Keynoting BlogHer White House Project
Print This Post
Dec
21
Oh yeah, the media has great filters. That’s why the Jennifer Aniston naked on the cover of GQ magazine is garnering so much attention. Gotta love those filters the media has and the blogs lack. Woohoo, what a difference they make for telling us what we need to know.
But at least David Gregory on Meet the Press today didn’t make his all-female roundtable match the Anniston cover:
ERIN BURNETT
Anchor, CNBC’s “Street Signs”
Co-Anchor, CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street”
CAROL MARIN
Political Columnist, Chicago Sun-Times
Political Editor, NBC5/WMAQ-TV Chicago
ANDREA MITCHELL
Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, NBC News
MICHELE NORRIS
Host, NPR’s “All Things Considered”
And his guest was Condelezza Rice. Good for Gregory. But three pieces of advice going forward:
1. Don’t make this the last time or even the precedent. Mix it up. We like being on roundtables with men and women, you know.
2. There is no excuse for having an all-male roundtable of four. Ever. Don’t do it.
3. How about a blogger once in a while?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:36 pm December 21st, 2008 in Gender, Media, Women
Comments
8 Responses to “Four women and a moderator, though none of them are wearing only a tie”
Leave a Reply
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
If there is no excuse to ever have an all male roundtable, then why would an all women one be acceptable? Personally it makes it look as if we can’t hold our own, and we can.
As for including bloggers? Considering who’d they would pick, we’d be better off as it is.
I can buy this: “If there is no excuse to ever have an all male roundtable, then why would an all women one be acceptable? Personally it makes it look as if we can’t hold our own, and we can.” Absolutely.
Aw – now, re: the blogger thing, a blogger can dream. Gotta have hope, gotta voice it – be the change you want to be and all. It’s not like anyone from MEET THE PRESS will ever read this.
lol
Also – you know what I was thinking after I wrote this? What if someone asked us this:
Would you rather have a permanent moderator who is female but primarily male roundtable participants, or a perm moderator who is male, but primarily female roundtable participants??
And so I started to think, sheesh – is this the buy off for not giving the job to a woman- Andrew Mitchell or any other that could do it?
Not sure – what do you think??
It’s really difficult to draw attention to a topic that a person may have no interest in. For the sake of a broader knowledge of diversified subject matter. Some people cannot find an interest in some things.
The 50/50 concept is not universal, if you draw in those that have interest do they effectively represent their half?
Anniston is more about her reaction to a public disclosure to her husbands infidelity and subsequent notoriety. Her way of taking back the lime light. The exposure is both personal and at every level, show all tells all, would we assume that some may only look at the pictures? Oh it all about garnering attention, tit for tat, pun intended.
The administrations is pointing out what some of have seen all along, the media choose angles and many followed along, Rice was clear and concise and factual. A long story in history the arch of which is different than that of today’s headline.
We are not bound by blood we are not bound by religion…we are bound by an idea. That every American can come form humble beginnings and do great things.
Hard decisions can be unpopular, it is not possible to please everyone.
Not comprehensive, the economic analysis short pessimistic at best. (the round table)
Is this time to make demands or make compromises? It’s time to be comprehensive and why Washington keep revisiting the auto industry. It is psychology…so make sure it makes perfect sense.
Transparency is a folly, not everyone will leave it as it is, they will spin it around, nothing will ever been seen as it happens. Always a question of perception, in the western hemisphere it has a tendency to duality it’s either left or right, we have a rough road and by the way funneling money to the corporate contractors is not new it is actually old. The same old, look close at the attached labor they are partners. That is not new jobs it all entwined and greedy and over compensated. A free market requires competition and new and if competitive those that are not take concessions.
Willing to do more for less? If not then nothing really will change, that has to be comprehensive.
Journalism is not the cure for anything, to fast to little content. Everything needs to direct to something more detailed and more comprehensive. If we think scratching the surface is informative, then that is sad.
It is at best provocative, how much further is it ever taken? Talkers and then doers the people that actually make it happen?
Thats what is missing.
Well, playing devil’s advocate, what would a world full of doers look like? Leadership requires process too, Oengus.
As for the first part of your comment, I hope you aren’t saying what I think you’re saying which is that you think that there aren’t women interested in some of the topics?? Please tell me that’s not what you’re intimating.
I dream of a world where the best and brightest on whatever that particular political topic is going to be covered, knowing that if it was truly done properly there would be an automatic diversity created without having to count how many wore ties…
Perhaps in our lifetime…
Generally speaking in American culture, women have been expected to place a high value on personal relationships and to be rather careful about being assertive or aggressive.
Multiple factors influence women’s career paths. These factors include opportunity, achievement, and choice, and they are connected to each other.
An interconnected set of relationships: the cultural attitude that a career is an inappropriate field for women leads to discrimination; discrimination leads to a reduction in the motivation of women workers; and loss of motivation leads to reduction in women’s performance. All of this combined leads to withdrawal from careers, obsolescence of skills, and a further reduction in opportunities. It is a chain of interrelated factors that plays itself out, in one way or another, in many different fields.
Jill good luck with that…was it difficult for woman to break into media?
http://gmfactsandfiction.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/restructuring-plan-for-long-term-viability.pdf
Would you like to cover this in detail or are you not interested it’s your choice.
Lisa Renee – I think there’s a dimension we have to add to best and brightest: the individuals need to be people who take into account the impact on and planning for the most unrepresented and underrepresented populations in the very places where decisions are made. It’s because of feeling that without direct representation of such populations at the level where decisions are made that at least I know I push for having women or minorities or whatever demographic that is unrepresented or underrepresented in the discussions and outcomes that I push the need for direct representation of women on decision-making entities.
If we believed, if we trusted, that our concerns would be given their due by people who are not like us, then the best and brightest would be enough to ask for. But I don’t think that is enough to ask for at this point.
Oengus – thanks for the link to the GM restructuring plan. Interest isn’t the deciding factor – time and the existence of other interests are.
Go for it.