Bligh, M. C., Schlehofer, M. M., Casad, B. J., & Gaffney, A. M. (2012). Competent enough, but would you vote for her? gender stereotypes and media influences on perceptions of women politicians. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(3), 560-597. doi: 10-1111 /j.1559-1816.2011.00781.x
In this article, the authors, from different universities in USA are professors of Psychology presenting research on social identity and social influence, attempt to describe how the media has different coverage patterns when it is talking about women or men in politics. Based in two studies, the authors give an idea of how gender stereotypes, and media message can change the public conception of women (study 1), and when concentrating on women and their skills, they can also change the perceived competence of these women (study 2). What is new in this article are the analyzed results of the studies where the authors suggest that the media has power over how people can judge politicians according to their gender; especifically female politicians who must be held under suspicion of their performance, and they are judged as less competent, and less experienced as leaders. Also, people who perceive women negatively would perceive a woman politician negatively in terms of competence. In addition, the authors do not have any bias in this article because they just explain the topic through other authors’ examples, and their own studies without any inclination. This article is informative because the authors explain two studies where media plays a strong role in the perception women politicians, and the stereotypes that people have about that. Particularly, the audience of this article are Social Psychologist, politicians, and Social Workers who are interested in gender stereotypes, media, and politics. Finally, this article is useful because it gives facts based on statistics, and studies which show results about the media, and its influence on female politicians.Order now
Carol, S. J. (2009). Reflections on gender and Hillary clinton’s presidential campaign: The good, the bad, and the misogynic. Politic & Gender, 5(1), 1-20. doi: 10.1017/s17433923x09000014
In this article researched at Sheridan Library Politics and Gender data base. The author, who is professor of Political Science, and Women’s and Gender Studies at Rutgers University, New York, gives us a reflection about what was wrong, good and great against the woman in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2008, and how the behaviors in a campaign can affect the support from voters based on the gender of the candidate. The author knew that Hillary’s campaign would not be easy for her because the gender stereotypes, and the significance of the big step that she was taking. Thus, the author explains two topics in her article; First, the gender stereotypes and their role in Hillary’s campaign, and second is the power and sexism that the media played with her campaign being the two determining factors in Hillary’s campaign decisions. The bias of the author is objective because, despite her (author) not being in agreement with Hillary’s political position, the author manages to show how the media influenced Hillary’s campaign, and the impartiality of voters when a woman is running for power, without personal attachment. Also, this article is interesting because the author shows us that although the USA is known as a great power around the world, politically the country is racist, sexist and still maintains gender stereotypes. This article is informative because the author illustrated a political research about gender stereotypes and the influence of the media in Hillary’s Clinton campaign. The audience of this articles are students of Politics Science, and community against gender stereotypes such as Social Workers. Finally, this article is useful for as an analysis of the gender stereotypes in politics, and the influence of the media in Hillary’s Campaign.
Falk, E. (2017). Stereotypes as the basis for humor in Saturday night live parodies of hillary clinton. Media report to Women, 45(2), 12.
Erika Falk, Ph.D. , is the director of the Israel Institute, and the author of Women for President in 2010. In this article, she critically analyzed the television program Saturday Night Live (SNL) for parodies made during the 2008 presidential election about the presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. The parodies were sarcastic in nature describing Hillary as competent, knowledgeable, and smart; however, these characteristics are not realistic for a woman running for the top position in the White House. It was just a joke. The bias of the author is critically against with this kind of humor because Saturday Night Live showed Hillary as trespassing the gender norms of submissiveness and domestic caregiver thus traditional stereotypes. What is interesting in this article is how the author agrees with the point that SNL showed Hillary Clinton as a powerful person, but at the same time this characteristic is refusing the sex roles. So, while putting Clinton as a powerful person in humor can be funny when a woman acts traditionally, but not when a woman has an ambitious perspective. There is a clear conflict between what is acceptable in the public eye when a man is a presidential candidate versus a woman. The author’s intent is to inform the audience about the nature of the humor in Saturday Night Live and the influences it had on the public with a contrary message. Finally, the audience of this article is the public who like to see this kind of shows, women, feminist, and politicians. The article is useful because the author remarks that the media has assumptions especially when the skit is about male and female intellectual and emotional competence.
McThomas, M., & Tesler, M. (2016). The growing influence of gender attitudes on public support for Hillary Clinton, 2008-2012. Politics & Gender, 12(1), 28-49. doi: 10. 1017/s1743923x15000562
The authors, who are associate professors of Political Science in the University of California, make a study with a national panel survey in spring 2011 to test the hypothesis that gender attitudes influenced public support for Hillary Clinton. They found that there remain gender stereotypes in many professions, but when a woman is running as a presidential candidate, she can face serious difficulties such as women having to convince voters that they are competent enough in male policy issues and only conquering this obstacle can women win the national office. The authors agree with Falk and Bligh, authors mentioned above, with the thesis that media played an important role in Hillary’s Campaign where sexist comments were prevalent for voters. In addition, what is interesting in this research is the popularity that Hillary had as secretary of state finishing her term with a favorability of 70%, but her popularity went down when she ran for a more powerful position. The authors found a bias in this study which a woman acts with masculine traits the public tens to judge because women should not be tough or aggressive, but when a woman acts with feminine traits the public tens to judge because the woman is not qualified enough as presidential candidate; there is not gender equality: however, the authors are neutral. This article is informative because the authors demonstrate with results that voters in the USA had influenced over gender attitudes, and the support Hillary Clinton received. The audience in this article are politics, students and professors political Science, and the public in general interested in politics, and gender. Finally, this article is useful because this article is based on gender attitudes that explain why a woman may have more difficulties than a man to reach a position of power.
Uscinski, J. E., & Goren, L. J. (2011). What’s in a name? coverage of senator hillary Clinton during the 2008 democratic primary. Political Research Quarterly, 64(4), 884-896. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.library.sheridanc.on.ca/docview/912383 093?accoundtid=3455
The authors, Joseph Uscinski Associate Professor to Miami University, and Lilly Goren professor of Political Science in Carrol University, collected data from television’s News such as ABC, CBS, and NBC, and demonstrated their hypothesis that Hillary Clinton “sexist coverage” was used by the media during the 2008 Democratic primary elections in the USA. They found that the news was referring to Hillary Clinton in an informally way when compared to other candidates. So that, the author found gender bias in the media coverage, and this gender bias affected the results of the elections. Even, the authors are inclined to be against this “sexist coverage” giving a suggestion for the media where news people to be impartial in their coverage and do away with gender stereotypes. What is new and interesting in this article is how news people called Hillary Clinton by her first name given an imagen of inferiority to the audience while male candidates were called by their last name validating the male superiority. Consequently, there is a conflict because the USA seemed to have an acceptance toward gender equality, but with Hillary Clinton as a candidate, this acceptance is appearing to be a myth, so that the media has to work on this disparity by giving women and men the same treatment. This article is persuasive because the authors proved their thesis with solid arguments and stated the facts of the study. The audience of this article are politicians, students of Political Science, women, and feminist. Finally, this article is useful because the authors have demonstrated that the media has an important role in its audience, and the audience should not accept how the media treats gender.