The Women's Media Center had its first annual media awards last night at the Arthur M. Sackler Foundation (yes, the same Dr. Elizabeth Sackler who created the feminist art center at the Brooklyn Museum). The place was packed with supporters--folks who obviously recognize that the media is still sullied with sexism and must be held accountable. Think Bill O'Reilly. Think C. Gordon Liddy. Enough said. The honorees were...
Print and Broadcast Journalists:
Christiane Amanpour (CNN)
Helene Cooper (New York Times)
Candy Crowley (CNN)
Online Journalists:
Pam Spaulding (Pam's House Blend)
Rebecca Traister (Salon.com)
Broadcast Hosts:
Bonnie Erbe (To The Contrary)
Rachel Maddow (The Rachel Maddow Show)
Documentary Film:
Abigail Disney & Gini Reticker (Pray The Devil Back To Hell)
Theatre:
Lynn Nottage (Ruined)
Dolly Parton (9-5, the musical)
Entertainment:
Tina Fey (30 Rock)
Congrats to all the winners and the Women's Media Center for all the incredible work that they do.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Women's Media Center Honors Outstanding Feminist Journalists.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14433
Meh. The honorees in the broadcast host category leave something to be desired. Bonnie Erbe? Really? The best thing about her show is that one gets a chance to hear perspectives from Kim Gandy and Tara Setmayer. Bonnie's perspectives and questions aren't exactly incisive.
Don't get me started with Rachel Maddow. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, because I know she's a darling around here, but I'm certainly entitled to my opinion, which is that she relies too much on her sort-of-coquettish manner of pandering both to her guests (esp. Anna Marie Cox), and to her audience. I'd be rich indeed if I got a nickel for every time she says, "In other words..." and then proceeds to explain what was already made abundantly clear by her guest. The way she laughs at her own sense of humor makes me believe the stories that I've heard about her not having a television. Perhaps if she did, she'd realize that perhaps she's not as funny as she thinks she is.
Besides, Campbell Brown, Mika Brzezinski, Christiane Amanpour, and Megyn Kelly all have the necessary gravitas to effectively convey the news in a way that both Maddow and Erbe lack. I would prefer that ANY of these ladies would replace Rachel on her show. I know there will be differing opinions and statements about how intelligent Rachel is, and that "she's a Rhodes Scholar", but I don't buy it. Bobby Jindal's a Rhodes scholar, too, and I doubt I'll see anyone here using that to bolster any arguments about his "intelligence".
That said, I love that Tina Fey and Dolly Parton were honored. I should also note that Rachel does a good job when it comes to shedding light on gay rights. I just think she's woefully overrated.
As far as Maddow, I'm a fan and I don't really agree with your assessment, but she does take a lighter tone with most of the news than perhaps is expect of News Anchors/Commentators (TM). But I enjoy that about the show. She's a self-styled dork, so what if she doesn't always play The Authority Figure?
With regard to education, I wouldn't immedietely respond that she's a rhodes scholar, I'd immedietely respond that she has a PhD. (From Oxford if I recall.) Sure the efficacy of a Western higher education can be debated, but there it is.
Regarding humor, I always think it's funny that if someone doesn't think something is funny they assume no one else thinks it's funny. I think Coke tastes horrible, but I recognize that a lot of people think it tastes great...otherwise it wouldn't sell.
I think you misread being nice as sort-of-coquettish. People absorb information in different ways. Others could convey the same information. Men could also convey the same information. The point is that we have a diverse spectrum of journalists convey information in a variety of ways so that more people get it.
I'm sure people might think that her being gay doesn't matter. But that is like saying gender doesn't matter or ethnicity doesn't matter.
I was wicked proud to see an out gay woman get her own show. And I am wicked proud to see a successful out gay woman. It does mean she has a different perspective to offer on certain issues. And your digs on her really fall on her audience, who do think she is funny, do think she is smart and are absorbing more information from her than they might from someone else.
I would prefer that we have a variety of women journalists instead of all the same. Perhaps I am narcissistic for enjoying seeing a woman like me on the TV. :) (Not the PhD part, but the dorky out gay woman, who is, shall we say, not so femme...In other words butch. Huzzah for my community!)
I can't help but be excited about this (sorry 'courtship')-- so many people I love! 'Ruined' was the most moving thing I've seen in a long time, and, well, don't get me started on how much I love '30 Rock'