Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Women's Views on News

Women's Views on News

What would more women bring to the table?

Posted: 23 Oct 2012 01:00 AM PDT

The Fawcett Society recently hosted a debate called "Power in Crisis – what would more women bring to the table?"  India Thorogood went along to listen.   

The panel consistes of three women, successful in politics, media and business, which the Fawcett Society believes are in crisis: Caroline Lucas, the UK's sole green MP; Mary Riddell of the Daily Telegraph and Dr Ruth Sealy, a former business woman, business psychology consultant and now, lead researcher of the Female FTSE Report.

Encouragingly the organisation has to change venue to make tickets available to more people,  the theatre is packed full and I perch on the stairs.

First, Fawcett takes on Westminster, where currently women make up a mere 22 per cent of MPs. To add to this, it believes the next election could see a decrease in this number, as constituency boundaries are re-drawn.

Lucas is insightful on female representation in UK politics, as she is able to draw on personal experience. The MP notes that in her day-to-day life it is 'very noticeable' that she is one of few women in parliament, though this was less of a problem during her time in the European Parliament.

Riddell, however, is to some extent more positive about her experience in the media, saying that she has never faced 'overt sexism.' The political commentator does go on to say that a lack of women in media is very noticable, with  just ¾ of news journalists male, only one female editor (at the Daily Star) and at her own paper, only 26 per cent of journalists are women.

Research published by Women in Journalism this week certainly backs her opinion. She is asked what women can contribute to the media industry and about the crisis brought about by phone hacking. Riddell points out that the phone hacking scandal was not simply a male problem - as Rebecca Brooks was at the centre. Nevertheless, she does believe more women would help to dissipate a macho culture where 'the ends justify the means, however vile'

Dr Sealy focuses on the underrepresentation of women in business, specifically on FTSE 100 boards – where women make up only 17.5 per cent of boards. Interestingly, higher levels of power are even less gender balanced – with 6.5 per cent of Executive Directors female.

She reminds the audience that the first female CEO of a FTSE 100 company – Marjorie Scardino, quit this year arguing that attitudes to women have not changed during her 15 years of experience. Apart from a lack of women being 'a massive waste of talent', Sealey believes with more women holding the reigns of big business there would be less of a culture of individualism.

With so much mention of specific qualities women could bring to the table, it is surprising that Caroline Lucas is the only figure to mention essentialism. Though she believes that economic policies would be better considered with the involvement of more women in decision making, she insists 'I'm not being essentialist, honest!'

An uncomfortable moment arises when an audience member forthrightly challenges Lucas, asserting parliament is not just lacking women but 'women with integrity.'  Chair of the debate, Cheri Goddard, suggests that expectations of Lucas as a female MP are high. The Fawcett Society’s Chief Executive suggests that when you are one of few women in parliament, or any minority, there is increased pressure to achieve gains.

In this very brief debate, mentions of solutions to under-representation in these industries are fleeting.

When pressed, Ruth Sealy says that progress in putting women on boards is encouraging – by 2020 we could be 'approaching 40 per cent women on boards'. She qualifies this opinion – if we'd asked her two years ago she would have backed quotas but for now hopes that they will not be necessary. She notes that simply the threat of a quota has been a powerful tool for campaigners.

Lucas, raises job-sharing for MPs, allowing more women (and disabled people) to be involved in decision making and providing 'greater diversity of experience within the chamber.' Encouragingly, John McDonnell MP will present a job-sharing bill in the House of Commons this November, supported by Disability Rights UK as well as Lucas herself (You can sign the petition here).

Any hope of a solution for gender balance in media is unfortunately taken up by a  lengthy discussion on statutory regulation.

The last question asks the panelists to name their female heroes, and seems to have been put there to lighten the mood of a sometimes disheartening debate.

Mary Riddell suggests former Irish President, Mary Robinson, as well as Glenys Kinnock, former Labour MEP and now baroness in the House of Lords. Lucas picks newly appointed General Secretary of the TUC, Francis O Grady, and the German Green, Petra Kelly. For Sealy it is Emilene Pankhurst and Shirley Williams who inspire her.

It is obvious from the debate that we need more inspiring women like these in roles of power, what the debate does not quite make clear is how exactly we, as feminists, aim to achieve this.

What would more women bring to the table then? If the panelists are anything to go by – confident and intelligent debate, at least.

Savile, Reddit and turning off the lights

Posted: 23 Oct 2012 01:00 AM PDT

Mainstream news reporting and Jimmy Savile, a US Reddit moderator, the Rochdale case and decisions to turn off the lights.

As a media graduate, the consumption of news – whether it be TV or newsprint – was something that I always felt obliged to undertake.

During my studies and for several years afterwards I had newspapers delivered, watched Newsnight, listened to the Today programme: in short I was plugged into mainstream news media.

However, when I started to write for Women's Views on News in 2010, I began to access my news and opinion online, mainly through blogs, and more recently Twitter – until today I consider myself unplugged from mainstream news media.

And in this, I don't think I am alone.

According to a forthcoming book, only 18% of people in the UK read a local daily newspaper and TV news audiences, although steady, are heavily skewered to an older demographic.   Ofcom Media reports that only 6% of the average TV news audience is aged 25-34.

"The long term and still to be answered question is whether the current young heavy-users of digital media – and rejecters of TV news will, like the generations before them, learn to love catching up on the day's events in front of the TV or will they become life-long rejecters of TV news." Stewart Purvis, Ofcom Partner for Content and Standards

I beg to differ –  the long-term and still to be answered question is not why the younger generation are turning away on-mass from mainstream news, but why news content is overwhelmingly decided upon, written about and presented by men – witness the the lack of female political bloggers, the lack of female representation at the BBC (both in presenters and interviewees), and the nauseating sexual stereotypes peddled by the newspapers.

With such an over-representation of one gender deciding what news we watch, hear and read, we, as the public, are subjected to a breathtaking denial of the cultural landscape that we live within.  This cultural landscape consistently objectifies women, but the mainstream media refuse to address this every time another sexual abuse case emerges.

If we look at two recent cases that hit the news, firstly the 'Jimmy Savile as abuser' story.  Quite rightly those who joined in or turned a blind eye to Savile's abusive practices are about to face the consequences via a recently launched police investigation.  Secondly, the outing of a US Reddit moderator who hosted and contributed to numerous forums which posted pictures of women and girls – without their consent – as masturbatory material for its audience.

It is notable that the mainstream coverage of both cases has consistently refused to acknowledge that these incidences took place within a framework of rape culture.

In this instance I am defining rape culture as a culture within with women are not safe from sexual harassment and attack from men, a culture where 1 in 6 women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetimes, and where the reality of how the constant threat of sexual assault affects women's daily movements is not publicly acknowledged.

So instead of a discussion of the cultural landscape within which these abusers grew up and were shaped by, they are being portrayed as 'other' – one-offs that need to be dealt with.  The implication is that once we have dealt with them, the problem – men preying on women and girls – will go away.

Nowhere has the reporting emphasised how the culture within with we live enabled these men to practice their victimisation.

These are just two examples of news reporting that refuses to address the systemic violence against women and girls and this is are underpinned by the appalling figures on successful rape prosecutions, the dismissal of  both the Rochdale and Savile women (‘just the women‘, anyone?)  as being 'unreliable', and on a more practical level, the decision to switch off of half a million street lights after midnight by local authorities in England and Wales.

The common denominator in all the instances outlined above is that men were/are in charge.  They were in charge of the institutions that Savile targeted, they were (and are) in charge at the BBC (which turned a blind eye to his accusers),  they are in charge as moderators at Reddit, they are in charge in local authorities all over the country which have decided that turning off streetlights after midnight – despite the very real possibility that women – already unsafe on our streets – will now be even more at risk.

It is unsurprising that the discussion is avoided by the male-dominated news outlets because to acknowledge rape culture would make men uncomfortable – whether they be producers or consumers of news. Because to acknowledge it would also demand that they acknowledge their part in the perpetuation of rape culture by refusing to address it.

This male-centric view of the world – a view where women are not only not listened to, but erased from the conversation – is why I am unplugged from the mainstream media.   And why I am staying unplugged.

Meanwhile here is a more nuanced view of the Savile case.

UAE to review maternity law

Posted: 23 Oct 2012 12:48 AM PDT

A Dubai women's group wants to bring maternity leave in the UAE in line with international standards.

A Dubai women's organisation is lobbying the Government to bring maternity leave in the United Arab Emirates in line with international standards.

Women in the Emirates are currently entitled to 45 calendar days paid leave when working in the private sector, or 60 calendar days for government employees.

The Dubai Women's Establishment, a local government body concerned with women's advocacy, drafted a policy document based on their research into parental leave accorded around the globe.

'We found that our maternity leave is not up to the international standards,' said the organisation's chief executive, Shamsa Saleh.

Indeed, of the 39 countries investigated, only eight of them granted women less leave than the UAE.

One of those countries currently offering less parental leave is the United States, which, along with Liberia, Papua New Guinea, Lesotho, and Swaziland, has no national law mandating paid leave for new parents.

In contrast, countries with more generous provisions include Slovakia, which offers paid maternity leave for 28 weeks and parental leave of up to three years, and Sweden, which offers 60 weeks that can be divided between caregivers.

According to a report from Human Rights Watch (HRW) earlier this year, the consequence of paid parental leave for a suitable duration has far-reaching health benefits.

It is associated with increased breastfeeding rates, lower infant mortality, higher uptake of immunizations, and lower risk of postpartum depression.

Janet Walsh, deputy women's rights director at HRW, said: "Around the world, policymakers understand that helping workers meet their work and family obligations is good public policy. It's good for business, for the economy, for public health, and for families."

Some still express concerns about the effects of prolonged paid parental leave on small businesses and research has even suggested that it results in an absence of women in senior management roles.

A 2009 study found that in Sweden, where parental leave is 60 weeks, only 31.6% of managers were female, whereas the absence of such mandated paid leave in the US resulted in women occupying 42.7% of managerial positions.

Nonetheless, the news of the organisation's renewed lobbying of the government has been welcomed in the Emirates, where mothers have long complained about the inadequacy of provisions.