While schnarfing stir-fry and trying to keep up with the world on my lunch break, I just came across this AP story about the retirement of Charles Gibson from the ABC evening anchor desk.
In January, Gibson will be replaced by the estimable Diane Sawyer, who will be leaving ABC’s morning show, Good Morning America. That means that two of the The Big Three networks will be anchored by women; Katie Couric took over the CBS Evening News desk from Bob Schieffer in 2006 (to serious–and seriously ridiculous–hoopla).
While I’m pleased as punch that anchoring a news desk is no longer seen as the sole provenance of men, a little part of me is skeptical. I wonder if this is indicative of the tide turning, or if women are just being tossed a few crumbs. Are women being “allowed” to anchor because the advent of the Internet means that the attention to traditional news broadcasts has waned? Or is the prevalence of (usually white, slim, blonde, pretty) women anchors/newsreaders on cable channels prompting network TV to “up their game,” so to speak, and bring the eye-candy for male viewers? Is the anchor desk turning into a new pink-collar ghetto?
We’ve got a few more months of “In what respect, Charlie?” Gibson left, but I’ll anxiously be awaiting to see how Sawyer is received by both the media and the public.
I wonder if Brian Williams is watching his back…
After all the ridiculous hoopla over Katie Couric–which was so overwhelming that it started to sound ludicrously self-congratulatory: “OMG, we’re letting ladeez read the news!”–I would much rather have them be low-key about bringing Diane Sawyer on.
And at least Diane has some bona fide journalistic credentials, unlike the heavily-made-up-blond-with-cleavage news bunnies the cable networks keep foisting on us.
I volunteer to watch Brian Williams back and EVERY OTHER PART OF HIM if necessary. Brian, call me!
I was so bummed when David Gregory got MTP over the like of Gwen Ifill. I have enormous respect for what Jim Lehrer has going on over there on PBS, but her presence would elevate network journalism, I think.
@BearDownCB: No shit! I totally wanted Gwen Ifill to get that job. I don’t even like MTP anymore because I don’t like David Gregory–I’ve switched to This Week with George Snufalopagus instead.
Is the anchor desk turning into a new pink-collar ghetto?
I think you hit the nail on the head right here.
There’s a clear pattern of occupations/industries losing prestige and pay once women enter the field in large numbers. Secretarial work, teaching (college and otherwise), publishing, and public relations are just a few examples. In this particular case, it’s because network TV news has already become less relevant and prestigious that the powers that be are finally willing to give women a shot behind the big desk.
@BeckySharper & @BearDownCBears
+1 on the Gwen Ifill love, she’s got mad journalistic chops.
@Hill Rat: There’s discussion about that in regard to the rabbinate too.
Yeah, HR, that’s exactly my concern. But then I think that dudes are just going to run out of jobs if they keep “surrendering” to women, rather than just working alongside them. Jeezus, you’d think that fear of girl cooties would die off by 6th grade or so…
@PhDork
[Read in Cockney accent] Not bloody likely!
Only 3% of Fortune 500 companies have a female CEO, the top of the pyramid is still very much a (white) boys club.
@HillRat: For real. And mischiefmanager makes a good point that the same thing is going on in the Reform and Conservative rabbinate and in mainline Protestant denominations, where the majority of people being ordained are women. All the sudden the clergy is starting to be treated by society as another “service industry” like teaching or nursing instead of a high status job like it was in our parents’ time. I doubt the two things are unrelated.
To the extent that a clergyperson’s job is seen as administrative and pastoral rather than educational or inspirational, it’s easy to see how the job has become feminized. In my experience, synagogues have come to treat rabbis as executive secretaries, therapists, hospital visitors, employees at family functions, bookkeepers…everything but teachers and leaders. It would be interesting to compare the expectations of ministers and rabbis in training with the reality of the job.
Well, Diane Sawyer did work for the Nixon administration and her awful interview with the Dixie Chicks after ashamed-the-president-is-from-Texas-gate showed her to be as much a Bush water-carrier as any other news person at the time… She may deserve the job, but I’m not exactly expecting great reporting. I’d rather see someone more even-handed or liberal, man or woman.
@mischiefmanager @beckysharper
Interesting stuff about the clergy becoming more female. Do you see this as being a good or bad thing or simply another example of occupational segregation?
@Hill Rat: Most of the women rabbis with whom I’ve worked have been great. They don’t seem to suffer from Rabbi Ego as much as the men do. They are equally knowledgeable, of course, and more willing to try new things and to see ritual and texts from different points of view.
I can’t say that I’ve known male rabbis who were especially approachable, with one exception. (But the younger ones may be better). I have a male teacher whom I love dearly and with whom I argue all the time. But a lot of people are intimidated by him, so maybe it’s just this relationship.
I know that women rabbis have struggled to be taken seriously by male colleagues, synagogue boards and congregants, although I hope this is less common nowadays. It’s been a good 15-20 years since women began graduating from yeshivas in noticeable numbers. As they come into large congregations, they tend, at least at first, to be assigned to the school, which is a typical female role. I don’t think there are very many female senior rabbis at large congregations even today.
We now belong to a congregation which is lay-led, and it’s great. Men and women are equally likely to take on all ritual roles.
It occurred to me a while back that our kids, who are in their early 20′s, have never known Judaism without women rabbis. That is a very heartening thought for me!
@hillrat: totally agree with MM and I personally think women make better pastors, simply because they’re more inclined to listen and be empathetic rather than hard-line and wedded to traditional power structures. For example, as soon as women entered the rabbinate (and the mainline Protestant denoms), acceptance of divorce, gay clergy and families etc went WAY up. Women clergy tend to embrace the theology of inclusiveness.
@mischiefmanager @beckysharper
Interesting analysis, especially when you compare religions that have female clergy members with religions that don’t or only have them in extremely small numbers (Catholicism & Islam) that are very patriarchal.