Sexism in Journalism Really Lives on the Opinion Page

Jill Abramson's Firing Prompts Look at Gender Breakdown

Firing Offense: Jill Abramson, the now former executive editor of The New York Times.
Getty Images
Firing Offense: Jill Abramson, the now former executive editor of The New York Times.

By Elissa Strauss

Published May 19, 2014.
  • Print
  • Share Share

With all the worries about the founded or unfounded role of sexism in Jill Abramson’s firing from The New York Times, it’s worth remembering the very well documented way that gender discrimination plays out on the opinion pages of major publications.

Recently both the Women’s Media Center and VIDA: Women in Literary Arts released their findings of studies on the gender differentlal. Both reveal that our media landscape is still heavily, heavily, dominated by male voices. Really, statistically speaking the fact that you are reading a woman right now is unlikely.

The Women’s Media Center reports that op-ed writers remain predominantly white and male, with an average age of 60 years. Of the 143 columnists at the nation’s three most-vaunted (as they put it) newspapers and the four largest syndicates of opinion columnists, only 38 are women. They also found that men are three times as likely to be quoted on page 1 stories in the New York Times, and men account for two-thirds of newsroom staffers at our nation’s daily newspapers.

Things don’t look much rosier at magazines, according to VIDA.Thought-leaders like Harpers, the Nation, the New Yorker and the Atlantic all featured a higher number of men than women last year. Harpers (which has a female editor, for whatever that’s worth) published 54 women and 154 men, the New Yorker, 253 women and 555 men, the Nation (also has a female editor), 179 women and 478 men, and the Atlantic, 72 women and 150 men.

There is one piece of good news in all these reports, the 3rd one from WMC and the 5th from VIDA. Ladies and gentlemen, they have located a cure for the widespread gender disparity: trying. It’s simple, effective and doesn’t cost your publisher a thing!

Yes! A publication only need to actually try to include more women’s voices in their pages and, ta-dah, they will publish more women. This means soliciting more female voices, giving pitches submitted by women more consideration, broadening the scope of topics they consider highbrow enough for your pages and, lastly, feeling a deep prick of shame when, month after month, female bylines are crowded by male ones.

This sounds obvious, even intuitive, right? And yet, it remains ignored by some of the smartest and savviest editors around. Men and women.

Three years ago I spoke to top editors about the dearth of female bylines at their publications, including New Yorker editor David Remnick and New York Review of Books editor Robert Silvers. Both were contrite, to a degree.

Remnick told me: “It’s certainly been a concern for a long time among the editors here, but we’ve got to do better — it’s as simple and as stark as that.” And Silvers told me “We certainly hope to publish more.” But the only thing they have done since then is cast light on the deep chasm that exists between wanting to do something and actually doing it.

Tin House editor Rop Spillman told VIDA that their numbers back in 2010 were a “kick in the pants,” and has since come to realize that you have seek balance in a systemic way. The result? Well this year they actually featured more women than men. Similar changes occurred this past year at the Paris Review and the New York Times Book Review, now helmed by a woman, both of whom have brought balance, if not yet total parity, to their pages – through trying.

The Forward’s own Gal Beckerman also took that big step from wanting to trying in his opinion section and now women’s voices appear just as often as men’s. In addition to three regular female op-ed writers, including myself, the Forward’s editor Jane Eisner, and the latest addition, Forward Thinking editor Sigal Samuel, the Forward’s op-ed section consistently offers a range of women’s voices far above the national average of 20% of op-eds. It’s clear what effort can do.

My original instinct was to close this op-ed with a defense of why women’s voices matter. But then every line I started to write made me cringe. Why should I have to explain something that should be as self-evident as the importance of drinking water or being nice to children and the elderly? It is 2014. I just can’t. As Cate Blanchett said in her recent Oscar acceptance speech about the dearth of female-centered films, “The world is round, people.”

Amen. For too long now we’ve taken progress to be inevitable, but it’s not. Change can happen, but we have to try.


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight": http://jd.fo/f4Q1Q
  • Jon Stewart responds to his critics: “Look, obviously there are many strong opinions on this. But just merely mentioning Israel or questioning in any way the effectiveness or humanity of Israel’s policies is not the same thing as being pro-Hamas.”
  • "My bat mitzvah party took place in our living room. There were only a few Jewish kids there, and only one from my Sunday school class. She sat in the corner, wearing the right clothes, asking her mom when they could go." The latest in our Promised Lands series — what state should we visit next?
  • Former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror: “A cease-fire will mean that anytime Hamas wants to fight it can. Occupation of Gaza will bring longer-term quiet, but the price will be very high.” What do you think?
  • Should couples sign a pre-pregnancy contract, outlining how caring for the infant will be equally divided between the two parties involved? Just think of it as a ketubah for expectant parents:
  • Many #Israelis can't make it to bomb shelters in time. One of them is Amos Oz.
  • According to Israeli professor Mordechai Kedar, “the only thing that can deter terrorists, like those who kidnapped the children and killed them, is the knowledge that their sister or their mother will be raped."
  • Why does ultra-Orthodox group Agudath Israel of America receive its largest donation from the majority owners of Walmart? Find out here: http://jd.fo/q4XfI
  • Woody Allen on the situation in #Gaza: It's “a terrible, tragic thing. Innocent lives are lost left and right, and it’s a horrible situation that eventually has to right itself.”
  • "Mark your calendars: It was on Sunday, July 20, that the momentum turned against Israel." J.J. Goldberg's latest analysis on Israel's ground operation in Gaza:
  • What do you think?
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.