper perspective to make a value judgment on that.
Was the essay about Sara Krulwich? I’d love to see that. Greg, MVictors
the link is in the post where I mention it…it’s Robin Wright, who now writes for the Washington Post
I still don’t understand how this situation is going to make it more difficult for you. If locker room comments aren’t already made with some of the clothing Andrews and other female “journalists” (and Erin Andrews is NOT a journalist) wear, then they will never be made at all. This is a different time; there will not be jockstraps thrown at you or anybody else, there will not be an increase in comments made because we all know what Erin Andrews looks like naked. That stuff very rarely happens anymore.
What are you basing your speculation on? How does this video change things? How does it ensure that more comments will be made and the job will be more difficult for you? Sure, if the video was of her in the room with a player, yeah, things would change. But come on guys, it was a video of her doing her hair and checking out her own ass, something each and every female has done at some point. And she had nothing to do with this video! If she had ordered somebody to do this, fine, you have a point. But since (as far as we know) this video was filmed covertly by someone (a man, apparently based on your leap) this makes her no different than any other female that would potentially stay at the hotel. If you think there are going to be some comments by players, fine. I can’t disagree. But to say this is a 20+ year setback for women is baseless, hyperbolic speculation that serves no purpose.
If you want to prove that women can do the job just as well, tell Erin Andrews, Heidi Watney, and other female TV personalities to stop asking the same bland “how does it feel” and “what is it like” questions every single time they’re on TV. These women are becoming famous more for their looks and what they choose to wear rather than their skills at the job. Why are you ignoring that? That is a MUCH bigger issue for the advancement of women in this profession than an amateur, voyeuristic video shot in a hotel.
To be fair, men ask stupid questions on television as well.
Have you thought about why you refer to “girls” and “ladies” when you probably mean “women”? I’m not talking about journalistic style, but rather about the (de)meaning behind the terms. I’m sympathetic to the possibility that you’ve been conditioned to thinking and talking about yourself and other women that way. Otherwise, I found your blog to be almost incredibly lucid, insightful and mature. Thank you for asserting yourself and enduring criticism. I wish you all the best in your career. As the father of a bright 20-year-old woman (and as a former sports journalist who teaches now), I find great hope that you, too, will help change the world!