In 2008, Hillary Clinton ran for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination and endured non-stop sexism from the media. We called it out, week after week. We called it out, media watchdogs ignored it. For example, from our "TV: American Oh-Dull:"
Last week, we noted that FAIR's radio program CounterSpin is happy to ignore sexism and, at the top of Friday's show, they appeared bound and determined to prove us wrong.
Peter Hart: One of the most disturbing features of the media coverage of the Democratic presidential race is the way racism and sexism have been expressed. CNN viewers were treated to one pundit explanation that people might call Hillary Clinton a bitch because well isn't that just what some women are. Not everyone's so out in the open. MSNBC host Chris Matthews opened his May 18th show wondering how Barack Obama would connect with regular Democrats? Obviously code for working class Whites. This would seem to make the millions of Obama voters so far irregular. But then consider the May 14th op-ed by Washington Post Writers Group Kathleen Parker. She wrote about 'full bloodness' and the patriot divide between Obama and John McCain offering that there is "different sense of America among those who trace their bloodlines through generations of sacrifice." This makes Obama less American than his likely Republican rival and his success part of a larger threat "There is a very real sense that once upon a time America is getting lost in the dash to diversity." Well thanks to The Washington Post, Parker's rant appeared in newspapers around the country including the Baltimore Sun and Chicago Tribune. We're not sure what those papers used for a headline but one blogger suggest [nonsense] would do. Parker's attack wasn't even new. Before in the pages of The Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan wondered if Obama had ever gotten misty thinking about his country's rich heritage. John McCain by contrast "carries it in his bones." There's an appetite in corporate media for such repellent ideas as Editor & Publisher's Greg Mitchell recalled, Noonan's column was praised by NBC's anchor Brian Williams as Pulitzer worthy.
If you paid attention, Peter only proved us right. The first time this year CounterSpin can note any of the sexism, it's when Hillary's called a bitch and it produces a single sentence in which the 'pundit' isn't even named. We'll get back to that sentence but, like CounterSpin, let's focus on race. You'll notice the construct of Hart's opening sentence. We don't read Kathleen Parker, we don't know her, we can't even picture what she looks like. We haven't read her column and have no interest in doing so. We say all that as a preface because someone might be able to offer a defense of her and it might be valid. As Hart summarized and quoted what Parker wrote, it sure sounded like racism. But what of the other two examples? Yes, there are three examples of racism (real or imagined, we'll get to it) and only one of sexism. The sexism is clearly sexism and what Parker's credited with writing seems like racism.
[. . .]
It's amazing when you think about it, Hart has one solid case of racism and one solid case of sexism. Sexism is reduced to one sentence with no direct quote and neither the program or pundit is named. However, Kathleen Parker is named and quoted and it's six sentences of commentary. Hart also includes a Chris Matthews citation that may have nothing to do with racism and a Peggy Noonan citation that is only racist if we live in a world where Peggy's forced to stop recycling her usual garbage because the person she's targeting is bi-racial. Again, Peggy hates all living Democrats equally.
This was CounterSpin's initial 'foray' into sexism. The one time they've noted it in all of 2008. How proud they must be and how, well, fair they must feel that just once, for one non-specific, fleeting sentence they realized that sexism existed.
Even after the primary was over, people still couldn't be honest. That includes the embarrassing Kathleen Hall Jamieson who pretended to THE NEW YORK TIMES that she couldn't be sure that Hillary had experienced real sexist media coverage because what was there was so "limited." We found that strange since Kathy had participated in sexist media coverage of Hillary -- most infamously when Kath and Bill Moyers laughed and mocked Hillary for 'crying' onstage and shared Jesse Jackson Jr.'s tirade against Hillary instead of footage of Hillary (footage of the New Hampshire debate would've defeated Kath and Bill's 'observations' because Hillary did not cry).
Some wanted to argue it was open to interpretation.
Let's talk about another case of sexism.
If a show does 36 episodes, and each episode is an interview, how many women should be featured?
You might argue 18 because that would be a split directly down the middle.
How many episodes should feature women?
Let's just go the answer of how many episodes featured women: 6.
We're talking about NETFLIX and Loyola Marymount University's HOLLYWOOD MASTERS. NETFLIX has now aired 36 episodes.
Only six featured women. Women, to be featured, had to be actresses with multiple awards (Jane Fonda, Hillary Swank, Julia Louise Dreyfuss, Geena Davis and Amy Adams) or they had to produce multiple successful films and run a studio (Sherry Lansing).
No offense to human hairball Jake Gyllenhaal but how he is he qualified for THE HOLLYWOOD MASTERS? Or, for that matter, Damon Lindelof? Ken Burns is a "Hollywood Master"? He's the poster kid for revisionary history and Super-Cuts, that's all he is. Billy Bob Thorton -- is he going to be remembered as anything other than an ex-husband of Anjelina Jolie's? Do we even want to get started on what world needs an episode revolving around never-lived-up-to-his-promise Ethan Hawke?
Six women. Thirty-one men (one episode featured two men who were brothers -- and who were popular for a very limited time in the 90s culminating with THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY).
Six versus thirty-one.
These are numbers, hard data.
And this show comes with a host from THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER, Stephen Galloway. That would be the same publication that loves to pretend to care about inequality in the industry while they . . . perpetuate inequality in the industry.
Why is that we're the only ones calling them out?
Why is it that they have to be called out to begin with?
Common sense would tell you that, in 2018, you need to interview an equal number. And don't talk to us about 'merit.' When you're called THE HOLLYWOOD MASTERS and you sit down with the king of schlock Jerry Bruckheimer (episode six of season two), you don't have any standards at all.
Even with the pretense of merit, there are huge numbers of women who warrant being interviewed for a program entitled THE HOLLYWOOD MASTERS. Faye Dunaway, Rita Moreno, Cicely Tyson, Penny Marshall, Diana Ross, Nancy Meyers, Patty Jenkins, Charlize Theron, Lily Tomlin, Jane Wagner, Cher, Halle Berry, Goldie Hawn, Diane Keaton, Regina King, Nicole Kidman, Jessica Lange, Sissy Spacek, Pam Grier, Frances McDormand, Angela Bassett, Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, Meg Ryan, Glenn Close, Viola Davis, Sally Field, Shirley MacLaine, Holly Hunter, Alfre Woodard, Julie Andrews, Ellen Burstyn, Salma Hayek, Lonette McKee, Vanessa Redgrave . . .
There's a huge number of women we haven't even listed.
But somehow women aren't invited to be on THE HOLLYWOOD MASTERS.
And those few times they are invited?
They're tokens.
What exactly is Loyola Marymount University teaching, enforcing and encouraging?
Sexism.
People complain, rightly, about the huge inequality of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But it didn't start in just one year. Each year, people were inducted. Men and a woman. Maybe two women one year. But lots and lots of men every year.
There are 30 episodes of THE HOLLYWOOD MASTERS where a man speaks to male guests. Only six episodes where the the male host interviews women.
These are numbers, not interpretations or anything that might make the nervous have to think or step out on a limb with us.
Last June, THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER offered "TV Showrunners Talk Sexism in Writers Rooms, Hiring Diverse Staff and Weinstein's Blacklist." Exactly when are they going to examine the rank sexism in the program hosted by their own Stephen Galloway?