A Brief History of Sexism in TV Coverage of the Olympics

Years of research show that prime-time coverage of the Games gives male athletes more screen time and speaking opportunities—especially in the Winter Olympics.
More
Rick Bowmer / AP

For some Olympic fans, spotting and calling out sexism in Olympics coverage has become a sport in itself—and the past two weeks of Sochi coverage have certainly kept those vigilant fans busy.

NBC's primetime coverage of the 2014 Winter Olympics at Sochi has drawn criticism for the way commentators and analysts cover female athletes, and plenty of viewers found last night's broadcast of the women's ski halfpipe particularly irksome for the way it repeatedly referred to skiers as "girls" instead of women.

Skiing hasn't been the only event under fire, either. Speed skating, curling, hockey, bobsled, snowboarding—you name it. Last week, in one of the bigger dust-ups, NBC skiing analyst Steve Porino said, in a segment about how extreme the courses are for skiers, that the female athletes do "all of that while in a Lycra suit, maybe a little bit of makeup—now that is grace under pressure." The Washington Post rounded up tweets of upset viewers, who felt the remark paid unnecessary attention to athletes’ appearance, while Josh Levin at Slate wrote that onlookers should be "pretty angry" because "everyone knows there’s a double standard with regard to female athletes and how they’re expected to look pretty while performing amazing athletic feats."

But the double standard Levin mentions isn’t a new phenomenon. For years, academics and scholars have analyzed the way Olympic television coverage treats female athletes, from commentary just like Porino’s remarks, to less obvious metrics like visibility and screen time in certain events. Below are some of the most notable findings from several studies.

2002: "A Large Step Backwards"

The Olympics are too massive of an event to show in their entirety during primetime, which means NBC, as the exclusive U.S. broadcaster, has a lot of choices to make when putting together two weeks of programming. And after paying billions for the rights to air the Olympics—Comcast, NBC's parent company, shelled out $4.38 billion for the rights to all the Games between 2014 and 2020—plenty of dollars are riding on making sure those choices attract the largest audience possible.

To determine whether or not the selected coverage downplays the presence and accomplishments of female athletes, researchers look at a number of factors, and one of the most common is raw clock time—the number of minutes in a broadcast devoted to each gender. In a 2003 study from the Journal of Communication, researchers Andrew C. Billings and Susan Tyler Eastman analyzed 52 hours of NBC prime-time coverage from the 2002 Winter Olympics and found that men received almost twice as much coverage as women—a larger gap in gender coverage than the previous five Olympic Games.

Men's events received more than six and a half hours of coverage compared to women's events. The most frequently shown sport for both men and women was figure skating, but men's figure skating received two-thirds of that coverage. Men's luge, for example, received significant coverage while women's luge didn't receive any.

According to the researchers, who also studied ethnic and national biases in the study, these differences were among the most striking:

Perhaps the most telling finding in this study was the large discrepancy in clock time devoted to men and women athletes … this discrepancy in clock time represents a large step backward from the balance achieved in previous Olympic telecasts. If certain groups of athletes are not receiving their fair share of coverage, it makes sense that these athletes will be treated as second-class participants in every other form of analysis … Achieving equity is always a work in progress, and this study revealed as many steps backward as forward within NBC’s recent coverage.

2008: "There Seems to Be Little Incentive for NBC to Change"

Like many Olympics before it, coverage of the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing also gave more screen time to male athletes. Even as the total number of female participants in the Games increased to 42 percent of all athletes, broadcast coverage of women declined. According to a 2012 study from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, while American women's medal wins grew to 48 percent of their country's total medals, women's coverage on NBC fell two points to 46.3 percent of airtime.

Small percentage differences may not seem like much, but women's coverage is also highly concentrated in only a few events. Studies from as far back as the 1980s have found that media coverage of female athletes heavily focuses on "feminine" or "socially acceptable" sports, such as tennis or golf, and the UNC study found similar patterns in the Beijing summer games. Of all the primetime women’s coverage, 60 percent was dedicated to events considered feminine or acceptable by previous research: gymnastics, swimming, and diving. If you include beach volleyball, whose popularity is widely considered to be driven in part by its sex appeal, the number rises to 75 percent. And if you also consider any sport that requires female athletes to compete the equivalent to a bathing suit, that number rises to more than 97 percent.

Elsewhere, the study notes that while American women have been successful medalists in "big three" sports—basketball, soccer, and softball—their coverage of those sports declined steadily after 1999 and disappeared from the schedule entirely in 2008.

Why does this matter? "The paucity of reporting has reinforced the stereotypical dominance of male athletes, making female athletes at best marginal and at worst, nearly invisible," the authors write. They also cite several studies from the United Kingdom that find young girls who become active in sports struggle with pre-conceived ideas and expectations about femininity even as, in countries like the U.S., the number of girls competing in school athletics has grown exponentially since the 1970s.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Nolan Feeney is a former producer for TheAtlantic.com.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Why Are Americans So Bad at Saving Money?

The US is particularly miserable at putting aside money for the future. Should we blame our paychecks or our psychology?


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

The Death of Film

You'll never hear the whirring sound of a projector again.

Video

How to Hunt With Poison Darts

A Borneo hunter explains one of his tribe's oldest customs: the art of the blowpipe

Video

A Delightful, Pixar-Inspired Cartoon

An action figure and his reluctant sidekick trek across a kitchen in search of treasure.

Video

I Am an Undocumented Immigrant

"I look like a typical young American."

Video

Why Did I Study Physics?

Using hand-drawn cartoons to explain an academic passion

Writers

Up
Down

More in Entertainment

Just In