- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
sourceAndrea Kremer?s done nearly everything in sports journalism: produced, directed, and won Emmys for her stories. But come game time, she?like most women sports journalists?are stuck on the sidelines, the Washington Post reports. The play-by-play booth is reserved almost exclusively for men, who will broadcast the Final Four, the Masters, the World Series, and yes, tomorrow?s Super Bowl.
On record, most women journalists say the sidelines are fine, but privately they seethe. ?This is the most misogynist part of society,? said one sideline reporter. ?It?s the last bastion of acceptable sexism.? Worse, an unattractive man?sorry, John Madden?can thrive in sports journalism, while women need to be lookers. But "the industry is changing, and this, too, will change," said an ESPN exec.
I think that sideline reporters are completely unnecessary and hardly ever add anything insightful or meaningful to the coverage. Either do away with them entirely or stop encouraging them to ask guys questions like "Now that you've won the Super Bowl, how do you feel?" It's obvious how these guys feel, we don't need sideline reporters to make them spell it out. Other than the 'emotional' questions, most sideline reporters fail to get anything useful out of coaches at halftime, though they are somewhat useful for getting updates on injuries.
There is one woman who covers some college football and it's hard to get used to a female voice doing the play-by-play. I guess I could get used to it, but I'm not sure I really want to. Does that make me sexist? Not really, I'm just used to having things one way.
Anyway, what do you guys think about womens' role in sports broadcasting, the role of sideline reporters, and women being in the booth?
edit: topic summary updated