- Share This Post
- submit
- 2
-
Sparkle (0)
On a Friday afternoon in 1977 I got my answer. My looks would play a pivotal role in my chosen career. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your world view, my news director told me my looks were all wrong for television news. He spared nothing: not my hair, not my makeup,not the features on my face.
Net Net: my looks were not showing up in the asset column of my career ledger.
For a 26 -year- old, it was a devastating realization that while my bosses rated my reporting skills as superior, those skills were simply not as important as my appearance.
The "unflattering" Hillary photo this week is forcing many of us to think about our own attitudes about beauty and what role it plays in our careers.
I can't help but think that if a 1980's lawsuit had turned out differently, the photo would not be part of our national conversation.
In the 1980's, TV Anchor Christine Craft sued KMBC-TV in Kansas City for allegedly using different standards for judging male and female on-air broadcast news anchors.
At the time, Craft was eight months into a two year contract at the station. However, she got some unfavorables in focus group research.
Craft was informed that she had been demoted to reporter because focus group research had indicated that she was "too old, too unattractive and wouldn't defer to men."
At the time Craft was thirty-something. In the court case, the jury awarded her $500,000 in damages.
The judge threw out the verdict and called for a second trial.
Craft won again:Metromedia appealed. At that point the 8th Circuit Court threw out the second verdict and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.
Had Craft's victory stood thirty some years ago, we would probably be having a very different conversation about the "Hillary Photo."
There would probably be more concern about the fairness of showing that kind of closeup of Hillary, while sparing the guys from the same telescopic scrutiny.
For me, the Hillary picture wouldn't be problematic if there were similar photos of exhausted, bone -weary male candidates. Running for office is exhausting. Surely, there are times when even the most handsome of the group look less than their camera- ready selves. But by focusing on HIllary's exhausted appearance and not offering up the exhausted photos of the other candidates, the media is focusing on Hillary's looks from a different lens.
The Bad American has done an in-depth analysis of the stock photos available for the current political candidates to see if the camera's are looking for the same things with various candidates. He used Yahoo News Photos for his analysis.
Is it just me or does it seem like so many photographers are taking pictures of Clinton for Matt Drudge? Let’s see how goofy and embarrassing we can catch her seems to be the aim here. Or am I totally off base? Am I looking for something that’s not there. Again, look at the other candidate’s front pages. Or is Hillary just a total clown candidate who just can’t help launching into a regular Goofy imitation? Seriously, how many male candidates get this kind of treatment? And John McCain is allowed to have wrinkles, eh? But not Hillary Clinton. Would it help matters if she was a beauty queen? Oh, but then the press would feel the need to take her down a peg or two wouldn’t they? But they wouldn’t dare do that to any of the ’serious’ candidates (Kucinich excluded - its been open season on him for awhile). No there seems to be a double standard with Hillary Clinton’s looks. Because she’s a woman. Tell me I’m wrong.
Had the courts not overturned Christine Craft's victory, perhaps our youth-beauty obsession may not be at quite the fervor it is.
Perhaps instead of focusing on the fact that this is not a picture Hillary will want to include in her photo album, we would instead say, "Let's compare the exhausted photos of the other candidates." And, if there are none, it should raise some questions -- why are we focusing on HIllary's exhaustion and not anyone else's?
Had corporations not been given a free pass by the courts to have different standards in judging women and men who appear on our airwaves,we would have had thirty years to adjust to the concept that the standards used to judge a woman's ability to do a job need to mirror the standards used to judge a
