Women, Media, and Elections: Representation and Marginalization in British Politics 9781529204957

Citation preview

WOMEN, MEDIA , AND ELECTIONS REPRE SENTATION AND M ARG INALIZ ATION IN B RITISH POLITI C S EM ILY H A R M ER

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS Representation and Marginalization in British Politics Emily Harmer

First published in Great Britain in 2021 by Bristol University Press University of Bristol 1-​9 Old Park Hill Bristol BS2 8BB UK t: +44 (0)117 954 5940 e: bup-​[email protected] Details of international sales and distribution partners are available at bristoluniversitypress.co.uk © Bristol University Press 2021 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-1-5292-0494-0 hardcover ISBN 978-1-5292-0496-4 ePub ISBN 978-1-5292-0495-7 ePdf The right of Emily Harmer to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved: no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of Bristol University Press. Every reasonable effort has been made to obtain permission to reproduce copyrighted material. If, however, anyone knows of an oversight, please contact the publisher. The statements and opinions contained within this publication are solely those of the author and not of the University of Bristol or Bristol University Press. The University of Bristol and Bristol University Press disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any material published in this publication. Bristol University Press works to counter discrimination on grounds of gender, race, disability, age and sexuality. Cover design: Liam Roberts Front cover image: Museums Victoria Bristol University Press uses environmentally responsible print partners. Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ Books, Padstow

Contents List of Figures Acknowledgements 1 2 3 4 5 6

iv vi

Women in Political News: Representation and Marginalization 1 The Candidates: Making the House (of Commons) Their Home? 21 The Voter: Housewives and Mothers 58 The Spouses and Relatives: From ‘Ideal Election Wife’ to ‘Just 91 Another Political Wife’ The Leaders: ‘Iron Ladies’ and ‘Dangerous’ Women 121 Lessons from a Century of Reporting on Women in Elections 156

References Index

174 196

iii

List of Figures 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Percentage of items about politicians which quoted politicians directly 1918–​2017 Proportion of items about politicians which discuss policy 1918–​2017 Four main policy themes for politicians 1918–​2017 Percentage of items which evaluated politicians 1918–​2017 Percentage of items which refer to the appearance of politicians 1918–​2017 Percentage of items which refer to the family life of politicians 1918–​2017 Percentage of items which quoted voters directly 1918–​2017 Four main policy themes for voters 1918–​2017 Percentage of items which refer to voters’ families 1918–​2017 Percentage of coverage about party leaders’ wives 1918–​2015 The three most prominent themes in coverage of relatives 1918–​2015 Percentage of items which mention the appearance of relatives 1918–​2015 Percentage of items which evaluated relatives negatively 1918–​2005 Percentage of items about party leaders 1979–​2017 Percentage of items which evaluated party leaders 1979–​2017 Percentage of items which evaluated leaders and politicians negatively 1979–​2017 Percentage of items which evaluated leaders and politicians positively 1979–​2017 Percentage of items which quoted politicians and leaders 1979–​2017 Percentage of items which mention the appearance of leaders and politicians 1979–​2017

iv

30 32 33 35 36 37 65 66 68 98 100 101 102 127 129 131 132 134 136

List of Figures

5.7 5.8

Percentage of items which mention the appearance of the prime minister and other leaders in 2017 Percentage of items which refer to the family of leaders and politicians 1979–​2017

v

137 139

Acknowledgements This book has been a long time coming, not just in the sense that many of the elections analyzed within happened such a long time ago, but also in the sense that I have been working on (or perhaps ‘living with’ is a better description) this book for about twelve years on and off. The book builds on the work of so many incredible scholars researching questions about gender, politics, and media, many of whom are cited within its pages. Much of the research in this book is derived from my PhD thesis which I completed in 2013. I should therefore thank the Economic and Social Research Council for funding a good portion of this work. Even though 2010 was the final election included in the original thesis, I always imagined capturing a full century of elections when I turned it into a book. As a result, I started thinking about the book in 2015 after what I thought would be the final election before the 2018 centenary of women’s suffrage in the UK. How wrong I was! Not only would there be another election in 2017 but it would be contested by the UK’s second female prime minister. In many ways this ‘extra election’ has enhanced the book as it provided a good deal of material for the final substantive chapter about the mediation of women party leaders. However, it wasn’t only the fast pace of British politics that kept me from writing the book sooner. Like many colleagues in higher education, it took me three and a half years to gain a permanent academic position which gave me the security I needed to focus on the huge task of crafting twenty-​seven elections worth of data into a coherent analysis of election news reporting. I’m including this detail because finished books hardly ever have much to say about the difficulties and life events that led to their completion, and I hope any precariously employed academic reading this knows that their current situation is no reflection on their worth or the quality of their research. I’m very fortunate to have been able to write this book, and I want you to know that I recognize that fact. I’d like to thank the team at Bristol University Press for believing in the project and for their hard work on bringing the book to life. I am also grateful to the many colleagues who have been with me at various stages

vi

newgenprepdf

Acknowledgements

throughout this stop-​start journey from PhD to published book. Thank you to my former colleagues at Loughborough University, especially those who completed their PhDs alongside me. Special mention here goes to Sarah Lewis for always being hilarious and/​or fuelled by feminist fire! I reserve particular thanks to David Deacon for giving me my first academic job, which taught me even more about elections and their media coverage than I had learned before. I’m also very grateful to the many regular attendees of the PSA Media and Politics Group events for providing a lovely environment in which to discuss media and politics research in a constructive and friendly way. I received thoughtful feedback on aspects of this book from the group more than once over the years. Thanks must also go to my current colleagues at the Department of Communication and Media at the University of Liverpool for being so collegiate and supportive. I’m particularly grateful to Georgina Everett, Craig Haslop, Gary Needham, and Ros Southern for all the moral support over the past five years that we’ve all worked together. Thanks especially to Ros for making our many research collaborations and writing together so straightforward and rewarding, and for teaching me more about social media than I ever wanted to know! Special thanks are due to Heather Savigny, without whom I probably would never have written this book. Thank you for being such a great role model and for your advice and friendship over the years. I would never have dreamed that someone like me could be an academic without your encouragement. The other person without whom this book would have been impossible is my mentor and friend Dominic Wring. I have so much to thank you for that there is far too much to list here, so I will just say thank you for all the cups of tea, advice, and support that you’ve given me over the past decade or so. I’m hugely grateful for all of it! And finally, saving the best until last, I’d like to thank my family and friends for all their support. Special thanks to my Mum and Dad for everything, and to Pete Templeton for putting up with me and acting as my unofficial copy editor.

vii

1

Women in Political News: Representation and Marginalization It is now more than one hundred years since women gained the right to vote and stand as parliamentary candidates in the UK. Just as progress to reach that point was somewhat glacial, progress since that time has been almost as slow. While women became members of parliament quite soon after women’s suffrage, it would take six decades before a woman was elected prime minister for the first time. Throughout the subsequent century, the social and political lives of these women would change dramatically as a result of the political advocacy and activism of countless women (Cowman, 2010). Political discourse has also changed significantly over the same period because, as various legislation has been enacted to usher more and more citizens into the electorate, political parties have needed to appeal to an increasingly diverse and growing polity. The expansion of democracy placed new emphasis on the role of journalism and its ability to inform voters about politics and hold those in power to account (Temple, 2008). News media have, then, always been important in shaping what issues citizens ought to care about and whose voices are important in political debate. It is therefore crucial that news coverage of politics is inclusive and reflects the issues and concerns of all citizens. Some twenty-​five years ago (at the time of publication), Annabelle Sreberny and Karen Ross remarked that ‘work in political communication has tended to lack a gender dimension, while feminist work on the media has tended to focus on entertainment formats, rather than the “fact-​based” genre of current affairs that address the viewer as a gendered citizen’ (Sreberny-​Mohammadi & Ross, 1996: 103). To some extent, this remains true today. While there has been a noticeable increase in studies examining the mediated representation of women in political news, upon which this study builds, a cursory glance at the substantial array of academic studies which analyze electoral coverage in general suggests that the presence (or

1

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

absence) of women continues to be confined to studies that expressly set out to investigate the gendered dynamics of the campaign (Falk, 2010; Ross et al, 2013; Trimble, 2017). This marginalization of feminist scholarship in political communications research shows that scholars who ignore the pertinence of gender in election campaigns are missing important data which help to explain broader trends in political reporting. This book then has two clear objectives: firstly, to present a systematic quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mediated portrayal of women in UK election coverage over a one-​hundred-​year period. And moreover, secondly, to argue that to avoid providing a partial account of changes in election coverage over time, scholars need to account for gendered biases and differences in reporting. While studies of the representation of women in political news do essential work in establishing how election news contributes to the marginalization and trivialization of women in political coverage, for the most part they tend to focus on single campaigns and elite women. These limitations indicate a lack of understanding of how (and whether) election coverage has always reported women in these gendered (and often sexist) ways. While there are notable exceptions which aim to track the representation of women over time (see for example Falk, 2010; Trimble et al, 2013; Trimble, 2017), no previous studies have looked at the UK in a historical perspective, and there are few which analyze the representation of women other than politicians who appear in news coverage of elections. This book provides the first systematic examination of the mediated representation of women in politics in the UK for the first century of their inclusion in formal politics, between 1918 and 2017. This chapter will begin by setting out how political representation and mediated representations are connected. It will then go on to discuss how women have been politically marginalized in institutions and the media. The next section sets out an argument for studying gender in relation to election news. Then the chapter will set out the methodological details of the empirical research contained within this book and will end with a brief overview of the different chapters.

Political and mediated representation The premise of this book is that for women to be effectively represented in the political domain, they must also be adequately represented in the public discussion of political affairs that takes place in news media. Feminist scholars have long acknowledged that the way women are depicted in news media sends out important messages about their place and role in society and about their lives (Ross, 2010). If women are absent or marginalized

2

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

from political news, this can reinforce the notion that they do not belong in the political process, with the exceptions that make it a rule appearing as alarming aberrations rather than qualified officeholders. The concept of representation has different meanings in the context of this study. Political scientists would suggest that representation is about speaking on behalf of, and acting for, others in formal political institutions (Childs, 2008). Media studies scholars, on the other hand, would use the word representation to refer to how particular people, groups, or issues are portrayed in media texts (Sreberny-​Mohammadi & Ross, 1996). In the first case, people are representatives, while in the latter they are, themselves, represented. This book argues that there is no easy division here, but rather these concepts are intertwined when it comes to considering women in politics. This is because ensuring the political representation of women also crucially depends on whether women’s perspectives and concerns are included in news media reporting of politics, since politicians are often influenced by the media. In this next section, I will summarize these two ways of conceptualizing representation and will demonstrate how they are connected, starting first with political representation. There is a rich field of theoretical and empirical work which attempts to understand the contribution of women in formal political institutions. A great deal of this work is underpinned by the assumption that women politicians are important because of their ability to represent the priorities and perspectives of women voters (Phillips, 1995; Childs, 2008). Feminist political scientists have historically theorized women’s political representation in three main categories: symbolic representation, descriptive representation, and substantive representation (see Pitkin, 1972). Symbolic representation is mostly dismissed as superficial in terms of its ability to create a more equal world because the mere presence of women in politics does not guarantee that all women will materially benefit or feel represented. Descriptive representation can be described as ‘the claim that women should be present in decision-​making in proportion to their membership of the population’ (Lovenduski, 2005: 17). Childs (2008) suggests that descriptive representation has had little purchase in British politics; instead geographic and party representation have been prioritized which has resulted in political institutions that are overwhelmingly occupied by White, middle-​aged, and middle-​class men. Feminist political scientists tend to agree that conceiving of political representation in this way is inadequate, even if democracy clearly struggles to function for everyone without the descriptive representation of women and other disadvantaged groups. Descriptive representation has practical drawbacks because there may be an unlimited number of groups seeking representation on this basis, for example, the idea that farmers should

3

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

represent farmers. Crucially, descriptive representation is complicated by the fact that individuals occupy several identities (according to their age, social class, ethnicity, for example) as well as sex, making the practicalities challenging to imagine. Additionally, it assumes that women will necessarily represent other women’s interests (Lovenduski, 2005; Childs, 2008). These two points will potentially intersect, as some women define their subjective position by other factors and consequently might vote more in line with the interests of their age group, class, or ethnicity. Due to the limitations of descriptive representation, feminist political scientists have come to focus on the more tangible question of how elected politicians substantively represent women. Substantive representation can be defined as representing the interests of a particular group; in this case, women (Lovenduski, 2005). This approach is not without its problems. Serious questions remain about the extent to which women, in all their diversity, who share little in common except their historic under-​representation, have common interests to be represented (Smooth, 2011; Brown, 2014). The question of whether women representatives can act for women generally is therefore extremely complex and is dependent on a myriad of factors, including (but not limited to) the party identity of representatives and how marginalized they are within party and parliamentary institutions (Allen & Childs, 2019). Celis et al (2016) argue that substantive representation should be measured in three ways: Firstly, by assessing whether the representative claims made on behalf of women reflect their issues and needs. Secondly, by assessing the inclusiveness of the claims made for women. The third criterion considers not only whether women’s voices are included but whether they have an influence on policy. Previous studies attempted to provide an account of the relationship between women’s descriptive and substantive representation by examining the attitudes and behaviour of women representatives in real political institutions (Childs, 2004). This focus on the actions of individual elected women representatives has more recently been called into question, since those acting for women’s substantive representation tend to be multiple and they work collectively, as well as acting individually within formal political institutions (Allen & Childs, 2019). The latest scholarship also recognizes that adopting a feminist definition of women’s interests may exclude other issues which may advocate gender equality in some form (Childs & Krook, 2009; Celis et al, 2016). Additionally, focusing on female representatives rules out the potential for male representatives to advocate for women (Childs & Krook, 2009; Allen & Childs, 2019). While this substantial field of research does much to develop our understanding of how women are represented in formal politics, it is striking how little of this work discusses the communicative aspects of

4

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

representation. How do political representatives gain insight into what policy measures the people they represent need or care about? Do they just decide based on their own experiences as women, or of living and working with them? Politicians might have various ways of seeking advice from their constituents through regular surgeries and correspondence; however, how do they determine what millions of women might want or need from the legislative process? These are questions that are largely unanswered by the existing political science research, and yet, given how central news media have become to the conduct of politics, it is reasonable to suggest that media coverage of voters’ motivations and priorities could have some impact on how politicians come to determine what issues and policy solutions would advance women’s interests. News media are important actors in the political process because they select and shape a handful of events and present them to their audiences as significant and meaningful. Journalists do not merely cover observable events and report facts; they ‘animate them by turning them into narratives with plots and actors’ (Street, 2001: 36), which frames the experience of politics for their audience. This means one account is privileged over another to construct a coherent event that the audience cannot experience for themselves. The audience is therefore encouraged to attach more significance to some issues than others, which allows journalists to influence the political agenda by framing some topics as important to voters, and which gives them in turn the licence to ignore others (McCombs & Shaw, 1995). As a result, ‘ideological considerations and commonly accepted views and assumptions about the nature of society also feed into the news-​making process’ (Negrine, 1994: 119), meaning that some version of what is ‘normal’, what ‘usually happens’, or how people ‘usually behave’ is woven into the news. The normative function of journalism is apparent when we consider the mediated representation of women in political coverage. Their activities tend to receive less coverage than men’s, and descriptions of them rely on stereotypes or refer to their outward appearance or familial relationships (Norris, 1997; Ibroscheva & Raicheva-​Stover, 2009; Garcia-​Blanco & Wahl-​Jorgensen, 2012; Ette, 2017). These forms of representation reveal that the imagery and language used to report on politics is heavily gendered and establishes men as the norm while regarding women as peripheral, novelties, or outsiders in the political realm (Sreberny-​Mohammadi & Ross, 1996). This has become known as the gendered mediation thesis, which assumes that reporting conventions are determined by a male-​oriented agenda that privileges the idea that politics is a masculinized pursuit (Ross & Sreberny, 2000). Indeed, the language and metaphors used to describe the political sphere often evoke masculinized power struggles such as battles and sporting events (Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Harmer et al, 2017). Political

5

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

journalism, then, does not simply reflect the fact that men and masculinized norms continue to dominate politics; news instead plays an active role in perpetuating a masculinized conception of politics and politicians (Ibroscheva & Raicheva-​Stover, 2009; Harmer et al, 2020). Ross (2010: 110) rightly points out that ‘who speaks is who counts’, which means that if certain groups are consistently omitted from the discussion of politics, they are at risk of being ignored altogether by policymakers. It therefore makes sense to pay attention to the mediated representation of women, since improving women’s presence and portrayal in mediated political discourse might contribute to strengthening women’s substantive representation (Adcock, 2010; O’Neill et al, 2016).

Political and mediated marginalization In Britain, the number of women seeking to be members of parliament has increased significantly since 1918. Since then, attitudes have shifted, and it is now seen as crucial that women occupy political office, but despite this, at no point in British history have women MPs made up more than 34 per cent of MPs (Harmer & Southern, 2020). Moreover, there have only been two women who have served as prime minister during this century-​long period. Women’s portrayal in the news media is similarly marginal and often trivial because there is a ‘double gendering at work –​in both the gendered nature of representational politics as well as the gendered nature of media coverage’ (Sreberny-​Mohammadi & Ross, 1996: 105), which necessitates that both dimensions are analyzed together. The absence or marginalization of women from media discourses has been a preoccupation for media scholars since Tuchman et al (1978) complained of women being symbolically annihilated in mass media discourse through their marginalization, trivialization, or condemnation. Feminist scholars have noted two main aspects of the marginalization of women in media: the restricted range of stories in which their voices appear, and the position of female journalists in the news-​making process (Ross, 2007). The first of these concerns has been widely addressed. Many scholars have argued that the persistent representation of women as victims (of crime, violence, or public policy), sexual objects, or the female family members of newsworthy men demonstrates the extent to which patriarchal concerns dominate the production of news (Carter et al, 1998; Holland, 1998; Ross, 2011). The use of sources is a fundamental part of the construction of news stories, as it indicates the version of events that is being supported; thus, who is permitted to speak in the news indicates something about whose views count in society (Ross, 2011). Journalists tend to rely on sources they

6

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

consider authoritative and elite (Livingstone & Bennett, 2003), and due to the over-​representation of men in political life, many of these elites tend to be male (Ross, 2007). In most studies that have addressed the gendered nature of source selection, men tend to outnumber womanly significantly. Shoemaker and Reece (1996) found that men were twice as likely as women to feature as either news subjects or sources in newspapers. Similarly, Zoch and Vanslyke Turk (1998), whose study looked at source selection in US newspapers over ten years, suggested that women barely featured in news of national or international importance. Various studies of women in the news have shown that source selection is dominated by elite male voices from business and professional occupations and by politicians. Ross’s (2007) study of three local newspapers in the UK showed that men were twice as likely to be quoted as business representatives, and three times as likely to be quoted as local councillors. This gendered division of source status was also identified by Adcock (2010), whose study of British press coverage of the 1997 general election in five national newspapers showed that women featured in a third of news items and only featured as main actors in half of these appearances. Moreover, they were only directly quoted in a third of these appearances. The male dominance of newsrooms has been blamed for contributing to this marginalization of women’s voices in news content (van Zoonen, 1998; Djerf-P ​ ierre, 2011). Others emphasize that women journalists continue to be confined to so-​called ‘soft news’ subjects rather than hard news genres (North, 2016). However, there is some debate concerning whether female journalists make a difference in the selection of sources. Zoch and Vanslyke Turk (1998) contend that female journalists are more likely to use female sources. On the other hand, Liebler and Smith (1997) studied television news in the US, and their research revealed that the sex of the journalist made no real difference in their use of sources. The results of Ross’s (2007) study also failed to find a correlation between the sex of journalists and the likelihood of their using female sources. The possibility remains, then, that women working in journalism are perpetuating pre-​existing attitudes. While focusing on the ways that women are marginalized in news coverage is important, it is also crucial to remember that some women are further marginalized based on other social characteristics, such as race, age, and sexuality (Meyers, 2004, 2013; Edstrom, 2018). Women in politics are no different. Puwar (2004) argues that as women and minorities begin to enter fields where white male power is firmly entrenched, the spaces and institutions they come to occupy are not thereby made neutral, but remain imbued with histories and meanings that are hostile to their new occupants, and work in pernicious and subtle ways to reinforce that some people are entitled to specific spaces, while others are not.

7

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

These processes play out in politics and media alike. Intersectional analyses comparing the representation of women of colour to both male politicians of colour and to white women show that women of colour tend to be doubly discriminated against, receiving greater amounts of negative coverage or receiving negative scrutiny of their ability to represent other women of colour (Gershon, 2012; Tolley, 2015; Ward, 2016, 2017). Indeed, white women have always dominated the electoral landscape for women in British politics. The UK elected its first Black woman MP in 1987, almost seventy years after the first white women MPs were elected. In practice, this means that while this study recognizes that it is crucial to pay attention to the ways women of colour and other minorities are significantly disadvantaged in news coverage, there are very few opportunities to explore this in detail because of the implicit whiteness and heteronormativity of the mediated representation of women in UK elections. This chapter has so far argued that it is vital to analyze the mediated representation of women in election coverage because their portrayal in the news can have consequences for their political representation. The next section will outline why it is crucial to account for gender when studying more sweeping changes in political communication.

Gendering election studies Election coverage is particularly crucial because campaigns represent times when political parties showcase their vision for the future of the country, and when politicians are most visible (Cushion & Thomas, 2018). Elections are vital moments when citizens can endorse or reject the policy pledges of political parties, and to do so they require relevant information about these proposals to assist them in deciding how (and if) to vote. News media act as the primary source of election information for many people, so interrogating which issues and whose voices gain media attention, and which are marginalized or ignored, is crucial in determining if voters feel represented by the political agendas that circulate in the public sphere. This book will demonstrate just how important it is to take gendered mediation into account when studying elections, because several critical facets of election reporting have distinctly gendered implications. This section will argue that not measuring or accounting for gender at all means that most studies of election coverage only gain a partial understanding of how reporting has developed over time. There is a substantial and growing literature which has examined the amount, tone, and effectiveness of election coverage in recent decades.

8

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

There is widespread consensus that there have been many shifts in the relationship between the media and political systems, caused by changes in both (Blumler & Kavanagh, 1999; Norris et al, 1999). Blumler and Kavanagh (1999) identified three ages of political communications since the post-​war period. The first, or golden, age was characterized by the political parties being closely aligned with entrenched social cleavages, when political messages were substantive and issue based. The second, or television, age was distinguished by the rise of even-​handed reporting. The third age is identified by the increased exploitation and proliferation of various media which offered more opportunities for politicians to communicate with voters. In this third age, news media became integral to electoral strategies. Norris (2000) refers to these as pre-​modern, modern, and post-​modern campaigns, whereby campaigns evolved from locally organized constituency campaigns with little media coverage into highly professionalized operations that serve fragmented media audiences with multiple sources of political information. Changes in election coverage have tended to focus on several crucial areas. These include how election news has become increasingly focused on the conduct of the election and the role of public relations and journalists in the campaign. This is often called process news or meta-​coverage (Esser & D’Angelo, 2003; Esser & Spanier, 2005; Esser & D’Angelo, 2006). Studies have also measured how campaigns have moved from being party oriented to become increasingly candidate and leader focused, an effect known as presidentialization (see Kriesi, 2011; Vliegenthart et al, 2011). Research has also analyzed if and how election news has become more focused on the personalities and private lives of candidates, which is often referred to as personalization or ‘intimization’ (Langer, 2012; Stanyer, 2013). Studies of election news also frequently measure the extent to which campaign coverage has become increasingly hostile or adversarial, and the potential impact of this on citizen audiences (Cappella & Jamieson, 1997; Lengauer et al, 2011). The empirical evidence for these trends is often mixed and, at times, contradictory depending on the national context and media landscape being studied. What most of these studies have in common is that they ignore the possibility that gendered differences in reporting, or the tendency of news coverage about politics to portray it in masculinized terms, can have any impact on these trends. Generally, gendered mediation is not even considered. The next section will now explain why this is a fundamental mistake, and how gendered mediation could impact on the development of all these aspects of news reporting.

9

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Process news or meta-​coverage Scholars have claimed that, since political communications have become increasingly professionalized, journalists have considered reporting and interpreting party-​political strategies (and attempts to manage the news itself) as important aspects of stories (Esser & D’Angelo, 2003; Vreese et al, 2017; Cushion & Thomas, 2018). This might also have a practical dimension, since focusing on these aspects of campaigning requires fewer resources and produces more stories than researching complex policy discussions. Esser et al (2001) outline three stages of the development of meta-​coverage. They argue that journalism was issue oriented up until the early 1970s, after which time the focus on issues was replaced by reporting on more strategic elements of campaigns, such as how parties appeal to voters. Finally, they argue that the early 1990s news added a meta-​level to its coverage by increasingly examining the media management activities of campaigns, as well as by paying more attention to the role of media in the political process. Recent work by Vreese et al (2017) shows that reporting on election strategies is pervasive in political coverage across Europe and the United States, both in elections periods and beyond, but that this kind of coverage increased during election times. There is some empirical evidence to suggest that the prevalence of meta-​coverage is influenced by factors relating to the political and media environment in which the elections take place (Esser & D’Angelo, 2006). Empirical evidence from the UK shows that journalists have been reporting on the political process and party election strategies for most of the twentieth century (Deacon & Harmer, 2019). News which focuses on the political process rather than on policy agendas can also have gendered consequences. Studies that focus on gendered mediation have noted that election coverage often likes to focus on the ‘first woman frame’, which interrogates the electability of women candidates or speculates about their potential to transform the political landscape (Norris, 1997; Adcock, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Ward, 2017; Trimble et al, 2019). While it is essential to recognize and report on women’s electoral strategies and gains, subjecting them to this kind of scrutiny rather than focusing on what political agendas or skills they have to offer can reproduce troubling frames that reinforce their being seen as political novelties. Factoring gendered differences into the analysis of election reporting, then, may help us to explain more about the potential consequences of an overemphasis on process news.

Presidentialization/​personalization Presidentialization and personalization are inextricably linked and will, therefore, be discussed together. These concepts have been used interchangeably

10

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

by some scholars (see discussion by Vliegenthart et al, 2011; Langer, 2012). However, presidentialization mainly refers to a tendency to focus specifically on party leaders, while personalization can be thought of as an increased focus on the personal credentials and private lives of politicians. Studies of presidentialization show mixed results. Kriesi’s (2011) comparative study of six Western European elections spanning the 1970s to the 2000s shows that country-​specific explanations are important. In the UK between 1992 and 2005, there was a greater focus on the top two candidates in any given race (that is, party leaders) than in other parliamentary systems in the study. Moreover, the results suggested that coverage focused on leaders was more frequent in the 1970s. Deacon and Harmer (2019), on the other hand, found evidence for an increase in items which focus on party leaders between 1918 and 2015 in the UK. The trend is explained by an increased focus on the leader of the opposition rather than on the prime minister. There is also conflicting evidence about the extent to which political coverage has become more focused on the personalities and private lives of politicians. Comparative research shows that personalization depends on several factors, such as political culture, the system of government, the media system, and national context (see Stanyer, 2013). In the UK context, Langer (2012) analyzed this trend from an historical perspective, but studied news from between election campaigns. She draws a distinction between coverage about aspects of politicians’ personalities and attributes which relate to their political role, such as competence, and coverage which demonstrates an attempt to insert their private personas into political coverage. Langer concludes that personalization fluctuates across time and can depend heavily on the personalities of individual political leaders. Likewise, Deacon and Harmer (2019) found that mentions of the private lives of politicians were fairly consistent over time, while there was a noteworthy increase in evaluations of politicians’ competence. Such changes are often attributed to two interrelated factors: firstly the weakening of traditional party allegiances among voters, and secondly, the changing media environment (Van Aelst et al, 2012). Most accounts of personalization, however, pay scant attention to gendered differences between political actors. Research on the gendered mediation of political leaders, however, indicates that reporting on women candidates is often focused on perceptions of their character and suitability for office (see Falk, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Murray, 2010). Such research also demonstrates how the focus on the private lives of women candidates is often mediated differently to news coverage of men (Ross, 2002; van Zoonen, 2006). Neglecting the gender-​biased ways in which aspects of political reporting can shape perceptions of women as effective leaders is therefore profoundly problematic. This point is underlined by evidence from

11

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Trimble et al (2013), whose study of news coverage of political leadership candidates over time found that intense scrutiny of the personal attributes of women candidates helped to explain the overall increase in personalization, highlighting that accounting for gendered differences may offer important explanations for these broader trends.

Negativity Some academic accounts stress that confrontational news has important information value and stimulates political mobilization (Norris, 2000; Schuck et al, 2016). Others argue, meanwhile, that adversarial reporting may have the opposite effect and discourage voters from participating while increasing distrust towards political institutions and politicians (Cappella & Jamieson, 1997; Moy & Pfau, 2000). Regardless of their perspective, most scholars agree that confrontational and negative political news has serious repercussions for the way citizens perceive politics (Lengauer et al, 2011). Empirical research from the US shows that news about political events and actors tends to focus on negative aspects, while evidence from other political and media systems is less conclusive (Vreese et al, 2017). Zaller (1999) demonstrated that negative references to presidential candidates tripled between 1960 and 2000. Evidence from studies of European countries suggests that negative statements about politicians have also increased in and outside election campaigns (Semetko & Schoenbach, 2003; Wilke & Reinemann, 2001). Vreese et al (2006), who analyzed election news in twenty-​five countries, found that when news reporting was evaluative, it was mainly negative. Deacon and Harmer’s (2019) study of UK election news also noted an evident rise in negative reporting. Lengauer et al (2011) argue that the overwhelming evidence suggests that negativity towards individual politicians is increasing. This trend towards negative coverage is often explained by changes in the cultural and professional norms of journalists, changes in the relationship between journalists and political public-​relations spokespersons, and changes in the competitiveness and commercialization of news (Lengauer et al, 2011). Once again, if we take evidence from studies which have analyzed the gendered mediation of women politicians, there is reason to suggest that sometimes news coverage which evaluates politicians negatively is motivated by sexist assumptions about the ability of women to be influential political representatives. Moreover, news coverage can evaluate the behaviour and abilities of politicians through a gendered lens, emphasizing traditionally masculinized political performance at the expense of ‘softer’ political strategies (Harmer et al, 2017). Ignoring the importance of gendered language and assumptions which underpin political reporting is increasingly limiting in a political

12

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

environment where more and more women are being elected as both legislators and party leaders. Given how many of the trends identified in studies of election coverage may have gendered consequences or may be partially explained by gendered differences in news reporting, it is striking that gender is not measured or even accounted for by most of these scholars. Studies which do study gendered mediation are seemingly marginalized, or not read by those who may benefit from their insights. Studies of mediated representations of women in politics have established how election news contributes to the marginalization and trivialization of women in political coverage. However, for the most part, they tend to focus on single campaigns and elite women, meaning there is a dearth of knowledge about whether election coverage has always reported on women in similarly gendered ways. While there are notable exceptions which aim to track the representation of women over time (see for example Falk, 2010; Trimble et al, 2013; Trimble, 2017), there have been no studies which attempt to look at the UK in historical perspective, and none that analyze the representation of women other than politicians who appear in news coverage of elections. Much of the existing work, furthermore, focuses on elite figures such as female politicians and journalists, while ignoring the ways that women citizens are reported on and the potential consequences of their marginalization or gendered portrayal. Female relatives of politicians and their role in campaigns have also never been given serious academic attention in the UK context. This book is the first to offer a systematic quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mediated representation of all women in politics in the UK for the first century of their inclusion in formal politics. This book also demonstrates that analyzing gendered aspects of election coverage is crucial to understanding how election reporting has changed over time.

Notes on the book’s methodology and approach The broad concern of this research is to provide a historical analysis of the construction of women in newspaper coverage of elections in the century following women’s suffrage in the UK, to trace the development of gendered representations over time. It is essential for media studies to be historically aware because the political journalism of today has developed over a long period of time, so to understand the representation we have in contemporary Britain we must know how this has developed over time, as well as the kinds of norms and traditions that have influenced its development (Curran & Seaton, 2010). News reporting itself is almost exclusively focused on the latest events and the circumstances surrounding them, so media studies must counter this ‘present-​centred viewpoint’ (Deacon et al, 2007a: 170) to gain

13

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

a long-​term perspective on political events. The importance of conducting longitudinal studies of news material is reinforced by Mendes (2011), who argues that ‘tracking the news over time and space allows us to map changing ideologies and journalistic practices that could otherwise be thought of as permanent, unchanged or unchangeable’ (Mendes, 2011: 23). Deacon and Harmer (2019) echo this point by arguing that in academic and public debates alike, it is too often presumed that there have been historical changes in the way politics is reported without providing evidence to substantiate these claims. However, these are assumptions based on the analysis of contemporary conditions, meaning that the linearity and extent of change are overestimated (Deacon & Harmer, 2019). So, while it is tempting for feminist media scholars to assume that news texts have always portrayed women in similar ways to contemporary reportage, or that their representation may have improved over time, this is unproven, and yet it remains implicit in much academic work about women’s mediated representation. Taking a longitudinal approach to analyzing news coverage of British elections in order to investigate the representation of women is therefore imperative because it places contemporary reporting of women into a broader context. This study aims to find out how women as party leaders, ordinary candidates, voters, and female relatives of politicians are reported on in newspaper coverage of elections from 1918 until 2017, to determine whether there are differences between the representations of these different groups of women and how their portrayal changes over time. Adcock’s (2010) analysis of the 1997 general election showed that women appear in news coverage of elections in three capacities: as politicians, as voters, and as female relatives of politicians. This study adopts this approach by analyzing the representation of women in these three categories to determine if gendered representations are dependent on the role of women in the coverage. This study also differentiates between female party leaders and ordinary candidates in order to analyze whether high-​profile women are subjected to similar patterns of representation as their less prominent colleagues. Since the analysis deals with twenty-​seven distinct election periods, the size of the sample generated requires a mixed-​method approach. The research combines the use of content analysis (to give an overview of the fundamental changes and continuities in the mediated representation of women over time) with a more in-​depth qualitative analysis of the way women are described and evaluated. Content analysis is a quantitative method which enables the researcher to count the instances when certain things occur in a media text, such as the frequency with which a particular politician is mentioned or how many column inches are dedicated to a specific topic. This approach is especially

14

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

useful for this project because it allows for the analysis of key characteristics of large bodies of material. It also distils communications phenomena into manageable data from which inferences can be drawn, which can then be corroborated by other forms of analysis (Hansen et al, 1998). Given that this study analyzed media content across a longitudinal time frame, it is especially useful because its systematic approach can quickly establish continuities and changes over time. (Deacon et al, 2007a). Since content analysis focuses on manifest content only, it avoids making inferences about latent content or meaning. It follows, then, that in order to understand the mediated representation of women in election news, it is necessary to combine this method with a more inductive, qualitative approach that will allow us to unpack the gendered assumptions and consequences of writing about women in the news. This mixed-​methods approach is especially important because gendered narratives are often subtle and implicit, which means that taking a purely quantitative approach would conceal some of the more subtle ways that assumptions about women’s backgrounds, experience, and political viability are mediated (Tolley, 2015).

Key questions Given that there is considerable variation in the roles of these different groups of women, the content analysis did not uniformly apply all variables. For example, given that the female relatives of politicians were included because they were explicitly referred to as politicians’ family members, it was not necessary to record this in the data. Similarly, not all variables are discussed in each case if there were insufficient data. The content analysis was interested in answering the following questions: • Which policy areas are women most associated with, and does this change over time? • Are women subjected to evaluative coverage, and does this change over time? • Is the coverage of women personalized by referring to their physical appearance and family roles, and does this change over time? • Are women given a voice in political coverage, and does this change over time? The qualitative analysis, on the other hand, aimed to look in more detail at the way women were described, categorized, and evaluated in election news, building on the wealth of academic literature in this area. This literature will be discussed in more detail in Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 5, to demonstrate how the qualitative analysis both draws on and contributes to our understanding

15

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of gendered mediation. When analyzing the data, all items which were about the election were read through systematically. Short notes were generated about the qualitative content of the articles, paying particular attention to the language used to construct women and its ideological consequences, before being coded using the content analysis variables described in the next section.

Sampling and data The study focused on newspaper coverage of elections to make sure the results were comparable across time. There was no radio coverage of elections until 1924, when party leaders were only allowed to broadcast one direct address to the audience each (Beers, 2010). Similarly, there was little television coverage of elections until 1959 (Rosenbaum, 1997). Digital news media did not become sufficiently available to a mainstream audience until the late 1990s (Curran & Seaton, 2010). The study, therefore, analyzes newspaper coverage, to ensure that all elections between 1918 and 2017 can be included and compared. The press also continues to play a significant agenda-​setting role in UK elections (Cushion & Thomas, 2018). The study included five newspapers, which have been in print for the entire sample period: The Daily Telegraph, the (Manchester) Guardian, the Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, and the Daily Herald, which was relaunched as the Sun in 1964. These titles also reflect the British political spectrum, with the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail representing the conservative perspective and the Guardian representing the centre-​left. The Daily Mirror and Daily Herald changed their political persuasions during the sample period. The Daily Mirror started as a Conservative-​supporting newspaper before switching to back the Labour Party during the Second World War (Pugh, 1998). By contrast, the Daily Herald/​Sun switched its allegiance in the opposite direction. It was founded in 1912 and came under the editorial and financial control of the Labour Party and its Trade Union Congress allies in 1922 (Beers, 2010). Due to its lack of commercial success, it re-​emerged in 1964 as the Sun and eventually became a more populist title following its purchase by Rupert Murdoch in 1969. The paper subsequently embraced the Conservative Party during the run-​up to the 1979 general election (Temple, 2008). The analysis focused on the final week of each election campaign up to and including polling day, because although recent election campaigns have been around five weeks long, this has not always been the case. There are also three campaigns for which the coding does not include some titles. They were unavailable because they were not printed, for various reasons. Firstly, the Daily Herald is excluded from the 1918 data since, during the Great War, it was only published once a week, so it cannot be compared without irreparably skewing the data. Secondly, due to strike action by

16

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

newsprint workers during the 1970 election, there were no newspapers published between 10 and 13 June 1970. This means two sample days were missing for all titles and, therefore, the newspapers from the last two days from the week before were substituted to maintain comparability as closely as possible. Finally, there was no Daily Telegraph printed on 27 February 1974 due to industrial action, so this was not coded. The study identified a total of 4490 items which met the terms of inclusion. News items were only coded if they met two essential criteria: firstly, they had to be explicitly about the general election, and secondly, they had to contain a significant reference to a woman. A significant reference means that the woman in question appears in at least two sentences within the item. The content analysis recorded the newspaper title, the date, and page number of each item to identify articles for the qualitative aspect of the study. The study measured the following variables: 1) the category of women primarily featured in the news item; 2) the policy themes that were discussed; 3) whether the news item explicitly evaluated women in an entirely negative or entirely positive way; 4.) whether the news item mentioned the physical appearance or family situation of the woman or women in question; and 5) whether women were directly quoted or not.

Inter-​coder reliability Content analysis is dependent on maintaining consistency within and between categories to ensure that the findings can be compared. The author coded all items in this study. To ensure that the categories were rigorously adhered to throughout, an inter-​coder reliability test was carried out with a second coder who coded 10 per cent of news items which were randomly selected from across the sample. Inter-​coder reliability (ICR) scores were calculated using the ReCal web resource (Freelon, 2010, 2013). The ICR scores for all variables discussed in this article exceeded 0.89. Krippendorff (2004: 241) deems 0.800 to be a good indicator of inter-​coder reliability, with 0.667 being ‘acceptable’ for tentative conclusions.

Overview of the book The book is organized into four main chapters, which each take one group of women as their subject. Each chapter will summarize the existing literature about the mediated representation of the women in question, and will then present the results from the content analysis showing the continuities and changes over time, before discussing the gendered nature of the qualitative aspects of the news coverage. The findings will be brought together in the

17

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

concluding chapter, where the differences and similarities between each group will be discussed. Chapter 2 focuses on women political candidates. The chapter will first provide a brief overview of what we already know about the representation of women candidates in political media, then present the results from the content analysis, which tracked four key trends over time: the extent to which women candidates are quoted; what policy issues they are most associated with; the proportion of items which explicitly evaluate women politicians negatively and positively; and the extent to which coverage personalizes women candidates by mentioning their appearance or domestic situation. The second part of the analysis elaborates on the gendered nature of electoral coverage by presenting a qualitative analysis of three key areas: how women are portrayed as representing other women, the extent to which news coverage is sexist, and finally, the extent to which the personalized coverage that was measured quantitatively is explicitly gendered and/​or problematic. The chapter shows that throughout the twenty-​seven elections that women have been able to stand in as candidates, they have been mediated in ways which emphasize their gendered identity, and while there have been several changes, there is also a staggering amount of consistency in the coverage. The findings from the content analysis and the qualitative analysis present a mixed picture of both unsurprising and more unexpected results, which reinforces the notion that progress is not guaranteed. They also demonstrate the importance of tracking these trends over time in quantitative and qualitative terms. Chapter 3 begins with a brief discussion of the limited existing research into the mediated representation of women voters. This is then followed by a presentation of the content analysis results, which track three main trends over time: the extent to which women voters’ voices are included in news items, the issues with which they are most associated, and the extent to which news coverage about them is personalized by focusing on their domestic situation. The final section offers a qualitative analysis of the news coverage about them. The analysis first looks at how women are portrayed as a distinct set of voters who are unpredictable or undecided. An analysis of the way newspapers portray the motivations and values of women voters follows, before a discussion of how political issue coverage about them is gendered in particular ways. The final section of the analysis discusses how their voices are incorporated into news coverage. The lack of existing academic research into the ways that women voters are mediated in electoral campaigns means that this chapter makes a necessary intervention in how the role of women in elections is understood. The quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that the representation of women voters in newspapers has been remarkably stable over time.

18

WOMEN IN POLITICAL NEWS

While there were some subtle shifts in the way women were mediated, the representation of women has changed surprisingly little since 1918. It will be argued that this represents a significant problem because it completely ignores the enormous social differences between women and tends to marginalize those women who do not conform to patriarchal assumptions about the role of women in society. Chapter 4 focuses on a group of women whose mediated representation in UK coverage has received very little attention: female relatives of politicians. While they have no official political role in the process of elections (except as voters), the frequency with which they appear in the news shows that their role in campaigns deserves some scrutiny. The chapter provides a systematic analysis of the mediated representation of female relatives of politicians in order to investigate how their role and gendered representation changes over time. Firstly, the chapter will explain why analyzing the portrayal of such women is essential to understanding the broader implications of gendered election coverage, and will rehearse the scant literature on politicians’ spouse’s media representation. The chapter then presents the results from the content analysis, focusing on the development of the mediated representation of these women over time. The content analysis shows what proportion of the relatives are party leaders’ wives, what role they perform in the coverage, the extent to which coverage of them mentions their appearance, and the proportion of coverage which evaluates them negatively. The chapter will then present a qualitative analysis of the changing role of female relatives’ overtime, followed by an analysis of the gendered consequences of increasingly personalized newspaper coverage about them. The analysis in this chapter differs from the others because no politicians’ female relatives appeared in the sampled newspaper coverage in 2017. Therefore, the analysis tracks their representation from 1918 to 2015. The exclusion of this last election does not prevent us from drawing conclusions about their representation, though we note here that 2017 is interesting as an outlier. The chapter will argue that the inclusion in news coverage of election campaigns of women who are not campaigning to become political representatives is a consistent feature across time, and that the gendered character of depictions of wives and daughters of candidates communicates something significant about the ways media frame electoral politics. Interrogating the gendered implications of their inclusion is important, then, because although these women are not seeking political office for themselves, their mediated representation still contributes to gender-​biased newspaper coverage of elections, which reinforces the idea that political life is the domain of men.

19

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Chapter 5, the final empirical chapter, focuses on the mediated representation of women political party leaders over the course of five elections: 1979, 1983, 1987, 2015, and 2017. It first establishes what we already know about the mediated representation of women leaders. This is followed by the content analysis of news items about women leaders over time, which analyzes if and how they were evaluated, how frequently they were directly quoted, and how often coverage of them mentioned their appearance and family situation. The final section presents a qualitative analysis, which shows how news coverage of leaders is gendered by analyzing how their leadership is depicted as being important for women in general, the extent to which news coverage catches women leaders in gendered double binds, and finally how personalized coverage is problematic from a gendered perspective. There have been comparatively few women who have occupied the role of party leader during UK general elections, so it is difficult to judge if changes in the way they are reported are a consequence of journalists becoming used to the presence of women leaders, or whether changes stem from the specific political circumstances and leadership styles of individual women. To determine if party leaders are subjected to the same kinds of coverage as other women candidates, the content analysis results compare the coverage that leaders receive to that of their female colleagues during the same campaigns. The analysis overall, then, suggests that in general, news coverage of party leaders is less gendered than that of ordinary women politicians in quantitative terms. This suggests that while the presence of women in leadership roles normalizes their mediated contribution to politics, it does not significantly benefit other women politicians, throwing into doubt the idea that the increased presence of women in leadership positions might lead to a reduction of gendered tropes and stereotypes in the mediation of women in politics. The final concluding chapter compares the mediated representation of all four groups of women to draw out their similarities and differences. It will argue that the way women are represented in UK election news has consequences for the political representation of women. This chapter further argues that the evidence provided by this study means that accounting for gender should be a crucial concern for all researchers of electoral news, given how many of the features of the coverage can be partially explained by gendered mediation.

20

2

The Candidates: Making the House (of Commons) Their Home? After a long struggle, women got the right to vote in the aftermath of the First World War. The process of integrating them into political life, however, was not immediately straightforward. The Representation of the People Act 1918 enfranchised approximately seven million women over the age of thirty, or women over twenty-​one who were householders (or married to one). However, in an oversight that reveals much about the role women were still expected to play in British society, the legislation failed to address whether women would be allowed to stand for election to parliament (Cowman, 2010). This ambiguity gave long-​time campaigners for women’s political rights an opportunity. Several women, such as Christabel Pankhurst, forced the issue of women standing for election by submitting nomination papers regardless. Eventually, a bill was introduced to settle the matter, which resulted in the rushed Eligibility of Women Act 1918 (Beddoe, 1989) that allowed women to stand for election on equal terms with men. This new legislation, therefore, meant that women could be elected members of a parliament nine years before they were eligible to vote for it (Cowman, 2010), highlighting the absurdity of the rationale for denying women the right to vote as men did in the first place. Since the bill only became law three weeks before the election, women candidates had little time to find a seat, let alone one that was winnable. As a result, only one woman was elected in the 1918 general election. This was Constance Markievicz, who, as a Sinn Féin candidate, refused to take up her seat, and was also imprisoned at the time of her victory (Beddoe, 1989). The following year, Nancy Astor became the first woman to take up her seat in parliament when her husband was ennobled and she was elected in a by-​election in his former constituency. In 1924, Margaret Bondfield became the first woman member of the government as a parliamentary secretary at the Ministry of Labour, and she went on to become the first woman cabinet

21

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

minister in 1929 (Zweiniger-​Bargielowska, 2001). The British press took great interest in these early women parliamentarians, focusing primarily on their private lives and style of dress (Cowman, 2020). Astor famously adopted a plain and unembellished style to ward off undue media attention about her appearance (Thane, 2020). This early coverage established some traits that we are still living with in the twenty-​first century. This chapter analyzes how women politicians have been represented in news coverage of elections from these beginnings to the present day. The chapter firstly provides a brief overview of existing research into the representation of women candidates in political media. Then the chapter will set out the results from a content analysis of newspaper articles, tracking four key trends over time: 1) the extent to which women are quoted; 2) the policy issues with which women are most associated; 3) the proportion of items which explicitly evaluate women politicians negatively and positively; and 4) the extent to which coverage personalizes them by mentioning their appearance or familial situation. The second part of the analysis will examine the gendered nature of electoral coverage by presenting a qualitative analysis of three key areas: 1) how women are portrayed as representing other women; 2) the extent to which news coverage is sexist; and 3) the extent to which the personalized coverage that was measured quantitatively is explicitly gendered and/​or problematic.

Women, media, politics Research about the media coverage of women in politics is not in short supply. However, much of it focuses only on the period from the 1990s to the present. This neglect of elections prior to 1992 raises important questions about whether earlier representations were similar, or if substantial changes have taken place since women began participating in elections.

Quantity and types of coverage Research into the prominence of women in electoral coverage has indicated that there is a persistent gender gap in the visibility of politicians during and between elections (Kahn, 1994; Braden, 1996; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Heldman et al, 2005; Ette, 2017; Adcock, 2010; Ross et al, 2013; O’Neill et al, 2016). In the UK, Loughborough University’s audits of election studies, which have analyzed all general elections since 1992, show that women’s voices are consistently marginalized in favour of their male colleagues in press and broadcast coverage (Deacon et al, 2005). There is also evidence that this gender gap remains during elections that feature an array of women

22

THE CANDIDATES

party leaders. The 2017 campaign, which was contested by a female prime minister, resulted in women accounting for just 36.8 per cent of all individual politicians mentioned in online news (Harmer & Southern, 2018). In addition to being less visible in news coverage, women are typically given fewer opportunities –​and less time –​to speak in political news (Hooghe et al, 2015). For example, a study of televised debates in three Scandinavian countries found that male politicians were generally afforded more time to speak than women (Krogstad & Gomard, 2003). Semetko and Boomgaarden (2007) also report that women were much less likely to be quoted than men during the 2005 Bundestag elections in Germany. In the UK, women’s voices are often marginalized in press and broadcast coverage (Deacon et al, 2005; Harmer & Southern, 2018). Ross et al (2013) studied the 2010 election and found that not only did women feature in fewer news stories than men but that women were much more likely to be mentioned or quoted in feature articles focused explicitly on gender issues. There are, however, studies which differ; for example, in their comparative study of election coverage in the US, Canada, and Australia, Kittilson and Fridkin (2008) failed to find any significant gender differences in the amount and prominence of candidate coverage. However, most research –​especially into the UK context that is most relevant for this current study –​seems to suggest that these differences exist.

Issue stereotyping Research has shown that voters often associate women candidates with so-​called ‘soft’ or feminine policy areas, such as education and healthcare (Dolan, 2005; Dolan & Lynch, 2014). The evidence concerning whether this permeates mediated representations of women is mixed. Studies from the United States suggest this focus has an impact on the way women are reported on. Women are often included in news coverage discussing policy areas which emphasize caring roles, such as childcare and women’s rights (Herrnson et al, 2003). Kittilson and Fridkin (2008) found that not only did men receive more issue coverage in general but that stereotypically ‘male’ issues like foreign policy and the economy were more often reported on in relation to male candidates, while ‘female’ issues were more associated with women in the coverage. Press coverage of Ségolène Royal’s presidential campaign focused heavily on domestic and social policies (Murray, 2010). Similarly, Michelle Bachelet was also associated primarily with healthcare (Franceschet & Thomas, 2010). Conversely, others have found no relationship between gender and issue coverage. Wiliarty (2010) found that Angela Merkel established a reputation in more traditionally masculinized policy domains. News coverage of Margaret Thatcher similarly positioned

23

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

her as accomplished in foreign policy and economic issues during her time as prime minister (Nunn, 2002). Importantly, even though being associated with particularly gendered issues can be problematic for women candidates, Herrnson et al (2003) argue that there can also be positive consequences when a candidate attempts to appeal to a specific constituency of voters concerned about these issues. So far, there has been very little systematic work focused on this dimension of news coverage of UK politicians, which this analysis will address.

Tone of the coverage The presence of news frames highlighting female politicians’ gender has been well documented internationally (see Heldman et al, 2005; Campbell & Childs, 2010; Garcia-​Blanco & Wahl-​Jorgensen, 2012; Campus, 2013; Falk, 2013; Ross et al, 2013). How candidates negotiate these gendered expectations is the subject of much critical work. Jamieson (1995) documented the multiple ways in which gendered expectations trap women in double binds that are disadvantageous to their political representation. For example, the ‘competence/​femininity’ double bind, whereby in order to be considered good leaders, women must display masculine qualities, but in doing so they risk being deemed unwomanly, resulting in negative judgments in turn. Also, the ‘women/​brain’ double bind, whereby women’s emotions are thought to hinder their intellectual and leadership abilities –​for some, displaying emotion is incompatible with strong leadership; however, women who fail to be appropriately emotional are judged harshly for transgressing gender norms. Puwar (2004: 72–​3) similarly argues that women and minorities in politics are subject to ‘super surveillance’ due to a ‘reluctance to bestow authority on specific types of racialised and gendered bodies.’ A significant amount of current research emphasizes the extent to which women politicians are reported on in sexist or problematic ways (Carlin & Winfrey, 2009; Sheeler & Anderson, 2013). Indeed, stereotypes of women politicians are numerous. The tone of news coverage about women is also perceived to be very different from that about men (Ross, 2002). Studies show that women who confound the mediated ideals of femininity are represented harshly. Margaret Thatcher was labelled an unnatural woman when, as secretary of state for education, she withdrew the provision for free school milk for primary school children (Webster, 1990). She was quickly dubbed ‘the milk snatcher’, and press coverage of her was especially harsh because she contradicted the idea that women should be compassionate and nurturing. Similarly, in coverage of her senate campaigns, Hillary Clinton was portrayed as power driven and ambitious (Parry-​Giles, 2000). Framing female politicians in this way as ‘monsters or nonwomen’ (Ross, 2010: 106)

24

THE CANDIDATES

is symptomatic of the sexist (and sometimes misogynistic) framing of women in other media genres. Women politicians also believe that they are described in highly emotional terms which set them apart from their male colleagues (Ross, 2002). Childs’ (2008: 158) studied press coverage of MP Clare Short’s resignation, and showed that she was described as ‘bossy and mouthy –​all heart and emotion’ and ‘a moody and brooding woman’ among other things. Another common stereotype employed in coverage of women politicians is the propensity to associate them with political change or renewal, which unduly emphasizes their position as political outsiders (Murray, 2010). Norris (1997), for example, compared news coverage of female leaders from different countries and found that they were framed as breaking through social barriers. Moreover, their rise to power was framed as unexpected, and their political experience was downplayed. Women are also often framed as agents of change with the potential to alter the way politics is conducted. Adcock (2010) reported this framing in her study of British press coverage of the 1997 general election, arguing that the press focused on the record number of women candidates who were standing for election. Left-​wing newspapers tended to present these women as a positive force for change, while more conservative titles portrayed them as ‘the embodiment of an inexperienced, ruthlessly disciplined or slavishly loyal type of politician’ (Adcock, 2010: 145). This example neatly captures the risk for women candidates, because it shows that they are required to appear as tough, experienced, and assertive as their male colleagues in order to be considered effective politicians, but they are simultaneously required to make politics a less confrontational and more collaborative process (Ross, 2002). This can mean that a failure to demonstrate a gentler politics can lead to negative coverage. A study of two female candidates in New York state primaries in 1992 found that both were reported as being party to a bitter and cynical campaign which produced a high volume of media attention (Braden, 1996). Braden argues that much of the coverage took for granted the fact that male politicians would conduct controversial and personalized campaigns, but the involvement of women generated significant media discussion about whether it was appropriate or not to expect women candidates to behave in the same manner (Braden, 1996). Gidengil and Everitt’s (2003) analysis of how the direct speech of female candidates was mediated during two Canadian elections (1993 and 1997) also reveals that women were reported on in more hostile and aggressive language when they behaved similarly to their male opponents, but were ignored when they were non-​confrontational. Ward’s (2017) intersectional study of UK election news highlights that these expectations can be incredibly difficult for women of colour. She argues that in 2010, despite headlines celebrating

25

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

the possibility of the most diverse parliament ever, Black, Asian, and other minority female candidates were subjected to particular scrutiny regarding their credentials and ability to transform politics. Her findings showed that the perceived newsworthiness of these women’s genders and ethnicities meant that, while they enjoyed a visibility advantage compared with white female candidates, their coverage was also exceptionally negative and narrowly focused on their identities. Ross (2002) argues that women politicians and candidates are thus required to ‘square an impossible circle, to be morally superior to their male colleagues, but also to … be both as rough, tough and aggressive as men, but to also make politics a more conciliatory and “nicer” process at the same time’ (Ross, 2002: 152).

Personalization The extent to which electoral coverage has become more personalized is the subject of a significant body of work (see Kriesi, 2011; Langer, 2012; Van Aelst et al, 2012; Deacon & Harmer, 2019). However, the gendered nature of such trends tends to be confined to studies which centre on the representation of women candidates. Notable exceptions include Trimble et al (2013), who argue that personalization and gendered mediation are inextricably connected. Their study of Canadian leadership election coverage measured the presence of gender markers such as ‘man’ and ‘woman’, references to age, physical appearance, sexuality, upbringing, marital situation, and children. They found that coverage of women was more likely to be personalized. They even argue that their results suggest that gendered mediation drives the overall increase in personalized coverage in Canada.

Appearance Personalized coverage manifests in particular ways for women politicians. Perhaps the most ubiquitous way is the amount of attention that is paid to women’s physical appearance (Carroll & Schreiber, 1997; Ross, 2002; Conroy et al, 2015). There is a notable volume of evidence that suggests a focus on the appearance of women politicians is an international phenomenon. Lawrence and Rose (2010) noted that Hillary Clinton’s first attempt to gain the Democratic nomination in 2008 featured a good deal of coverage which deconstructed and mocked her haircut and her fashion sense. Similarly, Hinojosa (2010) argued that Venezuelan presidential candidate Irene Sáez was subjected to a myriad of commentaries about her hairstyle, body weight, and clothing choices. New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark also received much attention regarding her appearance in the five election campaigns she fought as leader of the New Zealand Labour Party

26

THE CANDIDATES

between 1996 and 2008 (Trimble & Treiberg, 2010). Garcia-​Blanco and Wahl-​Jorgensen (2012) analyzed the construction of women politicians in newspapers across four European countries (France, Spain, Italy, and the UK). They noted that while issues of sartorial style or appearance featured in all countries, the UK newspapers were much more likely to discuss the appearance of women politicians. This is borne out by women’s observations about their own experience, since female politicians themselves also argue that their outward appearance dominates any media coverage they receive to the detriment of their substantive political messages. Ross’s (2002) study compared the experiences of female politicians from the UK, Australia, and South Africa. Most of the women highlighted how evaluations of their appearance were linked to their political performance. One participant recounted appearing in a women’s magazine wearing a red dress and feather boa to humanize herself and being immediately castigated by the press for trivializing politics and for her lack of political judgement (Ross, 2002). While historical research into this area is rare, Pederson’s work (2016) indicates that reporting on the appearance of women is an enduring phenomenon. Many women’s suffrage campaigners, in fact, sought to highlight their appearance to present themselves as respectable feminine individuals, in order to combat popular notions that only ‘unnatural’ women or ‘ugly harridans’ would demand political rights. Cowman (2020) also demonstrates that early women MPs were subjected to news coverage that took an undue amount of interest in their appearance and clothing choices. In the United States, Falk (2013) studied the campaigns of all the women to run for president, and observed that media coverage mentioning their appearance was a feature of all campaigns dating back to the first candidate, Victoria Woodhull of the Equal Rights Party, in 1872. Scholars have also discussed the ways that women politicians have utilized their image in an attempt to manage perceptions about their credibility and suitability. Margaret Thatcher famously went from wearing traditional hats to wearing designer clothing to improve her image (Webster, 1990). Other politicians have also made use of their physical appearance for political purposes. Yulia Tymoshenko, former Ukrainian prime minister, used clever sartorial choices for political purposes, blending traditional elements (such as an embroidered shawl) with more cosmopolitan clothing to connote a traditional yet sophisticated vision of post-​Soviet nationalism (Zhurzkenko, 2014). Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon’s image altered dramatically between 2004, when she first participated in the leadership contest for her party, and 2014, when she became first minister. Later coverage presented her in domesticated and feminine ways, including a sustained focus on her appearance (Higgins & McKay, 2016).

27

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

This tendency to concentrate on the physical appearance of female politicians reflects the way that women are generally represented in mainstream media as sexualized objects. Gill (2007) argues that there is nothing incidental about these sexualized representations of women that appear daily in the news: they are part of an operation of power which trivializes the perspectives of women and serves to ‘keep them in their place’. Objectifying women in this fashion presents them as passive objects rather than as active subjects capable of thoughtful and worthwhile opinions on higher political matters.

Family life Studies also indicate that women receive more coverage about their private lives than male candidates (Carroll & Schreiber, 1997; Trimble et al, 2013). Garcia-​Blanco and Wahl-​Jorgensen (2012) analyze coverage of women in the UK, Spain, Italy, and France, and find that women are often framed as mothers, with this personal framing often overshadowing their political contribution. Van Zoonen (2000) compared the portrayal of family pressures on Dutch male and female politicians in magazines. The men were presented as performing their political duties while their devoted families sacrificed their time with them for their career. Conversely, female politicians’ families were presented as suffering from their absence. Women politicians also stress the extent to which their age and family arrangements are cited in news coverage, despite it having little to no bearing on their professional role. They also argue that their male counterparts are never asked about their childcare arrangements (Ross, 2002). So, while male politicians may use their image and family life to humanize themselves, this is more difficult for women. Emphasizing one’s private life highlights the tension between participating in the masculinized public sphere and women’s traditional roles in the feminized private realm (van Zoonen, 2006). This form of personalized coverage therefore contributes to the ‘othering’ of women in politics, and emphasizes the ‘notion of woman as out of place and unnatural in the public sphere’ (Falk, 2010: 37). Some studies suggest that differences in press treatment for men and women candidates may have become less significant over time (Bystrom et al, 2001; Jalalzai 2006). However, Williams (2020) compared coverage of Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May’s first three weeks as prime minister and found that, contrary to expectations, not only was there more attention given to May’s gender than to Thatcher’s but the coverage was also more detailed and elaborate, particularly in the conservative press. Similarly, research into coverage of women MPs in UK newspapers from 1992–​2012 found that women received more negative press compared to men, as well as compared

28

THE CANDIDATES

to previous decades (O’Neill & Savigny, 2014). These studies suggest that such trends are not stable and may in fact be increasing. If we are to avoid the rather lazy assumption that things must be getting better for women in our society, more historical research is needed to place newer elections (and these assumptions) into context, as this example so clearly highlights. There is, therefore, an established body of scholarship showing that news coverage of politics is heavily gendered and that this is problematic for women politicians. Nevertheless, some gaps in our knowledge remain. The greater part of this research about the mediated representation of women politicians almost exclusively concerns contemporary women. Since most of this literature was produced during the past three decades, this means there is a lack of scholarship which places the gendered mediation of women politicians into historical context. The rest of this chapter, then, will attempt to begin to redress that imbalance, and will show how gendered coverage developed over time.

Changes and continuities over time In this section, the results from the content analysis of newspaper articles are presented. First, the extent to which women are given a voice in news coverage over time will be discussed. This is followed by an analysis of the policy issues with which women are most associated. Next, the analysis shows the extent to which women politicians are evaluated negatively and positively. Finally, we will look at how the sampled news coverage was personalized in terms of a focus on women’s appearance and familial roles.

Marginal voices Research suggests that women are marginalized in election coverage compared to their male counterparts (Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007; Harmer & Southern, 2018). This study does not compare women’s representation with men, but there is nevertheless a meaningful way to measure the extent to which women are given a voice in the coverage. Figure 2.1 shows the proportion of news items about women politicians which quote them directly. During the interwar period, women politicians were not quoted directly in most items. In fact, fewer than 30 per cent of the items included direct quotations by them during this period. There was a considerable increase in women’s voices being heard at first hand in the immediate post-​war period. However, the proportion of items wherein women are quoted then started to decline again from the late 1970s until the early 2000s. The percentage

29

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.1: Percentage of items about politicians which quoted politicians directly 1918–​2017 60

50

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

40

30

30

20

10

0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Quoted (%) 23.1 13.2 23.3 29.1 24 11.9 16.9 23.8 56.6 43.6 46.1 43 48.5 39.3 33.3 54.8 42.9 35.6 34.5 29.7 24.1 28 28.8 35.3 23.5 44.6 49.2

THE CANDIDATES

then increased again in the 2015 and 2017 elections. It is striking that, except for two election campaigns, women were quoted in fewer than half of the news items in which they appeared. This suggests that they were not the focus of many of the news stories in which they were included, and were, for the most part, marginal figures in election news.

Issue focus Previous research has indicated that women candidates are often associated with traditionally ‘feminine’ policy areas, such as childcare and education (Herrnson et al, 2003). Significantly, the content analysis of these articles reveals that a large volume of items did not mention policy at all. Just 32.4 per cent of items about women politicians featured any mention of policy, and the remaining items focused on the electoral process. Figure 2.2 shows the proportion of items which include policy coverage in each campaign. These results show that much of the news which features women is not policy focused. At least one third of all news items about women in each election do not contain substantive policy discussion. Deacon and Harmer (2019) studied twelve elections between 1918 and 2015, and found that process news typically accounted for 30 to 40 per cent of all newspaper coverage. Although these data are not strictly comparable, the results in Figure 2.2 provide some indication that news coverage of women contains fewer explicit references to policy than general coverage, which is dominated by men. The content analysis demonstrates that women politicians have historically been most associated with the economy, followed by international affairs, health and welfare, and employment. The prominence of health and welfare and education among these top four themes provides some support for the claim that women politicians are stereotyped as being most concerned about policy areas which pertain to caring responsibilities. However, the remaining themes –​including the top two –​imply that when placed into historical context, women politicians are depicted as addressing a range of policy areas. These four themes account for 79.6 per cent of all policy themes discussed in the news items between 1918 and 2017. Figure 2.3 shows the prominence of the four main themes that women were associated with over time. The dominance of themes such as the economy and international affairs shows that issue coverage in the UK context is hardly ever gendered in quantitative terms. The results reveal that the economy tended to be the dominant policy area discussed in items about women politicians during both the interwar period and the immediate post-​war period. It was also the dominant issue throughout the 1970s. While health and welfare issues

31

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.2: Proportion of items about politicians which discuss policy 1918–​2017 90 80 70

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

60 50 40

32 30 20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Policy (%) 51.3 41.5 51.2 50.9 52 44.1 49.3 28.6 56.6 51.3 63.2 39.7 65.7 42.9 57.1 58.1 80.5 62.4 52.7 54.1 48.3 36 32.9 47.1 38.8 35.7 42.8

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.3: Four main policy themes for politicians 1918–​2017 80 70 60 50

THE CANDIDATES

40 30

33

20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

International affairs (%) 16.7 14.3 Employment (%) Health and welfare (%) Economy (%)

0

8.3 14.3 16.7 0

0

0

40 16.7

0

22.2

0

5

19.1 21.9 31.6 16.7 44.4 11.8 9.1

0

0

10

9.5

6.3 10.5 5.6

11.1 28.6 44.5 33.3 20

4.7

6.3 15.8 33.3 11.1 5.9

0

22.2 28.6

0

16.7 42.8 66.7 20

0

42.8 22.2 33.3 30 33.3 50 21.1 5.6

0 0

7.4

3.3 50.7 32.3 16.7 41.7 40

50

0

2.7

10

0

10

0

0

18.5 15.2 5.8 21.5 11.1 16.7 20

0

50

7.1

6.4

0

0

3.6

5.7

17.6 18.2 7.4 15.2 14.5 9.2 11.1 0

0

29.4 36.4 24.1 33.7 18.8 16.9 11.1 8.3

10

5.7

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

became more prominent over time, there is very little evidence to support the idea that women are mostly associated with gendered issues in UK election campaigns. On the other hand, women not being associated with obviously gendered policy areas does not necessarily mean that there is no problematic difference in the way that those women are subsequently represented as compared to men. This will be further discussed in qualitative terms later in the chapter.

Evaluative coverage Many scholars have pointed out that the tone of news coverage can be extremely gendered. One way of measuring this is through an analysis of whether politicians are explicitly evaluated in the coverage that they receive. Figure 2.4 shows the proportion of items about them which evaluate politicians in positive or negative terms. Neutral responses are not included here. The results demonstrate clearly that positive evaluations of women politicians have declined over time. Negative coverage has conversely increased, particularly from 1974 onwards. During the interwar and immediate post-​war periods, the proportion of items which evaluated them negatively in each campaign was very low, only rising above 10 per cent of items in four out of fifteen elections between 1918 and February 1974. In contrast, positive evaluations were typical, particularly during the interwar years, when there were far fewer women candidates. After February 1974, there is a noticeable increase in negative evaluations that endures to the present day. A number of factors coalesce to explain the dramatic fall in positive evaluations and increase in negative coverage. These data corroborate other research that shows an increase in negative commentary about politicians generally and a decline in deference over time (Conboy, 2004; Curran & Seaton, 2010; Deacon & Harmer, 2019). The extent to which the gender of the candidates contributes to these trends cannot be established with the data from this content analysis; however, this issue will be explored qualitatively later in this chapter.

Personalization Personalization of news coverage was measured by counting how many news items referred to the appearance or familial situation of women candidates. Items which include references to the physical appearance, clothing, and family situation of women candidates are a constant presence in election news, but there is some variation over time, as shown in Figures 2.5 and 2.6.

34

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.4: Percentage of items which evaluated politicians 1918–​2017 50 45 40 35

25

35 20 15 10 5 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017 Negative evaluations (%) 7.7 0 10.5 12.7 5.3 6.8 9.9 4.8 3.8 6.4 11.8 11 5.7 3.6 2.4 3.2 19.5 18.3 28.1 39.2 25.9 38 35.6 29.4 35 37.5 40.7 Positive evaluations (%) 38.5 45.3 29.1 36.4 29.3 25.4 12.7 21.4 32.1 14.1 15.8 21.9 5.7 28.6 21.4 16.1 7.8 20.8 17.7 21.6 5.2 2 10.9 2 0 7.1 15.7

THE CANDIDATES

30

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.5: Percentage of items which refer to the appearance of politicians 1918–​2017 35

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

30 25 20

36 15 10 5 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Appearance (%) 7.7 5.7 10.5

0

1.3

0

5.6

0

16.9 10.3 6.6 15.1 11.4 25 14.3 29.1 14.3 6.4 7.4 7.4 6.9

8

13.7 7.8 27.5 16.1 12.1

newgenrtpdf

Figure 2.6: Percentage of items which refer to the family life of politicians 1918–​2017 35 30

THE CANDIDATES

25 20

37 15 10 5 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Family mentioned (%) 15.4 5.7 12.8 3.6 10.7 6.8

9.9 16.7 15.1 15.4 6.6 13.7 14.3 32.1 14.3 16.1 13

9.4

7.4

8.1

8.6

4

4

9.8 19.2

8

6.4

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

The existing literature about media coverage of women politicians, which is primarily focused on the 1990s onwards, consistently highlights a strong tendency to refer to the physical appearance and clothing choices of women in political coverage (Ross, 2002). Figure 2.5 confirms that journalists have always commented on the physical appearance of women politicians. However, the proportion of news items which refer to the physical appearance of politicians varies considerably over time. For instance, these references are relatively rare during the interwar years, while no items mentioned their appearance in 1924 or 1931. The tendency to mention their appearance increases during the 1950s and ’60s, but decreases again after October 1974. These references then peak again in 2010 and remain relatively high throughout the next two campaigns, suggesting that interest in fashion and appearance has rebounded in recent elections. While there is considerable fluctuation over the years, the persistence of references to the appearance of politicians when it has no bearing on their politics is nevertheless striking. The character of these references to their appearance will be further explored in qualitative terms later in the chapter. In contrast, the proportion of news items referring to the familial relationships of women politicians is much more consistent. While there is a noticeable outlier in the coverage of the 1966 campaign, when 32.1 per cent of items mention the family situation of women politicians, such references are mostly consistent across the whole sample period. They are also relatively infrequent, tending to appear in between 4 and 15 per cent of news items. This suggests both something intriguing about the 1966 election and that, while references to the domestic arrangements of women politicians have always been present, this aspect of their private lives has never been considered especially newsworthy. This contrasts with some of the studies mentioned earlier in this chapter, which suggested that many women politicians are depicted as mothers struggling to juggle family life and politics (see van Zoonen, 2000; Garcia-​Blanco & Wahl-​Jogensen, 2012). There is a line to be walked here, then, since despite their relative scarcity, the presence of references to women’s familial responsibilities remains a gendered phenomenon. This will be explored in more depth by analyzing the tone of this coverage later in the chapter. In terms of the fundamental question of who gets to speak, the content analysis offers a decidedly mixed picture. Out of twenty-​seven elections studied, women politicians were directly quoted in at least half of news items in only two of them, meaning that they were more often spoken about in news coverage than quoted. The extent to which they were quoted fluctuates over time and is somewhat cyclical, with the inclusion of women’s voices increasing and declining over the decades. Women tended to be portrayed in relation to similar issues over time. Contrary to some of the academic

38

THE CANDIDATES

literature, the content analysis does not show much evidence that women politicians are more associated with feminine policy areas such as healthcare and education. However, the extent to which women politicians were the subject of evaluative coverage shifted dramatically over time. In the early elections, it was common for them to be portrayed in a favourable light. The proportion of items evaluating them positively, as we have seen, significantly declines over time. In contrast, negative coverage was rare in the earlier elections but became increasingly common in the later years, especially from the late 1970s onwards. The content analysis also revealed that mentions of their appearance and domestic situations were a persistent feature of the coverage, even if there is some change over time. These findings support the idea that news coverage of elections marginalizes and ‘others’ women politicians insofar as they are rarely quoted directly, coverage of them has become increasingly negative, and their appearance and family lives are the subjects of scrutiny. However, as previous scholarship has indicated, to determine how far news coverage is gendered we need to examine the tone of the coverage as well. The next section will explore this in more detail.

Gendered representatives Research into news coverage of women politicians has shown that gender is central to the mediation of politics. This section highlights three persistent examples of gendered news coverage. First, the analysis will show how election coverage is gendered by discussing how female politicians are repeatedly portrayed as women whose presence is essential for the representation of other women. Secondly, the chapter analyzes the sexist nature of much of the coverage. Finally, the analysis will show how personalization of election coverage can be gendered in ways which disadvantage women politicians.

Representing women From the outset, women politicians were portrayed as important because they could better represent women voters and their concerns. The Daily Herald argued that ‘the standpoint of women would be better expressed through women members than through the most sympathetic male representative’ (Daily Herald, 1922a: 4). This logic, that suggested women had common concerns which would be best looked after by women members of parliament, was pervasive throughout early newspaper coverage. For example, the Daily Mail stated that ‘only a woman can really know and understand the problems which face women in the home’ (Daily Mail, 1935b: 12), and

39

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

that male representatives ‘cannot achieve half so much effect as this kindly woman can chatting with the womenfolk on the doorsteps and in the kitchens of cottages about things which seriously affect women’ (Daily Mail, 1935b: 12). The perhaps inevitable upshot of this framing is that women candidates in this early period were portrayed in domestic terms. Labour candidate Jenny Adamson ‘won the support of hundreds of women by her exposure of the increase in malnutrition and maternal mortality during the lifetime of the ‘National’ Government’ (Daily Herald, 1935: 15). Susan Lawrence also targeted women by ‘addressing short meetings in practically every residential street, summoning the housewives from their work with a ringing bell’ (Daily Telegraph, 1922c: 9). These methods of campaigning directly with their female constituents were commonplace among women candidates. Wring (2005) describes Jessie Steven using similar methods to campaign to working-​class women in Wakefield during the 1922 election. These highly domesticated interventions were generally described in favourable terms by journalists. These representations, therefore, explicitly highlight the women’s gender identity, positioning these candidates and representatives as women above and beyond all other identities. Far from being confined to the first few decades of the twentieth century, this trend has been noted in more contemporary studies (Ross, 2002). In contrast, post-​war coverage of women candidates was much more likely to recognize their involvement in broader political affairs. For example, former civil servant and Conservative candidate Marjorie Graves was thought to be ‘almost certainly destined for Ministerial office at no distant date if she can again add MP to her name. She has had great experience in foreign affairs, having been at one time at the Foreign Office’ (Daily Mail, 1935d: 7). Similarly, in 1955 Barbara Castle was reported as criticizing the Conservatives policy concerning the textile industry –​‘For twelve months Labour has challenged the Government about the cotton industries future’ (Daily Mirror, 1955: 11) –​demonstrating that women candidates concerned themselves with a wide range of policy issues. However, even though the coverage began to recognize a broader role for women, the newspapers continued to portray their being representatives for women as an important part of that role. During the 1945 election, Edith Summerskill was quoted saying that ‘Labour will work especially hard for the care of Britain’s mothers and their children –​children’s allowances and school medical and feeding services, better maternity and child welfare benefits’ (Daily Herald, 1945: 1). Similarly, during the 1979 general election, the Sun reported that prime minister Jim Callaghan ‘backed up his message by producing two housewives who claimed Tory spending cuts would damage family life’ (McHugh, 1979: 7). These so-​called housewives were then introduced as Labour candidates

40

THE CANDIDATES

‘Pat Hollis, who is standing in Great Yarmouth’ and ‘Anne Davies, Labour candidate for Bromsgrove and Redditch’. The decision to label female candidates as housewives (rather than political activists) renders their political experience invisible, demoting them from candidates to merely the prime minister’s helpers. Such examples of women candidates being framed as representatives for women voters were common. For example: ‘Shirley Williams knows exactly who her floating voter is –​a woman living in rural Hertfordshire, looking for a champion on the prices issue’ (Southworth, 1974: 9). Similarly: ‘Mrs Greenaway is concentrating on door-​to-​door canvassing and the home. She is well equipped to answer any housewife’s or mother’s problem with five children of her own’ (Daily Telegraph, 1964a: 13). One consequence of the emphasis on women candidates as being specifically women’s representatives is that the news coverage tended to present them alongside stereotypes of the home. This domestication is captured neatly in the language used to describe them. For example, during the 1974 October election, Margaret Thatcher was said to have ‘been chosen to present the real goodies in the campaign tuck box’ (Bevins, 1974: 7) when she introduced an affordable ‘9 ½ per cent mortgage rate’ (Lancaster, 1974: 16–​17). The Daily Mirror went on to proclaim that this policy was ‘the political equivalent of a supermarket’s loss leader’ (Lancaster, 1974: 16–​7). The first example alludes to a schoolmistress or matron figure distributing sweets to grateful children. The second refers to supermarket consumption. Both examples borrow from activities traditionally performed by women, thereby reinforcing the idea that their primary function in the political sphere is to represent women and their experiences. These representations were commonplace during the post-​war years. Grace Colman was described in the following way: ‘Once a college lecturer, she has a sobering, sixth-​form mistress air about her, and maintains strict discipline in her classes –​I beg her pardon, meetings’ (Churchill, 1951: 7). In the same news item, an opposing candidate, Irene Ward, reportedly ‘exudes a cosy feeling of “home to mum for fun and hot crumpets” ’ (Churchill, 1951: 7). Margaret Thatcher’s 1979 election campaign was depicted in similarly gendered terms. The Daily Mirror suggested that Thatcher ‘travelled 3000 miles on a calf-​cuddling, tea-​tasting, supermarket-​shopping, broom-​ sweeping substitute for a political campaign’ (Lancaster, 1979: 1–​2). The emphasis on caring, shopping, and cleaning here reinforce stereotypes about women politicians’ role in the public sphere, even when the woman in question could become prime minister. Female candidates have also uses gendered rhetoric to their own advantage, by including it in their remarks. Ann Spokes was directly quoted during the 1966 election saying: ‘Wilson window dressing is cleverly designed, but there is nothing in the shop except empty shelves lined with white

41

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

papers and a shop soiled scheme for Nationalisation they’ve tried to flog at every bargain sale but which nobody will buy’ (The Sun, 1966a: 4). This consumption metaphor for Harold Wilson’s economic policy reinforced women’s relationship to the domestic sphere and was designed to appeal directly to women voters concerned about prices, an essential strategy for the Conservatives in the post-​war period (Reeves, 2019). The propensity to highlight women candidates as being specifically crucial for women voters drops off during the later years of the century and into the next, signalling a shift in the popular imagination about the role of women in politics. In addition to focusing on the role of women candidates as representatives for women voters, there were many news items which attempted to quantify the number of women candidates standing in the election. There was also substantial discussion about possible explanations for the lack of women candidates being elected to parliament. The Daily Mirror noted that ‘only 23 women were elected to Parliament in February –​the lowest total since the election of 1951’ (Daily Mirror, 1974b: 17). In 1935, the Daily Mirror claimed that ‘many people who might have voted to get women into parliament remember the rascality of the suffragettes in their campaign of violence. That alienated all who had hoped for the enfranchisement of the sex miscalled “gentle”. As a result we have few women in parliament today’ (Daily Mirror, 1935b: 11). This explanation blames women for their under-​ representation. The cause, according to this journalist, was women’s rights activists’ alienation of otherwise sympathetic voters when they used direct action. Of course, this is ignoring the structural inequalities involved in the selection process for a parliamentary seat. Nevertheless, the Daily Telegraph agreed that women were responsible for their own lack of numbers, claiming that ‘women, first admitted to the House of Commons in 1918, still show little eagerness for membership. At this election the number of women candidates, though a record, is no more than 125’ (Daily Telegraph, 1950a: 4). The responsibility for women being under-​represented is placed firmly on their own unwillingness to come forward or their perceived untrustworthy behaviour, rather than on the many barriers women face in being selected and elected to parliamentary seats. Even record-​setting attempts at participation were not good enough for the Telegraph, it seems. The Guardian challenged this perception in 1924 by pointing out that ‘strong complaints have been made by women’s non-​party organisations that the women candidates adopted had not been given a fair chance. They had been put up, as a rule, to fight constituencies where the odds were against them’ (The Guardian, 1924b: 8). This very early intervention reflects what later research would confirm, namely that there were structural barriers that prevented women being selected in winnable seats (Childs, 2004). The Sun later claimed that

42

THE CANDIDATES

neither lack of suitable women nor Parliamentary timetables are to blame for the shortage of women candidates. I have attended several selection conferences, only to be told confidentially that any woman has to be twice as good as any man to be selected. Many believe in the culturally nurtured myth that a woman candidate loses 100 votes before she starts. (Miller, 1966: 4) By 1987 there was some suggestion that attitudes had changed. The Guardian claimed that in the past few years there has been a change of attitude in the selection committees of all parties. They have been more prepared to pick women not only in the hopeless seats, where most have languished in the past, but in seats that a party already holds or in marginals. (Linton, 1987: 6) Even though women improved their numerical representation in parliament during the 1990s, there were concerns that ‘despite a record number of women candidates, males in grey suits have dominated national platforms and the media buses following the main candidates’ (The Guardian, 1997: 18). This suggests that politics was still being constructed in gendered terms. Indeed, one might consider the negative press attention given the Labour Party adoption of all-​women shortlists in some constituencies. The record number of Labour women MPs who were elected as a result were quickly dubbed the ‘Blair Babes’ after they were photographed together with their party leader. Adcock (2010) notes that these women candidates were much discussed in the press as an important and potentially transformative addition to public life. After their election, however, the use of all-​women shortlists led to allegations those who were elected were inferior members (Cowley & Childs, 2003). A similar fate awaited the Conservative Party’s A-​list candidates (women and historically underrepresented groups) who were quickly labelled ‘Cameron’s cuties’ and ‘Dave’s dolls’ (Platell, 2010: 58). The word ‘dolls’ is particularly pertinent here, as it compares them to toys that are inanimate and subject to manipulation. Several stories appeared which referred to the ‘cuties’ perceived inexperience and political indiscretions. Amanda Platell, in the Daily Mail, questioned whether these women had ‘really got what it takes to transform politics’, and dismissed them as being chosen ‘because they are women and they know nothing about politics’ (Platell, 2010: 58) in order to allow Cameron to propagate the message that his party has modernized. They were, in effect, completely trivialized. These examples show that, even now, women candidates continue to receive sexist treatment from the press, which harms them in their role as

43

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

political representatives. Despite the passage of time, women politicians continue to have their gendered identities actively associated with their political activism, and their presence in electoral politics is tolerated on this basis. It seems, then, that throughout the period in which women have been able to stand for election, they have always been positioned as women first, and politicians second.

Negotiating sexism One consistent feature of the press coverage was the amount of sexism that women politicians experienced. In the early elections, the newspapers captured resistance to the political changes that had taken place in order to allow women to vote and stand for election. The Daily Mail declared in 1923 that ‘it is twice as easy to be a man candidate as to be a woman candidate’ (Daily Mail, 1923c: 9). The article then related a story about how when a woman candidate dared to mention as one of the planks of her platform such homely things as the improvement of the kitchen sink and the determination to secure a purer milk supply, a garrulous old Rip Van Winkle in the front seat got up and said, ‘but you must talk about Free Trade and Home Rule for Ireland. I’ve been voting since 1878 and I’ve never before heard such things as you mention at a political meeting.’ (Bell, 1918: 4) This male voter’s bewilderment that domestic issues were important in an electoral context shows how women’s experiences and priorities existed outside the political realm prior to women’s suffrage. The voter’s insistence that the candidate addresses his concerns instead trivializes domestic issues and literally positions them as an unwelcome intrusion into the political sphere. Significantly, however, the newspaper’s treatment of this man’s objections shows some sympathy for the inclusion of women by ridiculing his old-​ fashioned perspective. Even the conservative press, hostile to the idea of votes for women for so long, could see which way the wind was blowing. There were also reports of women being treated in sexist ways by male opponents. At one of Ray (Rachel) Strachey’s meetings in 1918, one of her opponents ‘declared that Mrs Strachey should stay at home and mind her children’ (Daily Mail, 1918d: 6) rather than seek to be a member of parliament. The Guardian reported the same incident, stating that ‘her retort was logical: “it is to look after my children that I want to go to Westminster” ’ (The Guardian, 1918c: 6). The reporting of these openly sexist remarks from her opponents shows that there was resistance to the introduction of women from male candidates. Crucially, reporting on these incidents gives journalists

44

THE CANDIDATES

distance from such sexist sentiments. They can present them as the views of others which they have just reproduced, rather than as views explicitly supported by their publication. This was evident in an item about Helen Gwynne-​Vaughan when it was suggested that ‘the manner in which she is breaking down the prejudice against the candidature of women is little short of marvellous’ (Daily Telegraph, 1922b: 14). Once again, the prejudice she experienced was carefully constructed as external rather than one shared by the newspaper. In 1935, the Guardian declared that such prejudice was no longer a factor, claiming that ‘they had in the Labour Party many women who were high above the average ability of Members of Parliament. They had lived down sex prejudice, and there were definite reasons for altering the old point of view about women in public life’ (The Guardian, 1935b: 13). This sentiment was echoed by the Daily Mail, which commented that ‘the interesting thing about this election … is that for the first time women candidates are being received by their constituencies on exactly the same terms as men’ (Daily Mail, 1935c: 7). This coverage paints an optimistic picture of women being accepted as legitimate political representatives during the first few decades of their inclusion. Unsurprisingly, however, the evidence of prejudice against women as politicians persists after the war. Sexism during this later period, however, was almost always evident in the tone of newspaper coverage. Rather than distancing themselves from sexist attitudes by attributing them to someone else, journalists’ descriptions of and commentary about women became more overtly problematic. Examples of this take several different forms. One common feature included using the term ‘girl’ to describe parliamentary candidates. One journalist claimed that ‘the girls, Anne Mallalieu and Helene Middleweek, were as articulate as they were attractive’ (Mount, 1974: 9). This reference to their youth and physical attractiveness trivializes their political role at the expense of their femininity. It also infantilizes them by describing them as children. Still more explicit references include ‘Tory ex-​pin-​up girl, Pat Hornsby-​Smith’ (Daily Herald, 1950a: 4) and ‘a left-​wing Labour dolly bird candidate who preaches the virtues of nationalisation’ (Daily Telegraph, 1974b: 9). The same sexist tone is also evident when the Daily Mail stated that ‘Diane Abbott is being a good girl’ (Johnson, 1987a: 6) by not causing controversy for the Labour Party during the 1987 election. These modes of representation minimize the candidates, ensuring that their political messages are secondary to their gender. They also reinforce the impression that women are outsiders, or minimal players, in the political sphere. Women’s conduct during campaigns was also subjected to sexist representation. For example, Clare Short was described in very emotional terms: ‘Rightwingers, led by campaign chief Peter Mandelson, are worried

45

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

about her outbursts on legalising cannabis, scrapping Trident and raising taxes’ (Daily Mail, 1997: 12). Depicting Short’s expression of her political views as ‘outbursts’ implies that her views on these policy areas are illegitimate, since they are borne of emotion and are not the views of a rational actor. The implication here is that since she cannot control herself, in contrast to more rational and deliberative ideas about the conduct of politics, her views have no merit. Childs (2008) noted similar patterns of emotional adjective usage during the news coverage of Estelle Morris and Clare Shorts’ resignations in 2002 and 2003, respectively. Moreover, Ross (2002) notes that women parliamentarians in Britain, Australia, and South Africa reported that their actions were often described in highly emotional terms. As time goes on, there has also been an increase in openly misogynistic language aimed at politicians. Margaret Thatcher was dismissed early on as ‘seem[ing] to have little to offer but a charming taste in hats’ (Levin, 1970: 8). Once again, a woman candidate is downplayed by drawing attention to her style, implying that this is all women have to offer. Shirley Williams was the subject of extremely misogynistic coverage during the 1983 election. It was the first election in which she (along with three male politicians) broke away from the Labour Party and formed the Social Democratic Party. They contested the election in alliance with the Liberal Party. The Sun lambasted her for her efforts to use ‘charm and sweet reason, denouncing Labour’s wild men. She is the image of modernisation, a by-​word for commonsense’, while ‘the trouble is that the little angel has a shady, scarlet past’ (The Sun, 1983: 6). This article appeared on the same page as a cartoon which depicted Williams first in a sexual embrace with James Callaghan and Harold Wilson under the caption ‘past’, and then in a similar position with Roy Jenkins and David Owen in a box labelled ‘present’. The article further stated that her ‘love affair with Labour was no passing fling. She was a member of the party for more than 30 years’ (The Sun, 1983: 6). This mode of representation frames Williams’ political allegiances as being akin to sexual relationships. The image recalls the threatening nature of women’s untamed sexuality and is intended to discredit her politics. Interestingly, the male politicians in this scenario receive no such censure in the article, which concentrated purely on Williams and her perceived defects. Misogynistic language was also used to target other women politicians for their political views. The Daily Mail described several Labour candidates as ‘screaming, spitting lesbians and sex perverts who want to turn Britain’s classrooms into indoctrination centres’ (Johnson, 1987a: 6). The instigation for this attack was the candidates’ public objection to the enactment of Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1986, which sought to ban the ‘promotion’ of same-​sex relationships in schools. In addition to misogyny, the article was unapologetically homophobic, and sought to portray these

46

THE CANDIDATES

women candidates as dangerous, emotional, and irrational. Moreover, the portrayal of their opposition to state-​sponsored homophobia implied that their political position was illegitimate and harmful to children. Openly feminist candidates like Harriet Harman were also discussed in derogatory terms. Harman’s reputation for political correctness was disparaged as recently as 2010. Quentin Lett’s, in the Daily Mail, railed, ‘Spare us, sister’, and described her contribution at Labour strategy meetings as her arriving ‘with a couple of scowling members of the sisterhood’ and ‘drones: “have we got the gender balance right?” Her male colleagues have been sorely tempted to rectify the gender balance by hurling themselves off the nearest rooftop’ (Letts, 2001b: 7). Women candidates themselves have been keenly aware of the sexism involved in campaigns. Some of them have discussed its impact openly in interviews with journalists. ‘Both women admit that it’s a tough life in politics. Said Mrs Short: “we are regarded as slightly inferior, and not considered to have the sort of brains that digest papers” ’. This attitude is neatly demonstrated by a male constituent in the same article: ‘ “Of course there’s nothing to choose between them –​they’re both ruddy women”, said the man in the Wolverhampton bus queue’ (Daily Telegraph, 1964a: 13). These difficulties were also occasionally acknowledged by the press: for example, the Sun remarked that ‘if women shouted verbal abuse like the men they would be denounced as harridans’ (The Sun, 1966d: 4). The fact that women are judged for their sex alongside their political performance was especially visible when the Daily Mirror reflected that ‘at a time of crisis, Harold Wilson once remarked bitterly that Barbara Castle was the best man in the Cabinet’ and that ‘she certainly took on a man-​size job as Labour’s Minister for Employment and Productivity’ (Daily Mirror, 1970: 3). Initially, this reads as a positive evaluation of Castle, since it implies her effectiveness as a politician. However, beneath the surface it reinforces the notion of men’s innate superiority and the idea that women like Castle are outliers. They must be exceptional to outperform men in the political sphere. So, rather than being a compliment to Castle, it becomes both an insult to Wilson’s male colleagues and to the political capacity of the ‘average’ woman. The same logic was at play when a reporter described Barbara Castle as ‘brave, tough and realistic, she makes her opposite number Mr Robert Carr, seem absurdly inadequate’ (Levin, 1970: 8). While the quotation compliments Castle’s skills as a politician in very masculinized terms, it also serves as a means of emasculating her male opponent. These subtle forms of sexism were also evident much earlier in the century, when Margaret Bondfield was given responsibility for the means test. One organ of the conservative press claimed that ‘there was not a man in the Socialist Government who was willing to take it on. They had to give the

47

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

job to a woman’ (Daily Telegraph, 1935: 4). In this example, male politicians are expected to take responsibility, and it is a mark of their failure that the job is delegated to a woman. Bondfield’s abilities are downplayed, as it is implied that she only got the job because her male colleagues refused it. The possibility that she could have been the best candidate was conceptually alien. This once again reinforces the perception that women politicians are inferior to their male colleagues. Reeves (2019) recounts an example of how women MPs subverted this sexism when they reached office. In April 1923, Margaret Wintringham accused then prime minister Stanley Baldwin of producing a ‘man-​made Budget’ because he proposed reducing tax on beer rather than tea and sugar, to the perceived detriment of housewives. The performance of women politicians, then, seems to have always been linked to their gender. In 1922, the Daily Herald remarked about the first few women MPs that ‘the argument cannot avoid turning to the performance of the two pioneers, for the failure on their part would –​in practice, if not in logic –​have seriously compromised their successors at the hustings’ (Daily Herald, 1922a: 4). The Herald recognized that, as women, their failure would have had negative consequences for future women candidates in a way that would never have been the case for men, who are not dismissed due to the performance of a Lord North or Anthony Eden. Thatcher was also crucial in this respect, because ‘back in 1979, [it was] predicted that if she turned out to be a failure as a national leader, it would rebound on all women in public life since her inadequacies would be put down to the fact that she was a woman’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). These quotations illustrate that women are not judged only on their own ability but as women, and stand simultaneously as signifiers for the capabilities of their entire gender. This is still more pronounced when we consider the question of intersectionality. Women of colour must also negotiate racism in the mediation of politics, which often subjects them to intense scrutiny of their ethnicity and political performance (Puwar, 2004; Ward, 2017). News coverage of the UK’s first Black woman MP (first elected in 1987), Diane Abbott, demonstrates this neatly. During the 2017 campaign, she was the subject of a great deal of news coverage because she was Labour’s shadow home secretary. The Sun published a full profile of her in which she was described as having been ‘born to Jamaican immigrant parents in London’ and as having previously worked as a ‘race relations officer’ (Lockett, 2017). Both examples emphasize Abbott’s ethnicity and are subtle reminders that she is an outsider, or ‘space invader’, who is perceived to lack political authority and legitimacy (Puwar, 2004). Abbot also attracted significant press attention when she gave incorrect figures for how much Labour’s police-​funding pledge would cost in a radio interview and struggled to remember the correct ones when challenged. She was roundly mocked. The Guardian suggested that ‘she’d set out to embarrass

48

THE CANDIDATES

herself and she was going to make sure she finished the job properly’ (Crace, 2017a). The Daily Mail remarked that ‘it was hard, as a listener, not to yowl and implore the referee to stop the fight and summon stretcher-​bearers’, and difficult to listen when ‘Big Diane herself just kept staggering on’ (Letts, 2017). Using a boxing metaphor to describe the encounter framed the interview as a sporting contest, in which men ordinarily appear, thus positioning Abbott as ill-​equipped for political office. Labelling her ‘Big Diane’ also suggests that she is somehow grotesque and carries some rather negative connotations of a racialized nature. The same column went on to claim that ‘the poor pudding just sat there and her mouth alternated between flickers of a smile and something more sad, possibly close to tears’ (Letts, 2017a). This quotation once again reinforces her perceived unsuitability for office by implying that she is too emotional. Another Daily Mail article described her interview as ‘a toe-​curling showing last night’ which meant she had been ‘banned from doing media appearances at the weekend following a series of disastrous outings’ (Tapsfield & Robertson, 2017), before going on to quote numerous political opponents who all stated that she was unfit for office. Gabriel (2017) argues that the intense scrutiny that Abbott received during the 2017 campaign was disproportionate and demonstrates how Black women are frequently othered and objectified in news coverage, and reminds us that the stakes are higher for Black women when it comes to appearing as competent and authoritative. Criticism of Abbott is even more telling because other (male) politicians made similar mistakes during radio and television broadcasts in 2017 which were hardly reported on in comparison (Harmer & Southern, 2019). The analysis reveals that while women politicians have always needed to negotiate sexist assumptions and judgements on the campaign trail, there has been a distinct shift away from reporting on the sexism they experience at the hands of voters and opponents as the newspapers themselves become the main propagators of sexist tropes. This also seems to correlate with the content analysis, which showed that coverage of women politicians has become increasingly hostile. Much of the sexism can also been seen in the personalized coverage which women candidates received.

Personalization The content analysis revealed a fluctuating tendency among newspapers to report on the appearance and familial status of women candidates. While the personalization of news coverage about politics affects all candidates, a closer look at the tone of newspaper coverage suggests that personalization is highly gendered in the UK context.

49

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

There were multitudes of examples in which the physical appearance of women candidates was referred to across the century. These include references which are presented as incidental descriptions of their appearance; for example, in 1918 ‘Miss Phipps’ is described as ‘a little woman with thoughtful brown eyes, quietly dressed in unobtrusive brown’ (Daily Mail, 1918c: 6). Similarly, Vanessa Redgrave was described as wearing ‘a woolly hat pulled down to her eyebrows and her yellow scarf ’ (Lee-​Potter, 1974: 8). Alternatively, ‘Tessa Jowell, followed the PM’s “hint of pink” lead by wearing a top in a bubblegum hue underneath a rather jaunty floral blazer’ (Chilvers, 2010: 12). Such references appear as apparently harmless details which give colour to a story; however, they also subtly work to emphasize the importance of women’s visual representation for their political appeal. Newspapers further reinforced this message by explicitly stating that women’s appearances can be advantageous in campaigns. For example: ‘The smile of Miss Murray rests on no adventitious aid. It glows and beams and spreads in its own light’ (Daily Mail, 1918b: 5), which makes her seem friendly and engaging to her voting audience. Similarly, ‘Miss Ward is buxom and beaming, wears shoulder length curls’ (Churchill, 1951: 7), and Jill Knight was described as ‘an example of beauty allied with brains’ (Daily Telegraph, 1959: 17). Candidates are also occasionally praised for appearing younger than they were: Barbara Castle ‘looked ten years younger’ (Daily Mail, 1959b: 7) than her forty-​eight years, while Irene Ward’s ‘heavy walk is the only thing that betrays her age’ (Hall, 1970: 7). Drawing attention to their femininity reinforces the extent to which women sit uncomfortably within the political sphere, and can trivialize them in a way that undermines them as rational political actors. There were also frequent instances of women candidates being subjected to news coverage which sexualized them. Joan Quennell was described as ‘certainly the most attractive Parliamentary private secretary a Minister of Transport ever had’ (The Sun, 1966c: 8), while Shirley Williams was once described as being ‘highly attractive without being much bothered about her appearance’ (The Sun, 1974: 6). Furthermore, ‘Win or lose today, 25-​ year-​old Helene Middleweek has to be top of the election poll for beauty’ (Daily Mail, 1974: 1). Although many of these references were confined to the 1960s and ’70s, 2010 saw something of a resurgence. For example, the Daily Mail reported that Conservative candidate Louise Bagshawe ‘is surely one of the first would-​be Tory MPs to boast a cover-​girl figure’ (Kay, 2010: 43). Similarly, the same newspaper proclaimed that Labour candidate Gloria de Piero’s ‘looks have never held her back’ while informing its readers that de Piero had once ‘posed topless as a teenager and was once voted one of FHM’s [a men’s magazine] “World’s Sexiest Women” ’ (Daily Mail, 2010a: 8), both details having very little to do with her candidacy. This

50

THE CANDIDATES

kind of coverage was likely further stimulated by the three political parties encouraging some of their candidates to appear in a stylized, glossy photo shoot for weekly women’s magazine Grazia during the 2010 campaign (van Zoonen & Harmer, 2011). Younger candidates were primarily targeted with this kind of coverage. One example stated that ‘she’s blonde, she’s striking and she is candidate for the North London constituency of Finchley. Apart from that, any similarity between Michelle Vincent and Margaret Thatcher is purely coincidental. Michelle, 23, who yesterday chose a black latex outfit to launch her campaign’ (Daily Mail, 1987: 8). A large photograph of Vincent accompanied this item. The candidate’s reasons for standing as an independent in the prime minister’s constituency were completely absent, while her choice of outfit was described in detail. Helene Middleweek was also described in a sexualized fashion: ‘Her tight jeans, clinging sweaters, and shoulder length hair’ were emphasized because they apparently ‘provide a beguiling appearance’ (Daily Telegraph, 1974b: 9). Ross (2002) suggests that ‘the objectification of women politicians as subjects for the male (sexualised) gaze is symptomatic of the way in which women’s bodies are commodified in mainstream society’ (Ross, 2002: 93). Importantly, though, they are also a means by which women candidates are reduced to physical attributes and positioned as outsiders in the rational, political sphere. Body shape, height, and weight were also regular features in the coverage, and similarly marked women out as different. About Bessie Braddock, the Daily Mail said: ‘The Labour Party’s largest asset –​she weighs 14st 12 lbs –​ comfortably overflowed a chair in her office yesterday’ (Daily Mail, 1959c: 9). It was similarly noted that Irene Ward was ‘a large, forthright lady’ (Hall, 1970: 7), and Celia Fletcher was described as ‘a large, jolly woman with an infectious laugh’ (Chippindale, 1974: 6). Barbara Roche was described as ‘a plump, middle-​class, Oxford educated barrister’ (Leslie, 1987: 6). Bodyweight rarely featured in representations of younger candidates, except when they were being complimented for losing weight. One example from the Daily Mail described ‘Jolly little Mrs Mabel de la Motte (5ft. 3in.), Conservative candidate for Fulham’, as ‘tubby when I met her during the 1955 election’ but during the 1959 election ‘she is a good-​looking shadow of her former self ’. Her electioneering is constructed as an aid to weight loss, since after the initial interview ‘she spent another two hours losing ounces and winning votes’ (Daily Mail, 1959b: 7). This attention to bodyweight relies on the traditional construction that weight loss and gain are important concerns to women, with praise given to women conforming to particular body ideals. Focusing on their bodies also emphasizes that women do not fit the conventional body shape of a politician, that of a man. This also happens when journalists draw attention to the height of women candidates, for

51

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

example: ‘At 4ft 9in, Jennie Gibbs, Liberal candidate for the Ogmore division in South Wales, thinks she is probably the smallest woman fighting in the General Election’ (Steele, 1966: 15) –​describing Gibbs as small positions her as abnormal compared to her (presumably) taller male opponents. Such details might not seem noteworthy in and of themselves, but when they have no bearing on policy they become irrelevant and have no substantive quality other than to reinforce difference. Women who fail to conform to mainstream beauty ideals are also heavily criticized. In 2001, the Sun newspaper proclaimed that ‘Ann Widdecombe sticking her top half out of a D-​reg pick-​up truck and looking like Queen Boudicea’s ugly sister is no way to woo voters’ (The Sun, 2001a: 6). Once again, the idea that the physical appearance of women politicians is central to their appeal (or lack of it) is reinforced. The invocation of a powerful female leader from history (Boudicea), coupled with Widdecombe’s perceived unattractiveness, suggests she is a formidable politician and strong character, meaning that women who do not appear adequately feminine are subject to ridicule (Ross, 2002). So, women candidates run the risk of trivialization in the press if they are conventionally attractive, but are condemned if they do not meet these standards. These examples show the extent to which personalization of election coverage can be problematic for women. The physical appearance of women was also explicitly discussed as being disadvantageous to their campaign; for example, the Daily Mail suggested that ‘the porcelain fragility of her complexion, the wistfulness of her great grey-​ blue eyes, and the delicacy of her exquisite dress are so strange a contrast in a colliery constituency that one feels Miss Parsons suffers many disadvantages’ (Daily Mail, 1923a: 10). This early example shows how women can be undermined by personalized coverage. It also highlights the importance of social class in the perception of candidates. Where women candidates are concerned, their style of dress appears to connote their class identity. The Countess of Warwick had to deny ‘an accusation that she wore diamond earrings and expensive pearls’ (Daily Telegraph, 1923: 9) on the campaign trail to play down her privileged roots. Here, Parsons and Warwick’s middle-​or upper-​class style looks out of place in their working-​class constituencies. This focus on their appearance reminds the reader that they are out of place in terms of both their social class and gendered identities, implying that they are not able to represent these constituents. Other examples of the interplay between appearance and social class were more nuanced. Sally Oppenheim, for example, was occasionally portrayed as keen to display her middle-​class identity: ‘Tory housewives’ vigilante Sally Oppenheim is out canvassing Gloucester in her curlers’, keeping ‘her cool blonde good locks with rollers hidden under a scarf ’. The author went on: ‘Not that she wants to play down her middle-​class blue-​rinsed

52

THE CANDIDATES

Conservatism. She’s proud of that’ (Martin, 1974: 9). Here Oppenheim is described as self-​consciously calling attention to her middle-​class identity as part of her a strategy to appeal to conservative voters. In coverage of the 1979 election, however, during a campaign visit where she chatted to voters in her constituency, ‘she looked like a million dollars –​a fact that hardly went unnoticed when she confronted a group of working class mums collecting their children from a junior school’ (Callan, 1979: 16–​7). These examples once again demonstrate the gendered nature of personalization, because here Oppenheim’s style is synonymous with her political choices. The implication that women politicians literally embody their politics reminds readers that women are somehow different. In later years, reporting on the physical appearance of women candidates became a common way to criticize them and their politics. Shirley Williams was portrayed as ‘a disorganised woman. She shows it in her eccentric dress’ (The Sun, 1983: 6). She was also criticized because ‘it’s obvious that she doesn’t care or at least that she doesn’t think her appearance is THAT important’ (Callan, 1979). Harriet Harman was also described as ‘a clothes-​ hater of the first order; a woman who always looks like she gets her outfits in a scrimmage following an explosion in the Sue Ryder [a charity shop] bargain bin’ (Moir, 2010e: 10–​11). These remarks not only comment negatively on their appearance, which in itself is hardly pertinent to their political roles, but interpret their appearance as an outward embodiment of their personal characteristics. The women’s supposed ambivalence about their appearance is deemed problematic and unfeminine. It becomes a way for journalists with different politics to attack them as ‘not one of us’. Remarkably, there is very little criticism of the fact that women’s physical appearance and sartorial choices are ubiquitous in political coverage. An early exception came from the pre-​war Daily Mirror, which noted how ‘the physical attributes of the would-​be masculine MP are notoriously ignored by the newspapers’ (Daily Mirror, 1923: 7). The proportion of news items which refer to women politicians’ private lives is a much steadier feature of the coverage across the sample period, as the results from the content analysis demonstrate. News reports frequently mention the age of the candidates. While it is never the focus of an item, it often appears in introductory statements. Barbara Roche is introduced as ‘33-​year-​old Mrs Barbara Roche’ (Leslie, 1987: 6), Marjorie Jalland is ‘thirty years of age and a barrister’ (The Guardian, 1945: 3), and Ann Taylor was labelled ‘a 26-​year-​old Open University tutor’ (Johnson, 1974: 7). Early examples suggested that candidates’ personal information was not always readily available. One reporter remarked about a Miss Murray that ‘I do not know her age, except that she confesses to be more than 30 and less than 40’ (Daily Mail, 1918b: 5).

53

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

As noted earlier, while it was never a major preoccupation for the press, there are also frequent examples of women candidates’ family circumstances being casually mentioned. Candidates like Cathy Wilson and Marilyn James were similarly domesticated by being referred to as ‘a Newport housewife’ (Daily Telegraph, 1979b: 11) and ‘a blonde Northampton housewife’ (Daily Telegraph, 1979c: 11), respectively. Pat Hollis was also labelled a ‘housewife’ (The Sun, 1979a: 7) and ‘mother of two Mrs Hollis’, emphasizing her having children as well as her marital status. Some items included these references when giving background information about the candidates. For example: ‘Doreen Gorsky, is 37, the second wife of a London doctor, who is himself standing as Liberal candidate for the City and Westminster. She has two children and two step-​children’ (Churchill, 1950: 2). Similarly, Shirley Williams, ‘44 and divorced, has a young daughter’ (Bevins, 1974: 7). Many early examples emphasized the fact that some women candidates were ushered into political life due to their relationships with male politicians: ‘The Unionists of Kensington have unanimously adopted as Unionist Coalition candidate Mrs Lucas, the widow of the former candidate’ (The Guardian, 1918d: 8). This is also true in the case of Nancy Astor, the very first female MP to take her seat after a by-​election in 1919 (Musolf, 1999). This phenomenon was not exclusively confined to the interwar period, as this quotation about Lena Jeger ‘who succeeded her husband as MP’ (Daily Mail, 1959a: 9) demonstrates. Megan Lloyd George, daughter of the former prime minister, was often compared to her father when she first entered politics contesting the constituency of Anglesey in 1929; the Guardian noted that she ‘has the spirit and much of the forcefulness of her father’ (The Guardian, 1931: 12), and ‘on the platform she is an enchantress (“her father over again” the elders say)’ (The Guardian, 1951b: 3). Strikingly, the family connections of these early women candidates were seen in generally favourable terms. This suggests that being associated with a formerly powerful man bestows some credentials on women candidates, or somehow proves they have the relevant politics, especially in an age when voters were less worried about political dynasties than people are today. Women candidates were often quick to make use of their familial relationships on the campaign trail. Anne Fremantle took her child with her while she campaigned –​‘This is her first election, and she solves the problem of whether or not to kiss electors’ babies by taking her own around in her pram’ (Daily Mail, 1935c: 7) –​while Jennie Lee made a political point by invoking her family background when she was quoted saying, ‘I’m a miner’s daughter and I know what I’m talking about’ (Daily Mail, 1950: 7). Margaret Thatcher also invoked her role in her family during the 1974 election: ‘Dennis Thatcher played mum yesterday while his famous wife Margaret and their children shared an afternoon at home. It was the

54

THE CANDIDATES

first time since the election campaign started that the blonde Tory Housing Spokesman has spent a full day with her family’ (Hinton, 1974: 7). Thatcher is depicted in a domestic setting, enjoying afternoon tea with her husband and children during the campaign, presumably as part of a political strategy to present her as an ordinary woman with a family. Thatcher’s motivation is revealed later in the item when the reporter claims that Thatcher ‘frets about the “frosty” image people have of her’. Thatcher is also portrayed performing domestic tasks as well as her political ones: ‘After cooking lunch, Mrs Thatcher wrote a couple of political speeches’ (Hinton, 1974: 7). The sequence of events positions cooking for her family as her priority before continuing her political work. This reinforces the idea that women should place their family first and their careers second. Women who chose to minimize any discussion of their family were portrayed as suspicious; for example, in 2010 Luciana Berger’s decision not to reveal that she had a partner was portrayed negatively (Walker, 2010). A feature in the Daily Telegraph in 1959 highlighted the families of women politicians in an extremely problematic way. It implied that since the women were out canvassing, their husbands and children would be subjected to ‘haphazard meals and general home chaos’ (Jackson, 1959: 9), reinforcing the social expectation that women are responsible for household chores. This demonstrates the tension between pursuing a political career and maintaining an ordinary family life for women politicians. The assumption of the piece is that unless she can guarantee that ‘her husband and home are not being neglected’ (Jackson, 1959: 9), a woman candidate ought to consider her priorities. One might also infer that a woman unable to run her own home is hardly fit to run a constituency, ministry, or the country. Predictably, some women politicians pushed back against this kind of framing. For example, Shirley Williams was apparently ‘one of the few politicians known to agree to a television interview –​providing a baby-​sitter is thrown in with the deal’ (Rose, 1974: 7). This was presented as showing that women can juggle work with their private lives, and as more broadly reflecting the reality that, as candidates, they ‘wish to serve. Late hours and families would not deter us’ (The Sun, 1966d: 4). Crucially, there is only a subtle hint here to the fact that women candidates are disadvantaged by structural inequalities that mean women assume most of the caring responsibilities in families.

Conclusion The findings in this chapter are not entirely surprising given that the majority of the available evidence suggests that the way women politicians have been represented over time conforms to what other scholars have found in their

55

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

studies of news coverage of women politicians. The analysis showed that women’s voices were consistently marginalized in news coverage, even if there was some variation over time, which corroborates evidence from more contemporary studies (see Hooghe et al, 2015; O’Neill et al, 2016; Harmer & Southern, 2018). The results also showed that women tended to be portrayed as women first and politicians second, because their presence in public life was frequently linked to their ability to represent other women politically. The gender identity of women is, therefore, consistently reported as being newsworthy by the press, which other scholars have also identified (Falk, 2010; Ross et al, 2013; Trimble, 2017). The results also demonstrate that this has been a long-​term feature of electoral coverage. It is noteworthy, however, that this chapter shows that women have been increasingly harshly evaluated in electoral coverage over time, and that the tone of negative coverage is often sexist, which is similar to results found in studies of women politicians in other contexts (see Ross, 2002; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Carlin & Winfrey, 2009; Sheeler & Anderson, 2013). This chapter also confirms that news coverage of women politicians is consistently personalized in unhelpful ways which trivialize and position them as unsuited to the political sphere (see Falk, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Garcia-​ Blanco & Wahl-​Jorgensen, 2012; Trimble et al, 2015). Strikingly, these findings suggest that despite the passage of time and the advancement of women in society, the mediated representation of women in electoral politics is characterized by a good deal of continuity rather than change. In some cases, things seem to be getting worse for women in this regard, not better. Nevertheless, there were some important historical changes which were more unexpected, and which raise interesting questions. The analysis showed that women were directly quoted in a higher proportion of news items between the 1950s and 1970s than in the period that followed, showing that women’s mediated visibility has not necessarily progressed despite greater political representation in numerical terms into the 1990s and beyond. The content analysis produced a similar result for personalized coverage. The proportion of items which referred to the physical appearance of women politicians was also higher in the same period than for later elections. These findings demonstrate the cyclical nature of election coverage, and furthermore highlight the importance of conducting historical analyses. The analysis also shows that despite some studies which suggest women tend to be associated with gendered policy issues (see, for example, Herrnson et al, 2003; Kittilson & Fridkin, 2008), there is little historical evidence for this in the UK context. This might suggest that issue coverage has fewer gendered connotations in the UK, but it also reflects the dearth of coverage of gendered policy issues such as childcare and violence against women in UK election news. Another surprising finding was the extent to which

56

THE CANDIDATES

early coverage of women politicians was very optimistic about the potential contribution that women might make to public life. The interwar years in particular featured very low proportions of negative coverage. So, while the qualitative analysis revealed some problematic forms of reporting on women in this period, the news coverage was not openly hostile to their presence, unlike more contemporary coverage. One of the most revealing changes, however, was the extent to which the tone of news coverage has become increasingly sexist and hostile over time. It might be reasonable to assume that the increased participation of women in politics, as well as other social gains, could serve to normalize the presence of women in election coverage, meaning gendered coverage would decline. Unfortunately, this chapter has shown that the gendered, and at times sexist, news coverage of women politicians remains, despite one hundred years of women’s political activity. While early coverage was certainly not gender neutral, journalists and commentators seem to have become increasingly comfortable with being openly sexist and at times misogynistic in their coverage of politics. Throughout the twenty-​seven elections in which women have been able to stand as candidates, they have been mediated in ways which emphasize their gendered identity, and while there have been several changes, the coverage is remarkably consistent. Taken together, the findings from the content analysis and the qualitative analysis present a mixed picture of both unsurprising and more unexpected results, which reinforces the notion that progress is not guaranteed. This also demonstrates the importance of tracking these trends over time in quantitative and qualitative terms. This is especially the case when it comes to analyzing the mediated portrayal of women who have not been the subject of as much academic research, such as women voters, who will be the subject of the next chapter.

57

3

The Voter: Housewives and Mothers Feminist media scholars have been analyzing the depiction of women politicians in political news for several decades, but for some reason the portrayal of female citizens has elicited considerably less attention, which this chapter will go some way towards correcting. This lack of research is troubling because normative theories about the role of media in democratic societies hold that journalists have a responsibility to inform citizens about electoral politics, so it is crucial to analyze how news media position and describe women voters and their political priorities. The UK press started off on mixed footing in this regard, as the newspapers at the beginning of the twentieth century were much divided over the issue of women’s suffrage. Newspapers such as the Daily Herald were mostly supportive of the aims of the suffrage campaigners. Other papers like the Daily News, however, disapproved of the tactics adopted by the Women’s Social and Political Union in particular, but were sympathetic to the principle of voting rights for women (Bingham, 2004). The Daily Mail famously labelled the more militant members of the movement ‘the suffragettes’, a pejorative term which they adopted in defiance (Bingham, 2004). Eventually, though, women’s enormous contribution to the war effort was thought to have persuaded even the sceptical newspapers to support the call for their enfranchisement in 1918 (Melman, 1988; Bingham, 2004). When only married women or women who owned property were granted the right to vote in Westminster elections in 1918, the campaign to equalize the franchise was less well received by some newspapers. Individual sections of the press, particularly those owned by Lord Rothermere, were particularly hostile towards the campaign (Bingham, 2002). Despite this opposition, women gained full voting equality in 1928 (Cowman, 2010). This was something of a watershed moment in political campaigning in the UK. Even though women had been actively involved in political parties for

58

THE VOTER

many years, the enfranchisement of women meant that political parties had to appeal directly to women voters for the first time (Jarvis, 1994; Beers, 2010). As a result, the press also needed to reflect the needs of women in their political coverage. The importance of this task remains undiminished one hundred years on. This chapter will begin with a brief discussion of the limited existing research into the mediated representation of women voters. This will be followed by the content analysis results which aim to track three main trends over time: 1) the extent to which the voices of women voters are included in the news; 2) the policy issues with which they are mostly associated; and 3) the extent to which news coverage invokes their familial situation. The final section presents a qualitative analysis of news coverage, discussing how women are portrayed as a distinct set of voters who are unpredictable or undecided. This is followed by an analysis of the way newspapers portrayed the motivations and values of women voters, before examining the way political coverage about them is gendered. The final section of the analysis focuses on how their voices are incorporated into news coverage.

Mediating women voters There is something of a paradox at the heart of normative ideas about the press: the idea that the media somehow represents the public is central to its democratic function and yet the public hardly ever appear in political news. On the rare occasions that the public appear, their views are selected and mediated by journalists to fulfil a specific function in the text. Consequently, their voice is often ‘edited, cut off in its prime, reduced to polling numbers, confined to banal soundbites, marginalised as background noise’ (Coleman & Ross, 2010: 45). Lewis et al’s (2005) study of UK and US television news showed that news hardly ever features ordinary people. Their content analysis revealed that most references to public opinion are vague and impressionistic references to public moods or attitudes which are not based on any precise or systematic source of evidence. Intriguingly, the study also found that citizens are mainly represented as non-​partisan such that citizens are mainly portrayed as being apolitical about manifestly political issues. Lewis et al (2005) conclude that citizens are mostly shown as passive observers of the world who are described as having fears, impressions, and desires, but also as being without strong ideas or proposals about policies such as healthcare and education. These limited (and limiting) representations, therefore, suggest that the world of politics is largely the preserve of politicians and ‘the experts’, meaning that citizens are largely marginalized in the news.

59

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Until now, there have been very few attempts to analyze the way women voters specifically are portrayed in election news, and there has been no systematic analysis of how women’s citizenship is depicted in the UK press. Nevertheless, the substantial amount of research about the portrayal of women in news media in general offers glimpses of women’s representation as citizens. One prominent example is the Global Media Monitoring Project, conducted by researchers worldwide every five years since 1995. It tracks the representation of women across news media in more than one hundred different countries (Gill, 2007). Each iteration of the study has consistently shown that women’s mediated representation has never once achieved parity with men anywhere in the world, despite the visibility of women as producers and subjects of news seeing some improvement over time. Women who appear as subjects of the news are overwhelmingly ordinary people rather than experts or political elites (Ross & Carter, 2011). News, then, is largely the preserve of political elites and experts, roles that women are rarely allowed to play. Historians of the interwar years have noted that once women gained the vote, press enthusiasm for women’s participation in public life soon began to wane. Younger women were singled out for heavy criticism for the desire to remain in the job market, and they were framed as unfair competition for men. Newspapers often also argued that women in the workplace contributed to the moral decline of the nation. Those who had been fiercely praised for doing their duty during the First World War were transformed in the public imagination into ‘ruthless self-​seekers depriving men and their dependents of a livelihood’ (Bruley, 1999: 61). Despite these negative portrayals, the press did include women in their discussion of politics and encouraged them to participate in elections during the interwar period (Bingham, 2004). Women voters were, however, often reduced to a set of stereotypically feminine concerns in much political commentary. The press primarily positioned women as being worried about child welfare, housing, and other domestic affairs. It must be noted, though, that this did not occur in a homogeneous fashion: women’s political priorities and the way that newspapers ‘feminized’ their political rhetoric varied according to the political persuasion of the publication (Bingham, 2004). The conservative press relied heavily on the figure of the housewife or so-​called ‘domestic chancellor’. In this portrayal, housewives were responsible for the family expenditure and favoured low prices, low taxes, and economic stability. The left-​leaning press instead preferred to emphasize women’s roles as mothers who prized the welfare of their families and the prospects of their children above everything else. These women were depicted as wanting better housing, welfare benefits, and improved educational opportunities (Bingham, 2004). These very limited ways of including women in election news meant that they were portrayed

60

THE VOTER

as uninterested in and unaffected by broader political issues, meaning that ‘the popular press generated a self-​fulfilling prophecy: assuming that women disliked or did not understand political material, they provided little to persuade them otherwise’ (Bingham, 2004: 143). When it came to the often unmarried, ‘modern’ young women who gained the vote on equal terms in 1928, newspapers seemed confused about how to approach them. As a result, they chose to treat them as aspiring housewives and mothers rather than considering them in their current state, or in line with other, more immediate political priorities. The inability of some newspapers to successfully target these women, however, in part led to a backlash to their winning the vote. Conservative newspapers were at the forefront of efforts to prevent the equalization of the franchise. Melman (1988) argues that this opposition was linked to young women increasingly being seen as ‘surplus’ and eventually ‘superfluous’ women who were competing with men in the economic sphere. When the equalization of the franchise was proposed in 1927, the Daily Mail launched a campaign to prevent it. The campaign used alarmist and misogynist language that sought to portray young women as untrustworthy contenders for voting rights (Melman, 1988). Bingham (2002), on the other hand, argues that harsh rhetoric about women’s incompetence as voters was primarily confined to the editorial and political columns, which did not reflect the paper’s overall stance. Bingham further claims that the Daily Mail’s campaign to stop the equalization of the franchise was a manifestation of its owner Lord Rothermere’s antisocialism, because he believed young women would be more likely to vote for Labour candidates. Regardless of its motivation, it was clear that not all women were considered equal in the eyes of the press, and there were many in the industry willing to exclude those women who could not be easily categorized. Studies of more contemporary elections tend to focus on individual campaigns and have shown that women voters are still marginalized in news coverage. The most detailed account to date of the reportage of women voters in political news comes from the United States. Vavrus (2002) noted a trend for media coverage to focus on specific voting segments during the 1996 presidential election, whereby the figure of the ‘soccer mom’ was identified as representing the group crucial to determining the election result. Vavrus (2000: 193) argues that this connection between women voters, who are ‘reduced to a demographic category characterised by women’s relationships to their children –​and an ideology of consumerism that reduces electoral politics to personal choices around product consumption and “lifestyle” ’ is problematic for women’s political representation because it actively positions women within the domestic, private sphere and contributes to the perception that they are passive consumers of politics rather than active citizens (Vavrus,

61

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

2002). The mediation of women in this narrow fashion represents an attempt to delineate the areas of politics that are appropriate concerns for women. The tendency to reproduce these stereotypes may or may not reflect the realities of what women are concerned about, but it almost certainly impacts on how well represented they are by their elected politicians. This is a trend not limited to the United States. In the UK, throughout the 1990s and beyond, women voters were increasingly pigeonholed in media coverage that began to report on political party efforts to target specific marketing segments (Harmer & Wring, 2013). One of the more famous examples, ‘Worcester woman’, was discussed at length in the lead up to the 1997 general election. Other identifications such as the ‘let-​down woman’, the ‘do-​it-​all woman’ (Campbell & Lovenduski, 2005) and ‘school gate mums’ (Deacon et al, 2007b) soon followed in subsequent campaigns, each representing a perceived group with a shared concern that, once captured, might swing a constituency or perhaps even the entire election. This emphasis on discussing women voters in such homogeneous terms is also very limiting. Presenting women as an interest group with similar concerns (when they, in fact, make up the majority of the electorate) is pervasive in the news coverage of recent elections. This rather lazy set of assumptions means that politicians and news organizations sometimes fail to recognize that female citizens simultaneously occupy an infinite number of social categories that might influence their political priorities. This reduction of women into an undifferentiated mass is compounded by a general marginalization in UK news coverage. During the 1992 election, despite claims from the main political parties that they were pursuing the female vote, the campaign coverage was ‘an almost exclusively male production’ (Billig et al, 1993: 114). On the rare occasion that women did feature, it tended to be in association with traditional roles. That continued across the 1990s. Adcock’s (2010) study of news coverage about the 1997 general election found that women were more likely to be represented as ‘ordinary women’ than as politicians or experts. Voters were most likely to be found in ‘vox pop–​style discourse or on-​the-​stump reports, designed to provide textual “colour” or representative voter opinion’ (Adcock, 2010: 148). Perhaps the most obvious evidence that women were reduced to stereotypes is the way that their views were not explored in any detail. Stereotypes are, by definition, very thin and used to convey a set of easily understood connotations very quickly. They cannot handle the complexities of an engaged citizen. And yet, this seems to be what women were reduced to in the 1990s. The Fawcett Society’s monitoring of the 1997 campaign concluded that despite the increased attention given to women in the political sphere, any substantive discussion of women’s priorities was conspicuously

62

THE VOTER

absent during this campaign. Mainstream newspapers were complicit in this erasure, choosing to give available space not to informed consideration of serious political issues of concern to women but rather to the question of whether women disapproved of Tony Blair’s haircut (Stephenson, 1998). A content analysis of broadcast news by Ross (2002) revealed that only three out of 136 news items in one week of the 1997 campaign addressed the issues that women themselves claimed to care about such as gender equality and the family (Tibballs & Adcock, 1997). Similarly, research conducted at Loughborough University found that of all actors present in their entire sample of media coverage of the 2001 and 2005 elections, just 14 per cent were women (Deacon et al, 2005; Deacon et al, 2006). One notable example of a woman voter gaining some media coverage happened when a member of the public, Sharron Storer, criticized Labour’s handling of the NHS in a filmed conversation with Tony Blair (Wring, 2002). Childs (2005) argues that the 2005 campaign followed a similar pattern of marginalization for women. This was nearly not the case, as Conservative leader Michael Howard’s interview in Cosmopolitan, where he talked about late-​term abortion, threatened to make it an election issue. Eventually, however, other events took over (Childs, 2005). Despite the paucity of research in this area, the evidence available suggests that news organizations have a history of marginalizing women voters in coverage of elections. When women are featured, they have been portrayed in narrow ways as a specific and homogenous group of voters predominantly motivated by their familial roles. In most of this coverage they are shown as being mainly interested in domestic concerns despite the social upheaval that has occurred over the last century. The picture of women voters identified in the existing research suggests that women voters are reported on in very limited terms which do not recognize the differences between them. None of the studies here described suggest that the press has much to say about the political concerns of LGBTQ+ women or women of colour, for example. The next section seeks to determine whether or not this is borne out over a longer period, and provides a systematic content analysis of how women voters have been portrayed in news coverage of elections over time.

Changes and continuities over time The content analysis measured three ways in which women voters are represented. First, the results showing how often women voters are directly quoted in the news are presented, to determine if reporters portray them as active in the political process. The analysis will then discuss the policy issues with which women voters are most associated, to see if they are constructed

63

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

primarily in relation to gendered issues. Finally, the analysis explores the extent to which news coverage mentions the familial role of women voters, to see if their political concerns are reported as being shaped by their role as wives and mothers.

Women’s voices The content analysis measured the proportion of news items wherein women voters are directly quoted. At issue here is whether women who are afforded the opportunity to speak can be considered more active than those who are simply discussed. The data also indicate to what extent women voters are included in political news. Figure 3.1 shows the percentage of items wherein women voters are directly quoted. The data show that the proportion of items which quote women voters has increased over time. Before 1935, it was rare for women voters to be quoted in the news. Apart from three elections, women were only quoted in 40 per cent or fewer of the items until 1983. This suggests that for the first sixty years of women having voting rights, they were considerably more likely to be written about than reported on in their own words. It is only in the two most recent elections that the voices of women voters are represented in over 80 per cent of items in which they appear. It is important to state that the elections during the interwar years may have featured fewer women’s voices due to reporting conventions rather than for purely sexist reasons. However, analyzing this over time reveals that there has been some progress in incorporating the voices of women voters into electoral coverage. The quoting of women’s remarks also suggests that women are more likely to be presented as actively engaged rather than as passive recipients of political campaign messages. To understand this better it is vital to analyze how women are portrayed in the news qualitatively. This will be discussed later in the chapter.

Issue coverage The historical literature suggests that women tended to be associated with domestic political issues (Bingham, 2004). The content analysis showed that where voters are concerned, 48.8 per cent of news items about them contained some issue coverage (whereas 51.2 per cent of items were mainly about the electoral process). To determine which policy areas women voters are most reported in relation to, Figure 3.2 shows the four main policy themes which dominated the coverage of voters. These themes combined accounted for 76.3 per cent of the policy coverage. The largest policy area

64

newgenrtpdf

Figure 3.1: Percentage of items which quoted voters directly 1918–​2017 100 90 80

THE VOTER

70 60

65

50 40 30 20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Quoted (%) 15.3

9.9 12.5 13.8 11.3

5.4 29.6 55.2

48

61.3 31.5 40.9 28.6 36.5 30.7 35.3 40.6 31.3 62.9 59.6 46.1 48.5 61.9 63.7 61.5 82.8 88.1

newgenrtpdf

Figure 3.2: Four main policy themes for voters 1918–​2017 80 70

50 40

66

30 20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

International affairs (%) 35.7 19.4 5.6

3.9 10.3 7.1 31.3 34.5 3.7 27.5 4.5 10.5 5.6

0

0

3.3

0

0

42.9 3.7

Equality (%)

25 25.8 5.6 15.7 24.1 14.3

Health and welfare (%)

7.1

Economy (%)

10.7 32.3 66.7 60.8 20.7 64.3 37.5 6.9 48.1 32.5 59.1 36.8 33.3 25 62.5 53.3 50 52.9 14.3 14.8

0

24.1 14.8 15

4.5

5.3 11.1 25

6.5 11.1 1.9 20.7 7.1 12.5 10.3 12.9 15 13.6 21.1 11.1 8.3

2.5

0

6.7 28.6 29.4 7.1 22.2 4.2

7.5 13.3

0

5.9

0

5.6

6.7 34.5 1.1

8.3

6.7 10.3

0

3.5

0

0

0

22.2 37.5 41.7 56.7 34.5 8.6 27.6 37.5 0

0

10

0

7.5 20.7 12.5

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

60

THE VOTER

associated with women across the entire sample is the economy, accounting for 34.7 per cent of the policy themes. Figure 3.2 demonstrates that although there is some fluctuation, the economy is the dominating policy theme for voters between 1922 and 1979. From 1987 onwards, this was replaced by health and welfare until 2017. International affairs tended to fluctuate according to the political context of the elections. It accounted for a large proportion of the coverage just before and after major conflicts in 1918, 1935–​45, 1983, and 2005, after the two world wars, the Falklands conflict, and the Iraq War, respectively. Equality as an issue was broadly defined, incorporating everything from pay equality to violence against women. It remained a regular feature of the coverage until 2010 when, intriguingly, it failed to be reported at all in the final three elections. Since the economy dominated coverage about women voters for so long, it might be tempting to assume that this means coverage of women voters is not particularly gendered. As the previous chapter demonstrates, where politicians are concerned, the economy is often seen as a masculinized issue. Alternatively, since the economy gives way to health and welfare in later elections, it might also suggest that coverage of women voters has become more gendered over time. However, the content analysis does not tell us how economic or health and welfare–​related policies are written about in relation to women voters. This is why a qualitative analysis is necessary, and this will be presented later in the chapter.

Personalization Previous research suggests that women voters are frequently positioned as mothers or housewives in contemporary political campaigns (Bingham, 2004; Harmer & Wring, 2013). The content analysis measured this phenomenon by noting if a woman voter’s family or her relation to them was mentioned in each news item. Figure 3.3 shows the percentage of items which mention the family members of voters over time. Figure 3.3 demonstrates that the newspapers refer to the families or familial role of women voters in a substantial proportion of items in almost all elections. Apart from 1966, the results show that between 20 and 40 per cent of news items about women voters mention their relationship to their families. Despite the relatively consistent trend, the results also suggest that later campaigns (from the 1980s onwards) tend to be associated with higher proportions of items mentioning women’s role in the family than campaigns during the interwar years or the 1950s and ’60s. This perhaps suggests that in more recent times there has been a renewed focus on how women’s personal circumstances impact on their political priorities, even

67

newgenrtpdf

Figure 3.3: Percentage of items which refer to voters’ families 1918–​2017 70

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

60 50 40

68 30 20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 2017

Reference to family (%) 22.2 33.8 31.9 26.6 25.8 23.2 29.5 64.2 33.3 48.4 45.7 25 34.7 14.6 26.9 27.5 21.9 43.8 33.3 51.1 38.5 37.9 33.3 47.3 49.5 48.3 37.5

THE VOTER

though women’s lives have changed a great deal over the last century. We will return to this idea later in the chapter. The content analysis suggests that, despite great social change throughout twenty-​seven elections, the mediated representation of women voters has remained relatively consistent in terms of their presence, issue orientation, and personalized coverage. Electoral coverage has seemingly always invoked women voters’ role in the family. Furthermore, the issues with which they were linked in the press were very similar over time. The economy was the main issue associated with women voters for the first sixty years of elections, and while it remained a consistent feature of the coverage, it was supplanted as the main issue by health and welfare in the 1980s. The main changes that occurred were that as time went on, the proportion of items which included direct quotations from women voters increased, suggesting that in later years women began to be given an active role in the coverage rather than merely being the subject of discussion. These quantitative results only give us a partial picture of the representation of women in the press. It is only analyzing the way women voters are discussed that will enable us to understand if there have been more subtle shifts in their mediation. This will be addressed in the next section.

Reporting women voters This section will analyze the mediated representation of women voters by focusing on four different areas. Firstly, we will look at how women voters were portrayed as a homogenous group who held the keys to an election victory if you could tap into their perceived shared concerns. Secondly, the analysis examines the way newspapers discuss the motivations and values of women voters before, thirdly, going on to unpack how they are written about concerning political issues. Finally, the chapter analyzes the way women’s voices have been incorporated into news coverage of elections.

The women’s vote From the earliest days of women’s suffrage, newspapers recognized (and, in some cases, feared) the potential impact of women voters on electoral outcomes. During the interwar period, newspapers constantly reminded their audiences that women could have a massive effect on the results; for example, ‘eight million women over 30 (wives of electors or independent occupiers) ought to vote on November 15. The result of the election is in their hands’ (Daily Herald, 1922b: 3). The Daily Mirror also stated that ‘women hold key to result’ (Daily Mirror, 1922: 3). These suggestions intensified after

69

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

the 1928 Representation of the People Act came into force, since women now formed the majority of the electorate. The Daily Herald stated that ‘the women of Great Britain are the majority of the electors; and it is in their hands that the decision of the country next Thursday must largely rest’ (Daily Herald, 1931: 7). The newspapers construed this as meaning that ‘women, for good or evil, have now the determining vote’ (Daily Mirror, 1929: 7). The insertion of a qualifying phrase (‘for good or evil’) indicates a level of unease about women’s newly gained political power. Attitudes towards women voters were to shift in later elections. This example from 1935 explicitly highlights the importance of women’s participation by declaring that this is the women’s election. Its trend today will be decided by women and its canvassing has largely been accomplished by women. Women’s influence is enormous. And so it should be, for every time it is the housewife who suffers most from the depression, from unemployment, from high taxes, and most of all from war. (Bloom, 1935: 10) During the post-​war years it remained routine for newspapers to suggest that women have the power to decide elections: ‘It seems it will be the women who make the decision’ (The Guardian, 1951a: 2). Other examples include: ‘Women could hold the key to the outcome of the election’ (Daily Telegraph, 1974a: 9); and ‘The future of Britain will be decided next week by the women –​whether the men like it or not’ (Daily Mirror, 1979: 1–​2). This last example strongly implies that men might be uncomfortable about power being wielded by women voters or that women and men hold opposing political priorities. This latter assumption runs through each of the examples, since women would only hold that power if their concerns were different enough from men that they would vote as a bloc. Nevertheless, despite obvious flaws in the presentation, this trend for depicting women as crucial to the outcome of elections continued into the 1990s and 2000s. In these later years the discussion became dominated by the importance of specific groups of women voters, as opposed to the undifferentiated mass of all women voters. The increased use of political marketing techniques by political parties meant that women voters became increasingly segmented by consumer habits and socioeconomic background. This helped shape campaigns, as parties tried to tap into the specific concerns of each of these respective subgroups. Such techniques are, perhaps inevitably, reflected in newspaper reporting. Various target groups such as ‘Worcester Woman and her undecided friends’ (Freedland, 1997: 15) or ‘Take a Break woman’ (Toynbee, 2005: 6) become ubiquitous in newspaper commentary at this time (Harmer & Wring, 2013). In 2010 party strategists suggested that

70

THE VOTER

‘the election would be decided by 400 000 women in marginal constituencies’ (Oliver, 2010: 11). The press reported that ‘women are regarded as the key group of swing voters’ (Winnett, 2010: 4). These examples demonstrate that women voters have been consistently portrayed as significant actors in election campaigns. Nevertheless, even in moments when their power is recognized, this was accompanied by an inclination to stereotype women as a distinct voting bloc who are erratic and difficult to read. Accordingly, women voters were frequently depicted as ‘an unpredictable lot’ (Daily Mail, 1970d p. 9). Newspapers frequently expressed concern that their voting intentions were unclear and volatile. During the interwar period, women’s novelty as citizens meant that newspapers frequently speculated about their voting intentions. Such speculation was particularly prominent in the 1918 and 1929 elections, perhaps unsurprisingly given that both elections saw a substantial influx of new voters. The Daily Telegraph declared that ‘in the big stakes of tomorrow’s election the woman voter is the dark horse’ because they ‘added the unknown factor to the power of the polls’ (Daily Telegraph, 1918: 5). The Daily Mirror similarly suggested that voters were ‘the sphinx in the general election’ (Walker, 1922: 7). Much interest was taken in the way political parties were struggling to predict how women might vote: ‘There is still one mystery perplexing the organisers of all political parties –​how women will vote’ (Daily Mail, 1922: 9). Newspapers expressed similar concerns in 1929 after the equalization of the franchise: ‘the political experts are more puzzled than they ever have been … because of the incalculable influence of the newly enfranchised’ (Daily Mirror, 1929: 7). The sentiment that women voters were particularly unpredictable remained remarkably unchanged across time. In 1951, for example, the Daily Mail claimed that ‘local organisers wish they knew what the women were thinking’ (Wakeford, 1951: 5) so they could judge the potential outcome more effectively. Similar claims were made in 1974: ‘The big mystery all the political parties would give their right hands (strong or weak) to solve is how women are going to vote tomorrow’ (Proops, 1974b: 9). During the post-​war period, the unpredictability of women as voters remained a consistent trope in the coverage which became manifest in two distinct ways. Firstly, women were frequently portrayed as unwilling to engage with or discuss voting and politics. In 1964 the Guardian claimed that it was ‘a baffling group of “won’t say” women who will decide the election’ (The Guardian, 1964: 2). The Sun also suggested that ‘women were the pollster’s problem, according to Mr Taylor. They tended to be more conservative, both with a capital and with a small ‘c’, but were reluctant to express views on political subjects’ (Suich, 1964: 10). This statement is, of course, contradictory. The journalist simultaneously claims that pollsters were unable to make sense of women’s political views because of their

71

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

reluctance to discuss politics and asserts that women tend to be politically conservative. No evidence is provided to support this perception of women voters’ opinions, and so we must conclude that either women are happier to talk about political subjects than Taylor suggests, or he was guessing based on existing ideas about women and their politics. The second way that women were depicted as unpredictable was in descriptions of them as undecided or so-​called ‘floating voters’ who were yet to make up their minds. The Daily Mail included a feature in their coverage of the 1955 election wherein ‘Flo Vote, the typical floating voter’ toured ‘the constituencies for three weeks to decide where she should put her “X” ’ and reported back for the benefit of women voters. She was described as a typical ‘housewife who could not make up her mind’ (Daily Mail, 1955b: 4). In addition to characterizing women as unable to decide, women were compared unfavourably with men in that they were depicted as ‘more reluctant than men to take the big decision’ (Carroll, 1974: 1). The Guardian, on the other hand, chose to reflect the idea that ‘women voters are “discerning” rather than floating’ (Wintour & Edemariam, 2010: 12). This description afforded women much more agency and intelligence, and perhaps ties in with the more rational idea of the floating voter that was historically attached to male citizens. Nevertheless, this still asserted a sense of unpredictability. These undecided women were often depicted as unengaged, apathetic, and difficult to persuade to vote: ‘Working class women who are potential Labour voters but are the least likely of any social group to make it to the polling station … party strategists are also privately anxious about how to reach and persuade poorer working class women in particular to get to the polls’ (Travis, 2001: 18). Women were, therefore, consistently portrayed as undecided, uninformed, and even apathetic about formal politics. News items about the unpredictability of women voters tended to treat women as though they were a passive and homogenous mass of voters with the same motivations and opinions. The tendency to portray women as a discrete group or constituency with similar concerns and opinions ignores the vast differences among women, such as their social class, ethnicity, age, sexuality, and so on. Combining women into one distinct category instead of representing women in their diversity means that many women voters go completely unrepresented in electoral coverage. The Guardian eloquently advanced this point in 1979: Politics and voting are not simple and assumptions that women vote as women rather than as members of an age group, a class or a workforce are highly suspect. Nevertheless politicians, pollsters and academics have for years rather assumed that women are more conservative

72

THE VOTER

than men, they personalise their politics more, that they follow their husband’s political preferences and that –​latterly –​a nod at women’s issues is necessary for the party that wants to scoop up women’s votes. (Mackie, 1979: 9) While the newspaper squarely lays the blame at the door of political parties in this example, the same can be said for political journalists who routinely reproduce the same stereotypes in their coverage, meaning that they are no more able to represent women voters than are the politicians who seemingly fail them as a matter of course.

Women’s values and motivations The content analysis revealed that women’s familial roles were consistently emphasized in news coverage, and that this went further by turning these roles into a primary motivation. Women’s reasons for voting were very often linked to their domestic concerns. The Daily Mirror claimed in 1924 that voters ‘may not particularly care whether we sign a treaty with Albania or not because the whole thing is too distant, but every housewife cares very considerably whether the price of sugar is to be 2d per pound cheaper or not’ (Wallace, 1924: 5). The sentiment that women only care about matters which directly impact on them and their families remained remarkably consistent across time. In 1970 it was claimed that ‘for every woman who asks about foreign policy there are 40 anxious about the prices issue’ (Daily Telegraph, 1970: 13). Similarly, a Daily Mirror editorial asked, ‘Does the Chancellor think the electorate is soft in the head? Does he think the British housewife is more worried about Reds under the bed than the price of bread under Ted?’ (Daily Mirror, 1974a: 2). Excellent rhyming aside, these examples show that matters of international significance (such as foreign policy) were presented as remote and unimportant to women in comparison with the immediacy of consumer prices. This mode of representation reinforces the idea that their relationship with their families determines women’s voting preferences. In this framework, women are not capable of thinking beyond the family, or beyond the here and now. Worryingly, this notion persists in relatively recent coverage as well. In 2005, a columnist for the Sun complained that she had written many times before in this column that women voters –​ particularly those with children –​are interested in education, crime, health and all the issues that affect our families and their future … Yet all these important matters seem to have been smothered into

73

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

oblivion be repeated bickering over the validity, or otherwise, of the decision to ‘liberate’ Iraq from Saddam Hussein. (Moore, 2005: 11) In this example, women are apparently unconcerned with fundamental democratic concerns such as the trustworthiness of our government and elected representatives. Very few newspapers have challenged this somewhat limited depiction of women’s political motivations, though examples do exist. A notable exception comes from 1979: ‘Women account for more than 40 per cent of Britain’s work force –​and two out of three of them married. So the true picture of women today is not one of the little wife at home who can’t be bothered with anything more than the price of butter’ (Cousins, 1979: 5). Of all the factors that are seen as shaping women’s political views, motherhood stands out in particular: ‘The hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that writes the decisive X’ (Daily Mirror, 1959: 16–​17). In 1918 the Guardian suggested that ‘having got this power, a power which they can use for improving the conditions of life for their own household, for their homes, and for their children, it is a trust which they ought to exercise’ (The Guardian, 1918a: 6). The idea that women would vote with their children in mind is perhaps one of the safer assumptions made by politicians and the press, though it is still an assumption, and one that does not distinguish between women with children and those without. Nor does it reflect the differences that might exist between women whose children fall into different age ranges or socioeconomic brackets. Nevertheless, the more reductive assumption that women are solely motivated by concerns about their children is evident throughout the interwar period: ‘There was no section of the community who understood more distinctly than the mothers of the nation the need for healthy conditions in the home, school, factory, and everywhere where children and adults met and lived together’ (Daily Herald, 1924: 8). Moreover, in 1931 the Daily Herald asked, ‘What woman will give her vote for that cutting of the tiny income of the very poor which means, not figuratively but in hard fact, less food and less clothing for thousands of children who even know hardly what it is to be properly fed or adequately clad?’ (Daily Herald, 1931: 8). In these examples, motherhood is represented as a universal virtue, one that sees the woman voter act as a mother not only to their own family but to the needy children of the country more broadly. These findings support Bingham (2004), who also observed that women were often represented as mothers who were concerned about social conditions and the welfare of children during this period. Despite the valorization of the role of motherhood here, portraying women voters in this way reinforces patriarchal assumptions about women’s role in society by placing them and their political concerns firmly in the private sphere. There are parallels with

74

THE VOTER

many historical ideals of femininity that raised women to a pedestal provided they did not enter the masculine, public sphere. Representations of women voters as being first and foremost concerned mothers continued unabated during the post-​war period. However, one noticeable change was that news items became much more interested in individualizing women. The focus, therefore, shifted from depicting women voters as anxious to improve social conditions in general, to portraying them as mostly concerned about their own families and even addressing them directly as individual women who should vote with the needs of their family foremost in her mind. For example, in 1945 the Daily Herald implored: ‘If you have children … help the Labour party to see that they get the food they need and the education they deserve’ (Allan, 1945: 4). Similarly, the Daily Mirror claimed in 1951 that ‘the housewife’s fight is to keep what her family already have. She is fighting for family security’ (Daily Mirror, 1951: 12). Even after the immediate post-​war decades, mothers continued to be portrayed as an important target group for politicians to win over. In 1979, prime minister Jim Callaghan knew that ‘Britain’s mums hold the key to Thursday’s General Election –​just as they did for Ted Heath’s Tories in 1970’ (The Sun, 1979c: 7). Similarly, in 1987: ‘Labour hopes to woo Britain’s mothers last night with the promise of a brighter future for their children’ (Bradshaw, 1987: 2). During the 1990s and 2000s, newspapers continued to focus primarily on individual mothers, but now they featured specific women and their opinions rather than simply addressing women. One woman suggests she will vote for ‘the party that will help her family the most’. Similarly, ‘Laura hopes Labour will stick to their election pledges of delivering pre and after school care for 100,000 children by 2004. And she is keen to see the introduction of more breakfast and after-​school clubs, holiday places and weekend activities for families’ (The Sun, 2001b: 23). These examples reinforce the notion that women’s political priorities are inextricably linked to their familial responsibilities. Women’s voices were also employed to reinforce these traditional ideas: ‘ “I’m appalled”, says her mum Jeannie, “because of these cut backs, my daughter and other handicapped children like her are going to suffer” ’ (Palmer, 1997: 3). Underlying this, however, is a thread of gendered portrayals that emphasize the need to ‘charm the nation’s mothers’ (Daily Mirror, 2010: 5) rather than engage with them about substantive policy issues. Women’s political priorities were also often assumed to follow those of their male relatives, especially during the interwar years. Early newspaper coverage suggested that newly enfranchised women would vote according to their husband’s views. The Guardian stated in 1918 that ‘it is said that many of the wives of absent soldiers will not vote because their husbands cannot advise them, and this, unfortunately means the double disenfranchisement

75

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of the soldiers’ (The Guardian, 1918b: 4). This example suggests that women were seen as needing men to help them understand politics. It also positions women as proxy voters for their absent relatives. The Daily Telegraph also claimed that ‘the reports show, too that in the present uneducated state of womanhood (the word is used politically) there is a disposition on the part of the married woman voter to accept her husband’s view as her own’ (Daily Telegraph, 1922a: 11). The assumption that women do not understand political issues and willingly accept their husband’s views is taken for granted. The Daily Mail stated that one man who has had more than twenty years of election experience yesterday classified the women into three groups: the woman who regards a request for her vote as an impertinence; the woman who takes her politics from her husband and stands by them to the death; the woman who distrusts politics and regards a canvasser in the same light as a tax collector. (Daily Mail, 1922: 9) Here women were portrayed as either disinterested, dogmatic, or distrustful voters rather than as engaged citizens. The author’s use of an unattributed source for such comments also allowed the journalist to distance themselves from this sexist characterization, although the decision to report the experience of the source is clearly designed to give it some credence. It was not until the 1950s that women voters started to be portrayed as more independent. Newspapers began to recognize that women no longer deferred to their male relatives’ political demands. The Guardian claimed that men had ‘apparently less influence over their wives than at one time’ (The Guardian, 1951a: 2). The Sun claimed that ‘a survey had shown that 12 per cent of women did not vote like their husbands’ (Suich, 1964: 10). The Guardian explained in 1964 that ‘women no longer automatically vote with their husbands and are quite happy to say so on the doorstep’ because ‘more women are going out to work’ and their ‘economic independence leads to independent thought’ (The Guardian, 1964: 2). Even though this development was primarily portrayed in favourable terms, it was still deemed surprising enough by many newspapers to warrant mentioning. For example, the Sun suggested that ‘the only amazement of the campaign so far has been the extraordinary number of households in which husband and wife hold opposing political opinions’ (The Sun, 1966b: 8). Similarly, one of their columnists expressed surprise when she ‘discovered that they are no longer tagging like obedient sheep behind their men’ (Proops, 1974a: 17). These constant references to a time when women voted in line with their husbands reinforced the idea that women, at least at one time, were not as politically aware or astute as their male relatives. On the eve of the 1979 election, the

76

THE VOTER

first to feature a woman party leader: ‘Fifty years ago, the women won the vote –​and then too often voted as their husbands told them’ (Daily Mirror, 1979: 1–​2). Such claims reinforce patriarchal assumptions about women’s position in society and downplay their political knowledge and understanding (Harmer & van Zoonen, 2016). Women voters’ political values and motivations are often narrowly defined as being derived from their roles as wives and mothers. Portraying voters in this fashion reinforces the idea that women are predominantly motivated to vote according to which party satisfies their interest in so-​called quality-​of-​life issues that affect them personally. Women voters are therefore assumed to fit a very narrow stereotype which excludes the possibility that they have other reasons for voting, or that they are just as likely as men to vote according to their ideological position. It also means that the newspapers offer no recognition of the fact that a significant proportion of the female electorate might not have husbands or children at all. Women voters are therefore assumed to conform to heteronormative and patriarchal assumptions about women’s role in society, and those who do not fit this stereotype are wholly marginalized in news coverage of electoral politics. A similar story can be told about the issues which women are most associated with in the coverage.

Women’s issues? The content analysis results revealed that news items about women voters tended to be dominated by the economy or health and welfare. There were also a significant number of elections where equalities issues were prominent. When we look more closely in the next section at how these issues are discussed concerning women voters, it becomes clear that news coverage of women voters is highly gendered.

Home economics: 1918–​79 Typically, the economy is characterized by gender and politics scholars as a masculinized policy area (Conroy, 2015). However, as the content analysis showed, it was deemed the most critical issue for women in election coverage between 1918 and the late 1970s. A qualitative analysis of the coverage shows that women voters’ interest in the economy was seen as predominantly related to the cost of living and how this would affect their families. After all, as the Daily Mirror pointed out: ‘The price of an egg and a loaf of bread and a packet of detergent is politics’ (Proops, 1974a: 17). Consequently, the figure of the housewife dominated the coverage of women voters during this long period. Women were described as being willing to ‘scrutinise the promises and merits of competing candidates solely from the point of view

77

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of the housewife, the home, and the needs of the country’ (Willoughby, 1922: 7). The economy was constructed as important because ‘the women are profoundly concerned at the high cost of living, and the party which is able to convince the army of housewives that it is determined to reduce taxation –​and, consequently the cost of commodities –​ will triumph tomorrow’ (Daily Mirror, 1922: 3). During the interwar period, knowledge of running a household was frequently equated with the capability to understand how to run the country. For example: ‘The average mother of a family, and especially of a middle class family, is essentially a good manager. She has to make a pound go as far as 210 pence. She wants and gets value for money’ (Watkins, 1923: 5). Women were often described as ‘the Chancellors of the Exchequer of the home’ (Daily Mail, 1931: 14) and ‘guardians of the domestic purse’ (Daily Mirror, 1931: 7) who were keen to ‘defend [their] shopping basket’ (Sutherland, 1935: 10). In a politically convenient gloss of macro-​and microeconomics, the woman voter was portrayed as vital to the economic prosperity of the country because she has the spending of the worker’s wage; she is the biggest employer of labour in the country. The smashing wage reductions in the last three years have restricted her power to buy goods, thereby restricting the home market, creating unemployment, and at the same time bringing want into millions of homes. (Daily Herald, 1923: 1) Politicians were frequently reported as appealing directly to women voters in these gendered terms. In 1923, then prime minister Stanley Baldwin was quoted saying: I am not surprised that our opponents have given up argument and have fallen back upon a dishonourable attempt to scare the housewife by talking of dear food. Women of every class find their resources straightened by the burdens which their households have to bear in taxes and rates to save the workless from destitution. (Daily Mail, 1923b: 6) A year later, Ramsay MacDonald, ‘addressing a women’s meeting at Cwm Avon, Glamorgan, last night, said he had fulfilled the pledges given at the last election to reduce the taxes on tea and sugar’ (Daily Mail, 1924b: 10). In the post-​war era, the cost of living became even more central to the political discourse since reconstruction policies promoted austerity and maintained rationing well into the 1950s (Zweiniger-​Bargielowska, 2001). This was reflected in the news coverage of the elections that followed. In 1951, the Daily Mirror stated that austerity was a ‘regrettable truth for the

78

THE VOTER

benefit of any housewives who may have been deceiving themselves with the great illusion that any British Government can suddenly give them more food, or put more buying power in their purses, or slash prices without slashing the standard of living’ (Daily Mirror, 1951: 12). The implication here is that housewives were unwilling or incapable of understanding the economic situation, which is most evident in the idea that they are ‘deceiving themselves’ or are being taken in by some ‘great illusion’. By itself, this might not be overly problematic since all citizens are capable of believing in a pleasant illusion, but the issue comes when this is seen in the light of an entire body of gendered items implying the same thing. Another example showed frustration with some women voters who were not engaged: The housewife who leave politics alone and thinks that the Government has no connection with her job in the home has much to learn. She is afraid her husband may lose his job. She is worried about her children’s future. She is tired of waiting for a council house which, when it is ready, she will probably have to reject because the rent is too high. She grumbles at the price of milk and the price of bread … a minute’s reflection should be enough to show her that these things are determined by politics. (Sutherland, 1935: 10) Overt criticism of voters was rare, however, and newspapers throughout the 1950s and into 1970s positioned themselves on the side of the housewife. In 1955, then chancellor of the exchequer Rab Butler ‘was questioned by a young housewife who said she could find no cheap food –​only that which was rising in price. Mr Butler agreed that the cost of living was a difficult problem’ (Daily Mail, 1955a: 4). The use of one housewife to illustrate the concerns of all housewives is noteworthy because it suggests that she speaks on behalf of all women. This assumption that women generally harboured monolithic views was also prevalent in coverage of the 1970s: Tory leader Mr Edward Heath made a final attempt last night to win the housewives’ vote, with a slashing attack on sparing prices and crippling taxation … he blamed Labour for Britain’s economic problems and declared: ‘Mr Wilson has made his biggest mistake. He has underestimated the mood of the women of this country’. (Daily Mail, 1970c: 1) The 1970 election was particularly marked by discussion of the cost of living. The Daily Mail reported that ‘prices are going up at the rate of 2s in the £ this year. Wages are going up as fast, if not faster. This is hell for the housewife. It means that we all have to keep running to stay at the same

79

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

place’ (Daily Mail, 1970a: 1). There was a consensus around the idea that prices were the central concern: ‘Of course, prices are the biggest election issue for housewives agree all the party spokesmen, and the candidates’ (Daily Telegraph, 1970: 13). Here, the views of party spokespeople and candidates are offered as authoritative sources on women’s political views, rather than those of women themselves. It was reported that politicians of all parties placed the rising cost of everyday commodities at the centre of their campaign to women voters: ‘The Tory leader’s [Ted Heath’s] eve-​of-​ poll rallying cry went out to the housewife. They have been underestimated by Mr Wilson, he said’ (Shrimsley, 1970: 1) because ‘the evidence is there for all to see, clear and beyond dispute. It is the evidence of the shopping basket and grocer’s counter. It is the evidence every housewife knows only too well’ (Daily Mail, 1970b: 2). The Conservative Party sought to appeal to working-​class women, in particular those who were not receiving the benefits of her working-​class husband’s improved pay packets under Labour (Day, 1982). This strategy culminated in the first Party Election Broadcast to feature the everyday experiences of an ordinary working-​class woman, which encouraged similar women to vote Conservative even if their husbands were content Labour voters (Harmer & Wring, 2013). Day (1982) claimed that this was the first time that a particular group of women voters were singled out for political attention of this kind, and that it was ultimately successful at persuading many working-​class women to vote Tory. Throughout the remainder of the 1970s, the cost of living continued to be an important issue associated with women voters –​‘For the housewives of Britain, the cost of the family’s food bill is a major factor as they weigh up the pros and cons of this election’ (Burton, 1979: 7) –​reinforcing the ‘conventional wisdom … that every election, in the end, turns out to be a Shopping Basket Election’ (The Sun, 1979b: 1–​2) as far as women were concerned. However, the dominance of prices and microeconomics would come to an end as, into the 1980s and beyond, the focus shifted towards health and welfare.

Health and welfare: 1983–​2017 In the 1980s, the focus on the cost of living waned, and news items about women voters were suddenly more likely to focus on health and welfare policies. There was also a shift in the role women played in these news items. In the earlier period, women voters were portrayed as actively engaged in advocating for lower prices and better consumer protections. In these later stories about health and welfare, women were more likely to be represented as subjects who were at the mercy of policymakers. This stands in stark contrast with their earlier portrayal as proficient housewives who had agency and who were able to make tough political choices.

80

THE VOTER

Some newspapers chose to report government failures on health and welfare by introducing individual women as unwitting victims of various policies. In 1992, the Daily Mirror carried a feature with several ordinary people interviewed about their struggle with living conditions. Examples included a widow called Daisy who ‘lives alone in a spick and span council flat that betrays no outward sign of deprivation’ (Daily Mirror, 1992: 10–​11) and a mother who ‘had seen iron bars go up at neighbours’ windows. She’d watched helplessly as gangs of vandals daubed graffiti on walls in broad daylight. She had heard the groups of giggling teenagers sniffing glue outside her three year old daughter Leanne’s bedroom window’ (Young, 1992: 16–​17). These examples functioned as highly emotive appeals to the broader audience by using vulnerable people like senior citizens and young mothers to highlight the inadequacy of the present government. The third-​person narrative cast these women in a passive role by denying them the opportunity to express themselves in their own words. By turning these women into victims, they are necessarily stripped of political agency. Women became emblematic of the difficulties experienced by various vulnerable groups during this period. ‘The plight of pensioners on the poverty line’ (Daily Mirror, 1992: 10–​11) was a common trope: ‘Widow Alice Barham, 85, has to survive on a £63-​a-​week pension and lives in sheltered accommodation’ (Daily Mirror, 1997: 6); ‘Two thirds of women pensioners are scared to leave their house at night [due to rising levels of crime]’ (Smithers & Harding, 1997: 2). The NHS was an obvious focus for such coverage, and accordingly ‘a desperate mum who cornered Mr Blair on TV about her dying daughter declared last night: “her life is in his hands”. Alice Maddocks, eight, has a rare condition called severe aplastic anaemia and will die without a bone marrow transplant’ (Pascoe-​Watson, 2001: 8). These examples all portrayed women voters in highly emotional terms and reinforced stereotypical assumptions about women. The NHS was also frequently commented on by women themselves as an important policy area of concern: ‘The NHS is something I believe in and yet my experience of it is dreadful’ (The Sun, 2001b: 23). One woman whose mother had died amid poor conditions in an NHS hospital appeared in the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail on the same day. Her emotive account served to undermine Labour’s claims that the NHS had improved under their administration. The various newspaper accounts claimed that the woman’s mother had been ‘treated worse than an animal’ (Rayner, 2010: 5) and was left to ‘die in squalor’ which was ‘horrifyingly undignified’ (Wilkes, 2010: 8). One wonders if, in cases like this, women are being turned into victims so that the male voter can metaphorically ‘save’ them from the evils of the newspaper’s political opponents.

81

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

While some women were reduced to victims, there were equally problematic examples in which some women were stereotyped as being wilfully dependent on the state. For example, in response to the Conservatives’ pledge to reintroduce a married-​persons tax allowance in 2010, the Daily Mail claimed that ‘areas where unmarried mother figures are highest are in the poorest parts of the country’ which makes ‘single or early motherhood a good career choice’ (Daily Mail, 2010b: 12). In contrast, the Daily Mirror condemned the plans as a ‘thoughtless and unjustifiable’ (Beattie, 2010: 6–​7) policy which stigmatized and misunderstood the plight of widows and single mothers. The focus on health and welfare is striking because it frames women as passive recipients of the state’s benevolence rather than active and equal citizens who make an essential contribution to society. Far from being victims here, the implication has always been that these women are either criminal or, for some politicians and newspapers, as close to it as makes no difference.

Equality The content analysis suggests that policies designed to improve equality were a consistent presence across time. Equality is a broad category which encompasses social inequality, poverty, and issues relating to minority groups, but in this context, women’s rights predictably dominated the news coverage. Consequently, this means that there was very little or no focus on social problems which affect marginalized women such as racism, LBGTQ+ inequalities, or disability issues, for example. And even though equality matters pervade the coverage across time, one should note that there are some changes in tone, which means that the picture of that coverage is hardly consistent. Early news items focus on reporting women’s improved political rights and their ability to vote and stand for parliament. Later the focus is on equality of opportunity in employment, as well as their right to receive equal pay and to maternity leave and childcare provision, policies that address the structural barriers to women’s equality. In the early election campaigns, newspapers noted that ‘up until now the women’s aspiration for equality has lacked the impulse and sanction of civic power. By their enfranchisement aspiration in every field becomes a legitimate and realisable demand’ (Daily Mail, 1918a: 4). The suggestion here is that, because women have gained formal political representation, this would necessarily translate into their ability to advance women’s position further by enacting appropriate legislation. The tone of these examples placed women’s unequal status in the past tense: ‘Women had been denied equality in politics, proper wages in industry, and had suffered the limitation of social

82

THE VOTER

opportunities in every department of life’ (Daily Herald, 1924: 8), which suggests an optimism about the potential impact of women in public life. In contrast, after the Second World War, news items about equality begin to discuss broader inequalities which women continued to experience in their everyday lives. News items about equality became less about widening their participation in the public sphere and more about improving opportunities for women to work and live on equal terms with men. In 1950, a letter in the Daily Mirror proclaimed that ‘the most important question a woman should ask her candidate is: “will you support the Married Women’s Bill making husband and wife equal partners?” for when the Bill becomes law, all women will have gained equal status of rights and responsibilities and equal pay will be bound to follow’ (Woollett, 1950: 2). In 1979, then prime minister Jim Callaghan ‘made a particular appeal for women’s votes. He said his Government had introduced a number of measures to help women, such as equal pay and equal opportunity’ (Potter, 1979: 7) and that ‘women are getting their best ever deal under Labour, … in the last five years, more had been done to establish women’s right than ever before … Labour set up the Equal Pay Act, sex discrimination laws and a woman’s right to maternity leave’ (Thompson, 1979: 5). Similarly, in 1997: the Liberal Democrats used national ‘Take Our Daughters to Work’ day to spell out policies for women, underlining their commitment to equality of opportunity at home as well as work. Launching the party’s Fair Deal for Women programme, Diana Maddock MP said women were held back by lack of access to childcare, low pay and poor maternity rights. (Smithers, 1997: 12) This very specific focus on women’s ability to balance their home and work lives ignores other issues which affect women in employment, such as sexual or racial harassment and discrimination, not to mention working cultures which may put women off for safety reasons, such as unsociable hours and poor transport links. While the changing social position of women was reflected more in news coverage as time progressed, there was a continued focus on women’s equality rather than a broader range of issues which affect women, such as racism, homophobia, or poverty, to offer some examples. Presenting equalities in such a narrow sense served to further emphasize the extent to which women were constructed as a homogenous group with similar life experiences and political concerns despite their diversity in terms of age, social class, ethnicity, and other factors. There was also no attempt to evaluate how these inequalities intersect to produce worse outcomes for some women than

83

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

others. News coverage of inequalities, then, actually further marginalizes those women who are already disadvantaged and under-​represented. Taken together, the ways in which political issues are most discussed in relation to women voters in news coverage reflects gendered assumptions about women’s contribution to society. While these are undoubtedly important issues for some women, the newspapers described all women as mainly concerned about the cost of living, health and welfare, and equalities issues. Moreover, the ways that these issues are usually framed tend to emphasize women’s domestic arrangements. Issue coverage also represented women as an undifferentiated mass of voters who share similar concerns, which in turn marginalizes those women who do not conform to patriarchal ideas about women’s role in the family.

Women’s voices The results from the content analysis showed that the extent to which women voters are given a voice has increased over time. During the interwar years, women’s voices were relatively few and far between and were mainly confined to the occasional reader’s letter. One example from 1935 stated: As a mother, I shall support the candidate who advocates a sane policy of education, infant and maternity welfare, the abolition of slum areas and the provision of more playgrounds for children. As a woman, I shall support the candidate who stands for peace abroad and improved social conditions –​less taxation, less unemployment, more houses at cheaper rents, decreased living cost. As a citizen, I shall vote for the candidate who demands an adequate British Navy and Air Force to maintain collective security. (Daily Mirror, 1935a: 14) This elaborate list of political concerns offers a rare insight into the multiple identities that women voters occupy. Indeed, defence is rarely considered a core concern for women voters, but the woman voter in this example clearly articulated that she saw international security as an extension of security for her family. Nevertheless, the news coverage in the main remained focused on their familial roles and domestic duties, and demonstrated the importance of including women’s voices in the news. In 1945, the Daily Mirror launched a ‘Vote for Him’ campaign. The newspaper encouraged women voters to use their vote to represent the views of their husbands and sons who had not yet returned home from war (Pugh, 1998). The newspaper, therefore, included a series of reader’s letters (mainly authored by women) explaining which party they intended to vote for as proxies for their male relations. Thousands of women

84

THE VOTER

responded: ‘Wives, mothers, sweethearts from all over Britain have written to the “Daily Mirror” to say that they are going to vote “for them” ’ (Daily Mirror, 1945a: 1). Thomas (2005) suggested that readers’ letters made up 30 per cent of the Mirror’s entire election coverage that year. One such letter stated that: I am a married woman, serving in the WAAF and shall vote Labour because I know that the future politics will decide whether I can afford to bring up one child or whether or not I shall get a house at a reasonable price, whether my husband will get a job at a living wage or not. (Daily Mirror, 1945b: 2) The newspaper described voting on behalf of men as a ‘sacred trust’ (Daily Mirror, 1945c: 2) or ‘a woman’s ballot box duty’ (Daily Mirror, 1945d: 1). Even though the newspaper featured women’s voices heavily, the ‘Vote for Him’ campaign positioned women as mere proxy voters for the political interests of men rather than as citizens in their own right. After the war, letters from readers remained a prominent vehicle for women’s voices. One woman confessed that ‘I’m trembling while I write this. (I’ve left my wash-​tub to do it)’ (Roberts, 1951: 6–​7), because she had never written to the newspaper before but was keen to be heard. Another woman complained that politicians canvassing for votes are promising jam to everyone –​except the single woman. After twenty-​five years at work I earn £4 16s a week … I live in a bed-​sitter in someone else’s house and pay a high rent. How about a little jam for me –​a living wage and a council flat? (Derby, 1955: 2) This is a rare example of a woman who does not conform to the dominant framing of women in election coverage. Instead of situating herself within the family, she emphasizes her role as an employee and tenant, a significant moment that shows that women often choose to see themselves outside of the roles of wife and mother and that more varied representation is needed to suitably serve the diversity of women properly. The post-​war years also saw an increase in examples of women voters interacting with politicians on the campaign trail. In 1955, one woman was quoted speaking to then chancellor Rab Butler: ‘ “You’re welcome to do my exchequer next week.” Laughing Mr Butler replied: “if I could advise you after the election I would be quite glad. But perhaps you could advise me. You probably know more about it than I do” ’ (Daily Mail, 1955a: 4). Earlier in this chapter it has been noted that newspapers talk of ‘charming’

85

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

women voters, and Butler seems inclined to that tactic here, rather than attempting to appeal to them with more rational arguments. Such tactics are of questionable merit, however, since women on the campaign trail are often not shown as susceptible to such obvious gambits. In 1979, a 43-​year-​old housewife, Mrs Rita Boot, who comes from a strong Labour family in Devonshire put the Prime Minister on the spot. She said: ‘many longstanding Labour voters are thinking of abstaining or voting for another party in anger at Left-​Wing extremism. What assurances can you give me and others that these power-​houses will not take control when the time comes for you to retire? (Bevins, 1979: 9) These examples depicted women engaging actively with the issues of the campaign. Newspapers increasingly began to include news items which asked women directly about their political views in the post-​war years. For example: ‘Maureen Price, 23, housewife of Birmingham … “I get my housekeeping on Friday and I am broke by Tuesday” ’ (Daily Mirror, 1964: 9). Similarly, ‘Angel Coleman, a miner’s wife’ was quoted saying ‘ “it is just shoved down your throat all the time”, she said. “I don’t vote, they are all a lot of liars” ’ (Moncur, 1987: 5). Both examples introduce the women as ‘wives’ rather than as citizens or voters. In the 1960s, newspapers began to include items which featured panels of readers commenting on their views about the election or politics in general. These items became an enduring feature of election coverage, offering some insight into the way ordinary people were responding to the campaign. In 1979, the Daily Mail featured a ‘panel of housewives’ whom they had asked to ‘monitor the campaign’ (Coolican, 1979: 4). Newspapers employed these items regularly, for example: Michelle Marsh, 18 from Oldham, Greater Manchester, is equally keen to see a change in power … ‘I think the Lib Dems are the party of the future. I am fed up of the pathetic way this country is run. On education, health and law and order, we need a shake-​up’. (Bowness, 2001: 6) In 2001, ‘Art teacher Angela Faunch, 31, says: “I voted Labour at the last election, but it was tactical voting. This time I’m voting Lib Dem” ’ (The Sun, 2001b: 23). The economy and its impact on family life was a common theme for women in these items; one was quoted saying ‘I’m a bit worried about … VAT’ (The Guardian, 2010a: 14), while another commented that ‘my biggest concern is petrol prices –​they are ridiculous’ (Battle, 2010: 28–​9).

86

THE VOTER

In these items, women tended to make vague allusions to policy areas rather than anything concrete: ‘For me education and the environment are very important’ (Topping, 2010: 8–​9). These items only seem to offer a superficial insight into the policies that women are interested in and their vague opinions about them. These panels of readers were often portrayed as reflective of broader opinion. The Sun claimed that ‘our team of ordinary voters drawn from all walks of life and reflects the opinions and concerns of Brits up and down the country’ (Sloan, 2010: 8–​9), but no details were given about how and why they were chosen. This proliferation of preselected readers expressing their political views perhaps reflects the growing personalization of politics. On the surface, some of these responses construct voters as actively interested in politics. However, the women are mainly reacting to the agenda of politicians and talking about their personal experiences rather than making their own political proposals. This move, towards focusing on personal and individual responses over time, suggests that women voters have become depicted as less politically engaged in more recent times compared to their forebears. This is exemplified when women make statements expressing the view that they feel unengaged with the political process. One woman admitted: ‘I’ve never had any interest in politics’ (The Sun, 2010: 40–​41). Others complained that political parties did not engage with them meaningfully. One woman described a party manifesto as ‘also a bit bland and it describes everything with far too broad a brush’ (The Guardian, 2010a: 14). The increasingly personalized focus on individual women is also exemplified by news items which report specific incidents from the campaign trail in which women ask hostile or difficult questions directly to politicians. In 2017, Theresa May was asked a difficult question about resources for people with learning disabilities by a woman, which she responded to poorly (Topping, 2017). The most prominent example, based on the volume of coverage it produced, happened during the 2010 election when then prime minister Gordon Brown referred to a woman voter who had just asked him a question about immigration as ‘just a bigoted sort of woman’ in his car while still wearing a lapel-​mounted microphone that had been provided by a broadcaster. Newspapers portrayed Gillian Duffy in very sympathetic terms as a ‘decent working woman’ (MacKenzie, 2010: 13) who was ‘popping out for a loaf of brown bread’ (Wilson, 2010: 1) when she spoke to Brown, emphasizing her domesticity and ordinariness. Her questions were portrayed as a ‘civilised inquiry’ (Letts, 2010: 8) and a ‘genuine concern’ (Daily Mail, 2010c: 14) about which ‘she spoke, I suspect for millions’ (Letts, 2010: 8). Duffy was depicted sympathetically by some newspapers, who transformed her into a symbol of the prime minister’s disdain for ordinary voters and their concerns. This incident is also far from unique. For example, Diana Gould

87

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

received attention for challenging Margaret Thatcher over the legitimacy of sinking the Argentinean ship the General Belgrano during the Falklands conflict in the run-​up to the election in 1983 (Coleman & Ross, 2010), while Sharron Storrer famously confronted Tony Blair over his government’s record on the health service during the 2001 election (Brookes et al, 2004). So, with a few notable exceptions, while the inclusion of women’s voices increased over time, their comments became increasingly apolitical, apathetic, or vague, which limits the extent to which their voices are valued in politics.

Conclusion This chapter makes a critical contribution to understanding how the role of women in elections is understood. There is a distinct lack of existing academic research into the ways women voters are mediated in news coverage of electoral campaigns, and the scant literature that does analyze women voters suggests that women have been portrayed as mothers and housewives who are concerned about domestic issues (Bingham, 2004). Research also indicates that women have been presented as mostly passive individuals who give somewhat vague opinions (Lewis et al, 2005; Adcock, 2010). Alternatively, they have been depicted as a specific group of voters that politicians need to win over in their quest to be elected (Vavrus, 2002; Harmer & Wring, 2013). Much of this research, however, tends to focus on one or a few election campaigns. In this chapter, a counterbalance to this is offered by providing a systematic analysis of the mediation of women over time. The quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that the representation of women voters in newspapers has been remarkably stable since 1918. While there were some subtle shifts in the way women were mediated, the representation of women has changed surprisingly little over twenty-​seven elections. The most observable change was that the proportion of items including a direct quotation from a woman voter increased over time, suggesting that women’s voices have been given more attention in recent years. However, the qualitative analysis revealed that, while there was an increase in direct quotations, the ways that their voices were included changed as well, not always to their benefit. In earlier elections, readers’ letters were a common feature in the coverage and allowed women to convey their thoughts (with some light editing, presumably) directly. In the post-​war period, this gave way to news items which asked a handful of women for their views on the campaign trail, or features where panels of readers were given some space to outline their response or opinion. This shift in how women’s voices are included resulted in women voters being

88

THE VOTER

represented as less engaged and less interested in the substantive issues and consequently less specific about their political views as time went on. This later picture reflects some of the findings of scholars who have looked at more recent news coverage (Lewis et al, 2005; Adcock, 2010), but also shows the importance of studying earlier elections. The analysis also showed that the phenomenon of news coverage focusing on individual women who interact with politicians on the campaign trail, identified by some authors (see Wring, 2002; Brookes et al, 2004), is a relatively recent development. This focus on specific target voters is indicative of the way that women voters have been subject to more individualized campaigning, and media portrayal, over time. Women voters were portrayed in very narrow terms as mothers and housewives whose motivations and political views were almost entirely attributed to their role in the family or private sphere (Bingham, 2004). Although this was not an unexpected finding in some ways, what is surprising is the extent to which this narrow representation persists over almost one hundred years, despite the profound social and political changes that have taken place in that time. It is also important to note that from the 1980s onwards, there seemed to be a renewed focus on women as mothers. This reassertion of motherhood was evident from the increased proportion of items that mentioned the families of women voters, which was consistently higher than the interwar period and in the 1960s and ’70s. This renewed focus on motherhood might help to explain why later studies have shown that women voters are often targeted by political parties (and therefore understood by journalists) based on their family situation (Harmer & Wring, 2013). In addition to portraying women voters as being especially motivated to vote by their family relationships, news coverage has tended to associate specific political issues with women. These issues remained remarkably stable over time and were dominated by a focus on the cost of living for the first half of the century, and then on health and welfare issues in the 1980s. While the issues remained similar, women came to be portrayed as less engaged and active in their demands for specific policies, and instead, newspapers began to render them as passive beneficiaries of the state’s funding in relation to health and childcare. While it is essential to cover issues that impact disproportionately on women, we see an ongoing and troublesome assumption that all women are affected in the same way, and an ignorance of other issues which impact on particular women. Another persistent feature of the news coverage was the extent to which women were depicted as unpredictable or undecided voters whose support is crucial to the outcome of the election. Along with the way women’s political perspectives, opinions, and the issues they care about are discussed in the coverage, this trend tends to present female citizens as a homogenous group

89

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of voters with similar priorities. This completely ignores the enormous social differences between women and tends to marginalize those women who do not conform to patriarchal assumptions about the role of women in society. So, while newspapers do include women voters in their electoral coverage, in practice, the prevailing assumptions that they are all motivated by their familial position and are interested in particular ‘women’s issues’ have the potential to stereotype and restrict the position of women in the mainstream political discourse. The more subtle changes which suggest women have come to be represented as less politically engaged and active over time, also show how crucial it is to monitor the representation of women over time.

90

4

The Spouses and Relatives: From ‘Ideal Election Wife’ to ‘Just Another Political Wife’ It might seem a strange choice to include an analysis of women who are neither portrayed as citizens nor as candidates in a study about electoral news. However, the ubiquity of coverage of spouses and relatives tells us a tremendous amount about British politics. Politicians’ relatives occupy an in-​between status where they are part citizen (as voters) and part politician (due to their political advocacy), which disrupts the traditional divide between public and private spheres. As a result, these women often appear in the newspapers as symbolic representations of, or advocates for, their male relatives’ political credentials or personal qualities. As these women are only included on the basis of their relationship with men, it is therefore instructive to scrutinize the newspaper coverage they receive because their presence also reveals much about the gendered character of election coverage. Coverage of wives and other female relatives is not a new phenomenon. The inclusion of women who were close to frontline male politicians in campaigning organizations like the Primrose League and the Women’s Liberal Federation encouraged women to become active in party politics long before they gained the right to vote (Cowman, 2010). Consequently, female relatives of aspiring or established politicians have been part of election campaigns for a long time. Prime minister William Gladstone’s wife Catherine was thought to be the first to establish the idea that wives should be seen alongside their husbands on the campaign trail by appearing on the platform when he spoke (Lawrence, 2009). Other women took a much more active role: Jennie Churchill (wife of Tory MP Randolph Churchill, and mother of Winston) became famous for giving lively speeches and canvassing voters during the 1885 election (Lawrence, 2009).

91

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

The extent to which female family members are involved in electoral politics is underlined by the fact that the very first three women who became MPs (Nancy Astor, Margaret Wintringham, and Mabel Philipson) were all married to the former occupants of their parliamentary seats. In each case, there was a vacancy as a result of their husband either being elevated to the House of Lords, dying, or being disqualified from office (Cowman, 2010). Some historians have argued that being married to a politician was a significant factor in the early electoral success of women candidates because it allowed them to present themselves as a reasonable female equivalent to their husbands, rather than as a dangerous feminist vanguard (Harrison, 1986). It also may have helped in a practical sense because it allowed them to contest a winnable seat which would have otherwise eluded them (Cowman, 2010). As noted in earlier chapters, it was a long time before women candidates were routinely selected for safe or competitive seats. Given their historical involvement in political campaigning, it is unsurprising that female relatives of politicians, and spouses in particular, in turn, attract media attention. While occupying no official political position in the process of elections (except as voters), the frequency with which they are reported on means their role in the campaign deserves some scrutiny. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a systematic analysis of the mediated representation of female relatives of politicians to analyze how their role and gendered representation changes over time. Firstly, the chapter explains why investigating the portrayal of such women is a vital component of understanding how election coverage is gendered. The chapter will rehearse the scant literature on politicians’ spouses’ media representation. Then, the results from the content analysis will be examined with particular attention paid to the development of the mediated representation of these women over time. The content analysis shows what proportion of the relatives are party leaders’ wives, what role they perform in the coverage, the extent to which their coverage mentions their appearance, and the proportion of coverage which evaluates them negatively. The chapter will then present a qualitative analysis of the changing role of politicians’ relatives over time, followed by an analysis of the gendered consequences of increasingly personalized newspaper coverage. The analysis in this chapter differs slightly from the previous two, because no politicians’ female relatives appeared in the sampled newspaper coverage in 2017; therefore, the analysis tracks their representation from 1918–​2015.

Power relations Other chapters in this volume, namely Chapters 2 and 5, show that the desirable qualities and traits of political leadership, but also of political

92

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

representatives in general, tend to be traditionally masculinized (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015; Harmer et al, 2017). This means there may be some benefit for politicians in including their spouse or daughters in their campaigning activities, because it shows that the politician in question embodies the position of the patriarch in his private life. This, in turn, reinforces his appeal to voters by signalling his authority, one of the core patriarchal values associated with leadership. It also implicitly conveys to voters his ordinariness: because he has a family, he is ‘just like them’, and this symbolically bestows legitimacy on his claim to represent the wider public. In one sense, then, politicians’ relatives might be considered newsworthy because they showcase the private lives of politicians, which are seen as increasingly important in the era of personalized politics. In a world in which politicians are routinely seen as elite and out of touch, this personalization can serve as a counterbalance, to ground politicians in the everyday. In political communication terms, personalization refers to the development of a greater focus on politicians as individuals rather than as representatives of broader political values or collectives. As a result, their political credibility has become increasingly bound up with appraisals of their personal qualities and private conduct. Van Aelst et al (2012) identify two elements of personalization. The first is the rise of individualization, in which political communication has become more candidate rather than party centred. The second element is in the growth of privatization, which focuses on examining the individual qualities and personal lives of politicians. Langer (2012) goes further, suggesting that this second element, what she refers to as personality politics, is constituted by two separate dimensions: first, the appraisal of personality traits which are desirable for political leadership (such as competence, intellect, and professional experience, all of which can be thought of as political qualities), and personal or human qualities such as likeability; the second dimension refers to reportage on the personal lives of leaders, such as their family or hobbies, which helps to portray a leader as caring, accessible, and relatable. She refers to this second dimension as ‘the politicisation of private persona’. In personality politics, the TV shows we watch, the sports teams we follow, and even the people we love are all reduced to little more than thin, politically valuable signifiers. It is this second dimension that is most pertinent to the inclusion of female relatives in election campaign coverage. Langer’s (2012) study of the personalization of political coverage in the United Kingdom between 1945 and 2009 concludes that most measures do not indicate a consistent and sizeable growth in personalized coverage. However, she does identify a ‘personal turn’ in political reporting since the 1990s, suggesting that coverage has become increasingly judgemental and intrusive in more recent decades (Langer, 2012). Stanyer (2013) refers to

93

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

this phenomenon as ‘intimization’ because it represents an erasure of the zone of privacy that politicians once enjoyed. However, as we have seen, politicians are often complicit in the process by exposing their private lives and families to media scrutiny (Trimble et al, 2013). Crucially for this study, personalization has gendered consequences for women in politics because, as the literature on gendered mediation of politics (discussed throughout this volume) shows, scrutinizing the personal lives and characteristics of politicians is inevitably gendered insofar as coverage routinely links physical bodies and personality traits with evaluations of leadership viability and competency (Trimble et al, 2013). This chapter will show that personalization is inevitably gendered. The use of male politicians’ relatives as signifiers of heteronormativity and an everyday, masculine ordinariness serves as evidence of the masculinized character of political representation. In a heteronormative patriarchal society that relies on a gendered division of labour, men inhabit the public sphere while women take care of the private realm. Including female relatives in political campaigns necessarily reinforces existing assumptions that politicians should be men who embody traditionally masculinized personality traits and experiences (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015). Politicians’ relatives, then, function as a symbolic resource for men campaigning for office, which implicitly reinforces the idea that politics is a masculinized domain. Inevitably, this has consequences for women politicians. Analyzing the presence and representation of female relatives in election coverage, then, is crucial for two interlinking reasons. First, it is essential because their inclusion as political resources for male politicians reveals that the normative or ideal political representative is still masculine. Consequently, wives and other relatives function as informal political activists who campaign in explicitly gendered and politicized ways. Secondly, analyzing them is vital because their visibility and newsworthiness reinforce gendered ideas about politics so that any stereotypical or sexist coverage can therefore have consequences for all women in politics, regardless of their role.

Politicians’ wives in the media There is a growing body of work on the mediated representation of politicians’ female relatives in political news. Much of this literature is, perhaps unsurprisingly, dominated by studies of US first ladies. Caroli’s (2010) historical overview of all first ladies since American independence documents how each woman adapted and shaped the role. Taken together, press coverage of first ladies framed them in relation to four primary roles. Firstly, they were expected to fulfil the role of loyal escort, with no independent function. Second, first ladies performed a protocol role, whereby they acted

94

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

as hostesses and attended social, ceremonial, and diplomatic functions. The third frame, a twentieth-​century innovation, emphasized their role in charitable causes. The fourth frame, which is deemed controversial, showed them acting as advisors and informing government policy (Winfield, 1997). Early occupants of the role rarely attracted much press coverage, even when standing in for the president at official gatherings, but this changed as time went on. Controversial first ladies like Hillary Clinton received a significant amount of media attention (Winfield, 1997). Brown and Gardetto (2000) argue that gender is central to the media response to these women because the first lady is both a public and private wife and citizen. Their analysis of Hillary Clinton shows that news coverage portrayed her involvement in both the private and public spheres as problematic. Journalists repeatedly questioned whether her role as a lawyer and policy advocate would conflict with her role as a mother and wife. News coverage of Michelle Obama during her husband’s first presidential campaign was pervaded by sexist and racist stereotyping. Harris-​Perry (2011) demonstrates that media coverage of Michelle Obama made frequent references to myths about her body, her role as a mother, and her marriage which aligned with stereotypical coverage to which other black women are subjected. The spouses of political leaders outside the US have also been known to receive media attention, particularly during election campaigns. For example, during the 2002 presidential election in France, magazines featured pictorial spreads of the candidates and their wives engaged in everyday activities like cooking and relaxing at home. Likewise, in Germany, Karin Stoiber and Doris Schröder-​Köpf were both employed to appeal to women voters during the 2002 election. (Kuhn, 2004; Holtz-​Bacha, 2004). Research indicates that media coverage of politicians’ spouses is often more critical about those who adopt a politically active role (Scharrer & Bissell, 2001; Winfield & Friedman, 2003). For example, Sara Netanyahu was treated negatively by the Israeli press for allegedly overstepping her authority (Halevi, 2003). In the UK Cherie Booth (Tony Blair’s wife) has also received negative coverage from conservative tabloid newspapers, which characterized her as an excessively influential woman who manipulated her husband’s position for her own benefit (Reyes, 2003). Some authors suggest that politicians’ wives are deployed strategically by parties to compensate for perceived weaknesses of their husbands (Winfield & Friedman, 2003). Higgins and Smith (2013) argue that the wives of party leaders were similarly deployed during the 2010 British general election. They argue that Sarah Brown and Samantha Cameron were mobilized to counteract the negative aspects of their husbands’ personalities. Samantha Cameron (the daughter of Sir Reginald Sheffield, 8th Baronet of Normanby) was carefully reinvented as a middle-​class housewife in order to play down

95

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

her husband’s reputation as an out-​of-​touch member of the upper classes; while Sarah Brown was intended to humanize her husband by making him appear warmer and more caring than his reputation as a hard-​nosed political bruiser suggested. Reyes (2003) and Adcock (2010) have both argued that the mediated representation of Cherie Booth and her children is central to the mediation of Blair’s public image and that therefore any criticism of her is by extension a criticism of her husband. Blair sought to portray his wife as a typical working mother to enhance his ordinariness (Reyes, 2003). Adcock (2010: 146) shows that news coverage presented spouses like Booth as ‘silent, secondary figures, loyally accompanying their husbands on the campaign trail’ in newspaper coverage of the 1997 general election. Seaton (2003) argues that the personalization of political coverage has intensified in recent years. She cites examples of political leaders who would not have survived this heavily personalized coverage due to individual character and behavioural flaws, such as David Lloyd George’s long-​running affair with Frances Stevenson. Seaton also contends that Violet Attlee, wife of the Labour prime minister, was a dedicated Conservative voter. This fact went unreported but would be the kind of family disloyalty which would cause negative news coverage in modern day personalized news reporting. The research into the mediated representation of politicians’ wives shows that while their roles may change over time, wives are often strategically deployed to compensate for perceived inadequacies in their husbands’ campaigns. They also often receive intense scrutiny and criticism when they attempt to step out of the role of escort and assume an overtly political role. The remainder of this chapter will show that the role and representation of political relatives (particularly spouses) in UK election coverage has changed over time in perhaps surprising ways, but that their coverage continues to reinforce gendered stereotypes about the role of women in politics.

Changes and continuities over time This next section will offer a quantitative examination of how the representation of female relatives of politicians has changed over the last century. First, the analysis examines how these women are related to politicians, by showing the proportion of items that refer to the wives of prime ministers or party leaders. The analysis will then show what role politicians’ relatives played in each campaign by showing the proportion of items which portrayed them as actively campaigning or as merely present on the campaign trail, as well as the proportion of items which eschewed the campaign trail entirely for a focus on their private lives. Next, the proportion of items which mention

96

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

their appearance is analyzed. Finally, the analysis shows to what extent female relatives of politicians are negatively evaluated in the news coverage. Figure 4.1 shows the percentage of news coverage about politicians’ relatives which includes the wives of the main party leaders, rather than the wife of an ordinary candidate or some other relative. The data show that apart from in 1929, the percentage of coverage that was about the wives of party leaders (compared to other relatives) remained below 40 per cent during the interwar years (1918–​35). Further analysis shows that the most prominent female relative in the coverage was a leader’s wife in just three out of these seven campaigns: Margaret Lloyd George in 1918, and Lucy Baldwin in 1923 and 1929. This suggests that during these early elections, news coverage reported on a range of different female relatives who were out on the campaign trail. After 1945, there was a modest increase in the prominence of leaders’ wives that lasted through the 1950s and ’60s. In one striking example, Clementine Churchill alone accounted for 57.1 per cent of the coverage of female relatives in 1945. This increased dramatically in 1964 when party leaders’ wives accounted for 79 per cent of the coverage of female relatives. The proportion of items that were about leaders’ spouses declined during the 1970s and ’80s, which can partly be explained by the fact that Conservative leader Ted Heath (leader in the 1966, 1970, and both 1974 elections) was unmarried, and that Margaret Thatcher’s partner was male. In the 1990s and beyond, the wives of party leaders completely dominate the coverage. These women accounted for more than 84 per cent of news items about relatives between 1992 and 2010. The trend peaked in 2010 when it reached a huge 92.9 per cent of this coverage. Strikingly, there were no news items in 2017 referring to a female relative of a politician, which represents a marked shift from just seven years earlier. The presence of a female prime minister is obviously a factor, not to mention female leaders of several other parties; however, it is a significant change, nevertheless. Given that these women might seem like unconventional characters in election coverage, their role in the news stories was recorded to identify why they received so much press attention. Figure 4.2 shows the three main themes exhibited in news items about the relatives category over time: incidents from the campaign trail; relatives actively campaigning; and information about their personal lives. Figure 4.2 shows that female relatives have been a consistent presence in the news coverage up until 2017 when, as noted, none appeared in any news items studied. Items which simply reported incidents from the campaign trail were consistently the most prominent across time. Such news stories merely mentioned the women’s presence alongside a politician at a campaign event, or they were pictured with their relative.

97

newgenrtpdf

Figure 4.1: Percentage of coverage about party leaders’ wives 1918–​2015 100 90

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

80 70 60

98

50 40 30 20 10 0

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015

Leaders’ spouses (%) 37.5 25.9 28.5 18.4 51.8 20 13.7 57.1 52.1 33.3 43.8 41.7 79

60 38.1 42.8 33.3 24

50 23.8 91.3 84.2 91.2 87.5 92.9 78.6

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

In contrast, items showing them actively campaigning and those focused on their personal lives follow distinct trends. Between 1918 and 1950, the proportion of items showing female relatives actively campaigning account for between 20 and 55 per cent of coverage, which is varied but shows a consistent presence of active campaigning during this period. After 1945, these news items decline and stay relatively low until 2015. Indeed, there are no items of this type during the coverage of the 1987 election. The items that were coded in this way include examples of women giving speeches at campaign events or directly canvassing voters. It is clear, then, that the reportage on relatives actively campaigning declines over time. Conversely, items which focus on the private lives of female relatives have increased. There were very few items of this nature between 1918 and 1945. No personal stories were recorded in 1918, 1929, or 1945. After the Second World War there is an overall rise, peaking dramatically in 1966 before declining until another increase in 1983. The presence of such news items varies considerably between elections, but Figure 4.2 shows an escalation in the proportion of items focused on private lives. While the content analysis indicates that the role of women relatives definitely changed over time, in order to see how this change manifested, it is necessary to analyze the qualitative changes that took place as well. This will be returned to later in the chapter. The increased coverage of the private lives of female relatives is further evidenced by data which shows that over time there was an increase in the proportion of news items which commented on the physical appearance of these women. Figure 4.3 shows the percentages of items which made some reference to the physical appearance of the relative in question. The proportion of items referring to the appearance of politicians’ relatives follows a similar pattern to that of items focusing on their personal lives. These references are infrequent during the interwar years, appearing in under 5 per cent of items. The proportion of items that refer to appearance varies considerably, but there is a noticeable rise into the 1990s and beyond. These references were exceptionally frequent during the 2010 campaign. The problematic nature of these allusions to the appearance of politicians’ spouses and other relatives will be analyzed qualitatively later in the chapter. Since the presence of women who are not themselves standing for election in newspaper coverage might seem odd, the content analysis measured whether they were explicitly evaluated in order to determine if their involvement was considered an undesirable or unwelcome intrusion into political life. Figure 4.4 shows the proportion of items which included some negative evaluation of these women. The results show that negative coverage of female relatives is a recent phenomenon. Between 1918 and 1966, there were only three campaigns in which news items negatively reported on these women, and even then, such

99

newgenrtpdf

Figure 4.2: The three most prominent themes in coverage of relatives 1918–​2015 90 70 60 50 40

100

30 20 10 0

Campaign trail (%)

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 70

50 40.7 47.1 20.8 73.9 42.3 79.2

36

Actively campaigning (%) 54.5 31.4 19.6 27.3 35.7

36.3 51.4 69.6 49.1

44

41 33.3 17.4 16.7 21.1 17.6 19.2

8

9.1

8.7

10

20 11.1

16 14.3 14.3

Personal life (%)

2

5.1

50 21.7

10

20

3.7 47.1 16.7 13.1 38.5 20.8

0

8.6

1.8

3.6

50 0

42 38.5

40 65.2 47.4 64.7 73.1 0

8.7 21.1 11.8 7.7

68 36.4 56.5 16

0

8.3

4.3

0

58

50

28 27.7 35.7

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

80

newgenrtpdf

Figure 4.3: Percentage of items which mention the appearance of relatives 1918–​2015 50 45

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

40 35 30

101

25 20 15 10 5 0 Appearance (%)

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 0

0

3.6

3.6

0

2

5.1

6.7 17.4 15.8 11.8 7.7

8

9.1 26.1 40

20 11.1 5.9

4.2 39.1 11.5 20.8 20 46.4 35.7

newgenrtpdf

Figure 4.4: Percentage of items which evaluated relatives negatively 1918–​2015 40

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

35 30 25

102

20 15 10 5 0 Negative (%)

1918 1922 1923 1924 1929 1931 1935 1945 1950 1951 1955 1959 1964 1966 1970 1974 1974 1979 1983 1987 1992 1997 2001 2005 2010 2015 0

0

0

5.5

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

7.7

0

0

4.3

10

20

3.7

0

16.7 17.4 7.7

25

16 36.2 29.6

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

instances were rare. In contrast, from the 1970s onwards the proportion of items including negative comments increased. Such references peak in 2010 when over a third of items about female relatives were negative. Crucially, while most items about relatives throughout the sample did not evaluate the women at all, the increasingly negative coverage they received seems to accompany the trend identified in Figure 4.1, which shows an increasing focus on party leaders’ spouses. It also seems to tie in with the increased focus on their private lives (Figure 4.2). Later in the chapter, we shall return to the question of whether these connections are borne out by qualitative changes in the coverage. The content analysis showed that the presence of female relatives of politicians was a consistent feature of election coverage, with, as already noted, the lone exception of 2017. The results also showed that, over time, newspaper coverage began to focus more on the spouses of party leaders than on a broader range of female relatives. The role that female relatives played in news coverage also changed. While references to them accompanying politicians to events remained a consistent feature of the coverage, early news items tended to report on their overt campaigning activities, including making speeches and canvassing voters. Gradually these were replaced by news items which were much more focused on their private lives. This increased interest in their private lives worked in tandem with a higher proportion of items which mentioned their physical appearance. At the same time, news coverage of female relatives also became increasingly hostile. While the content analysis shows some ways in which news coverage of female relatives has changed over time, analyzing the coverage for qualitative changes will enable a better understanding of the role played by female relatives in election campaigns. The next section will address this in detail.

Relatives on the campaign trail This section will discuss two main qualitative trends: firstly, the changing role of politicians’ wives and other female relatives on the campaign trail. Secondly, the analysis unpacks how journalists and commentators incorporate descriptions and criticisms of the women’s private lives and appearance into electoral news. Both trends have much broader implications for the representation of women in political life. This will be discussed at the end of the chapter.

Public, private, or both? A closer look at the tone and framing of the coverage revealed that the role of female relatives in electoral politics and its coverage had changed

103

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

drastically over the sample period (Harmer, 2016). During the interwar years, these women enjoyed an overtly political role, campaigning actively on behalf of their relatives. After the Second World War, the coverage of relatives became increasingly personalized and focused on their private lives. At the end of the 1980s, overtly political relatives emerged who received significant criticism in the press. These women were often portrayed as too partisan, and in some cases too feminist. In 2010, this changed again when the party leaders’ spouses were depicted as apolitical supporters deployed to humanize their husbands (Harmer, 2015). Political spouses then disappeared entirely in 2017. The changing representation of female relatives will now be explored qualitatively to demonstrate the shift in their role over the course of the century.

Political activists: 1918–45 In the first UK elections to include women voters, female relatives (and spouses in particular) were seen as necessary to promote party-​political agendas to the new female citizens. This role was remarked upon explicitly in the Guardian: ‘A generation ago it was thought desirable for the wife of a candidate to make a personal tour in her husband’s constituency … it was an appeal from woman to woman; an appeal based entirely on sentiment, heedless of reason and of policy’ (The Guardian, 1923a: 6). The function of such tours was to encourage women to persuade their husbands to vote, since women could not vote themselves. However, ‘it is no longer enough for her to look charming. She must understand the issues and be able to explain and justify her husband’s policy’ (The Guardian, 1923a: 6).The sentiment that politicians’ wives were important for communicating with women voters was shared by the Daily Mail, which argued that women voters ‘feel instinctively that they will learn more about their candidate by studying the sort of woman he has married than by listening to his devastating lists of import and export statistics’ (Daily Mail, 1923d: 10). No evidence is offered to support this claim, but it is strongly implied that women are more interested in personality politics than policy and make their judgements more intuitively than rationally. As a result, female campaigners act as conduits for conveying the political credentials of their relatives, acting as symbols that can reach places that prudent arguments could never reach. While this undeniably underplays the ability of women to engage with political speeches, it does help to explain why politicians’ relatives on the campaign trail were considered so newsworthy at the time. During the interwar period, newspaper reports chronicled the activities of politicians’ wives, and occasionally their mothers and daughters, when they addressed campaign meetings explicitly designed for women. One example

104

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

was a ‘Mrs C.F.G Masterson [who] had a friendly reception from a crowded meeting of women electors’, when she addressed them about ‘the danger of a tariff on food’ (The Guardian, 1924a: 11). Similarly, Lady Diana Cooper (wife of Conservative candidate Duff Cooper) reportedly ‘faced an audience of 4000 women yesterday at Oldham, where she is helping her husband’ (Daily Mail, 1924a: 6). Many of them discussed party policy and were portrayed as knowledgeable regarding the issues of the day. For example, Mrs Barclay (wife of the Liberal candidate for Manchester Exchange, Robert Noton Barclay) ‘attacked the Conservative Party vigorously for their educational economies and finished up with a hope that “the grave of Protection will this time be dug so deep that its corpse will not be dug up again by any Conservative body snatchers” ’ (The Guardian, 1923c: 13). Lady Ernest Simon was also reported lambasting ‘the government’s treatment of education, which I feel to be the most fundamental of all social questions’ (The Guardian, 1935a: 15). Some of these women were even granted space in national newspapers to address women voters directly, such as ‘the wife of the Minister of Transport and one of the most active women workers in the Conservative Party’ (Daily Telegraph, 1929: 10), who wrote an article addressed to women urging them to think ‘seriously how they intend to vote tomorrow. For the first time, many women have now the privilege of citizenship … accorded to them by the Conservative government’ (Daily Telegraph, 1929: 10). The press reaction to these interventions was mostly positive (which was borne out in the content analysis). Some articles praised the campaigning capabilities of some politicians’ wives; for example, ‘Mrs Asquith seems to have performed a notable feat in the way of quelling rowdyism [sic] at one of her brother’s meetings on the Clyde’ (The Guardian, 1923b: 7). Clementine Churchill’s grasp of economics encouraged the Daily Mail to comment that ‘the British fiscal system does not sound a bright topic for a woman speaker till Mrs Churchill puts on her cooking sleeves and begins to make rissoles of Mr Baldwin’s programme’ (Daily Mail, 1923d: 10). Despite these generally positive comments, these women were still constructed in gendered terms, as this last quotation demonstrates. The contribution made by politicians’ female relatives was often couched in the language of domesticity. Mrs Churchill’s argument against the economic policy espoused by the Conservative leader is represented as a food preparation metaphor, using the language of a wife’s traditional domain to further drive home her appeal to voters. The language of domesticity was also used by women who made political speeches, such as when Mrs Noton Barclay declared that Sir Edwin Stockton’s speech, which left out an essential contemporary issue like free trade, ‘reminded her of the girl who tried to make Irish stew. She left the meat out’ (The Guardian, 1923c: 13). Similarly, a Mrs Masterson remarked of proposed tariff reforms that ‘you can no more give Imperial Preference without taxes on

105

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

food than you can make tea without hot water’ (The Guardian, 1924a: 11). These examples would seem to be evidence of what Bingham (2004: 112) argues is an attempt during this period to ‘develop new forms of political discourse that would engage the female voter, which usually involved translating issues into the language of housewifery or motherhood’ (Bingham, 2004: 112). Regardless of their feminized representation, female relatives of politicians were frequently reported as being active political campaigners during this period.

Supportive wives: 1950–83 After the Second World War, there was a shift in the way the press represented female relatives. While they continued to be portrayed as supportive, the focus shifted to depicting them as accompanying their husbands or fathers on the campaign trail, rather than as actively campaigning themselves. For example, Violet Attlee ‘contrived to arrive everywhere looking immaculate. The secret was a small travelling iron, with which she pressed her clothes each night and renewed the crease in the Prime Minister’s trousers’ (Daily Herald, 1950b: 2). Similarly, Dora Gaitskell is described as ‘ready for anything. Yesterday morning she spent an hour having a special hair-​do. Then, with a brand new red ribbon round her hat, she joined her husband on his rounds’ (Cook, 1959: 7). These examples show that the gendered coverage continued, with great attention paid to the women’s domestic responsibilities. The press usually emphasized the women’s credentials as ideal domestic companions, in contrast to their predecessors’ (or, in some cases, their own former) political activism. This is partially explained by the corresponding decline in women-​only meetings during this period (Lawrence, 2009), which meant they were no longer needed to appeal directly to women. The lack of these meetings is, understandably, reflected in the subsequent reporting. The second shift in the reporting on politicians’ female relatives is the increased attention given to the private lives and experiences of the wife of the prime minister (or other party leaders). During the 1950 campaign, Clementine Churchill and Violet Attlee were both interviewed by the Daily Mail’s Virginia Leigh. The piece downplays their political views and instead frames them as dutiful wives to important politicians and caring mothers to their children. Their non-​political role is further exemplified by the assertion that ‘rarely do the Attlees at home discuss politics, they usually talk about books and literature’ (Leigh, 1950: 4). Violet Attlee’s own political views were, in fact, quite opposed to her husband’s, something that, as noted, was not reported at the time (Seaton, 2003). During the 1966 campaign, Mary Wilson was interviewed in the Daily Mirror about her experiences as the prime minister’s wife. The coverage was highly personalized. She was

106

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

reported as being ‘reflective, sensitive, self-​analytical’, and a ‘passionately devoted mother’. Wilson was cited as being very clear that her role as prime minister’s wife was not a political one, and is quoted saying that ‘there are plenty of people around to advise him and discuss things with him … that’s not for me to do’ (Proops, 1966: 17). In this example, she presents herself as a traditional wife who is there for moral support rather than as an advisor with an agenda, something which is also enthusiastically promoted by the press. This leads us on to an important point, which is that the role of politicians’ wives was explicitly discussed in the newspapers during this period. One woman interviewed on the subject argued that ‘there are two main activities for candidates’ wives –​canvassing and making little speeches from the platform. The first is said to be invaluable’ (Mayhew, 1959: 8). She also warned that speeches could be hazardous and that it was essential to avoid ‘simpering how delightful your husband is and therefore how excellent a representative he will be’ (Mayhew, 1959: 8). Wives were portrayed as needing to ‘boost your husband’s image at all times’. For many this meant ‘project[ing] an image of happy domesticity’ (Leslie, 1974: 12) and ensuring that their men looked presentable rather than arriving at an event ‘windblown and dishevelled’ (Mayhew, 1959: 8). Mary Archer commented in the Daily Mail that ‘mostly you’re just required to sit on a platform and smile’ (Leslie, 1974: 12). This sentiment was echoed by Clarissa Eden who remarked during the 1955 general election that ‘all I had to do was keep smiling’ (quoted in Booth & Haste, 2005: 17). Eden’s statement shows, potentially at least, a little more resentment at how limiting this role could be. Nevertheless, given these limitations, it is hardly surprising that the press would turn on them. Politicians’ wives were summed up derisively by the Daily Mail as a ‘cliché-​ uttering, hand-​shaking, all-​smiling, all-​purpose wind up political doll: brand name The Candidate’s Wife’ who ‘needn’t know much about politics, but she must know her place … a few discreet and worshipful places behind her husband’ (Leslie, 1974: 12). Insulting though this caricature may be, the Mail has hit on a few home truths about the presentation of the ideal candidate’s wife. During this period, the role of politicians’ wives is delineated as being that of non-​political helpers. Instead of making well-​crafted speeches to assist in the campaign, they are valued for their symbolic worth, enabling their husbands to present themselves as ordinary human beings. They are more useful in this guise than as active campaigners. They also lend significant heterosexual respectability by showing that their husbands are upright family men. In both cases, the reduction of these women to their symbolic value reinforces that politics remained heavily gendered during this time and that the standard or typical model of a political representative is a man. Women do not –​even should not –​get involved in that side of the family business.

107

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Lady Macbeth? 1987–2010 The image of politicians’ wives as passive supporters who refrain from promoting political messages had become entrenched by the late 1980s. This was so much the case that when women emerged who chose to flout these conventions, as the content analysis showed, they received a remarkable amount of negative press attention. Despite evidence of criticism of wives in previous decades, during the late 1980s and ’90s this took a decisively unpleasant turn into open and undisguised hostility. This happened most frequently when women expressed their political views or actively campaigned on an issue. In contrast, those women who conformed to the role of silent supporter were celebrated as the ultimate political companion. Examples of this latter form of representation include the Daily Mail piece which described Norma Major and Cherie Blair as being ‘on the election trail from dawn ‘til dusk, … [they] have continued to look radiant, immaculate, merry-​hearted, confident, loving and loyal. They have kept their opinions to themselves and bestowed smiles on friends and foes alike’ (Lee-​Potter, 1997: 11). Blair is reported as being with her husband ‘almost all the way, taking leave of her brilliant legal career to support her husband, sit through his speeches and follow him into the crowds at every campaign stop’ (Williams, 1997: 23–​5). Similarly, Ffion Hague was portrayed as ‘a strong, clever woman who is also in many ways a traditional wife’ (Lee-​Potter, 2001: 16–​7). This coverage was often sexist: Ffion Hague ‘may rarely open her mouth in public (the playwright David Hare has memorably described her as an entrancing, mute geisha)’ (Glover, 2001: 13). Sandra Howard was similarly depicted as coy and unassuming on the campaign trail: ‘Smiles shyly when the women in the hairdresser’s give him [her husband] the thumbs up’ (Thomson, 2005: 6). Invoking stereotypically submissive behaviour as desirable traits for politicians’ wives is telling. It shows the press’s preference for wives who are not party-​political campaigners and who support their husband’s political ambitions while keeping their political opinions to themselves. The newspapers were, however, extremely critical of attempts to cultivate an image which they considered inauthentic. During the 2001 and 2005 elections, Cherie Blair was derided for dropping ‘the wigged Cherie Booth QC side of her identity’ (Letts, 2005: 6–​7) and ‘conjur[ing] an image of the dutiful housewife keeping the children quiet … while seeming to forget that she has a job too’ (Freeman, 2005: 10). Even the wives of politicians, it seems, are subject to the double bind of the public and private spheres. Women who did not play down this public side (authentic or not) found themselves suffering for the choice, since most disparagements were reserved for those wives who were perceived as too political, who were treated as threatening. Cherie Blair’s portrayals sometimes accused her of attempting

108

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

to wield illegitimate power over the democratic process. The fact that she ‘already had firm political convictions by the time she met Tony’ and ‘stood as a Labour candidate in the Kentish marginal Thanet North in 1983’ was reported as problematic. Her views were presented as suspicious. She was described as ‘a feminist with Left-​wing leanings’ (Evison, 1997: 31) and as being too fond of ‘freebies and uber-​feminist views’ (Letts, 2005: 6–​7). Fellow Labour leader’s wife Glenys Kinnock was also criticized for her decision to visit ‘well over 30 constituencies. She’s campaigned relentlessly on her own’ (Lee-​Potter, 1992: 7). She was also mocked for her political beliefs because she was apparently anxious to tell us she quit CND in 1991. She was a member of this pacifist organisation in the years when Stalin-​style Communists threatened to destroy us. She leaves it when the Soviet Union ceases to menace. And Glenys is supposed to be the bright one in the Kinnock household. (Daily Mail, 1992: 6) The insult works here because the Mail is able to construct Glenys Kinnock negatively, and then compare her husband unfavourably with her. If the clever partner can be so dense, the paper seems to be saying, just how bad will the lesser half be in government? For all that politicians and campaigns may try to use wives to offset the image of their husbands, it is clear that this has been met with a concomitant rise in opponents trying to turn those same spouses into electoral liabilities. Indeed, the idea that politically active wives were off-​putting for voters frequently appeared in the coverage. During the 1987 election campaign, Kinnock was forced to laugh off ‘suggestions that she had been “kept quiet” during her husband’s campaign’ (The Sun, 1987: 5) in case she embarrassed her husband. Similarly, Blair was also described as ‘somewhat overbearing, forever barging into the conversation and letting some new clanger drop from that infamous mouth’ (Letts, 2005: 6–​7). The Daily Telegraph also claimed that Blair ‘used to be viewed as an electoral asset to the Prime Minister. Yet a YouGov poll in 2002 placed her four times more likely than Sandra Howard to turn voters away from her husband’ (Hollingshead, 2005: 15). The portrayal of these women as political liabilities who ought not to engage in politics ignores their history of political activism. Blair was particularly interesting in this regard because between 1997 and 2005 she was transformed from being ‘every inch a budding Prime Minister’s wife’ (Maung, 1997: 3) to being ‘the Conservative Party’s single greatest vote-​winner … demonstrating what a political liability she is to Labour’ (Letts, 2005: 6–​7). On the more extreme end, wives who would act on their political views were also portrayed as a threat to democracy. This portrayal was almost

109

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

always deployed by political opponents, which raises questions about the legitimacy of the complaint in the first place. But nevertheless, along with a general deriding of their political views, there was a growing tendency to suggest that politically active wives were manipulative and had ambitions for power. The Daily Mail columnist Lynda Lee-​Potter wrote that ‘under no circumstances can I vote for the Kinnocks, and make no mistake about it, we don’t just consider Kinnock the man but Kinnock the woman, because Glenys’s voice at Number 10 would be loud and forceful” as she “almost certainly wants … power, a voice, her own way’ (Lee-​Potter, 1992: 7). This quotation implies that Neil Kinnock would be powerless to prevent his wife influencing him. Cherie Blair was similarly accused of ‘being aloof, too highbrow and the real power behind “our Tone” ’ (Evison, 1997: 31). The fact that she once stood for election was used to explain her engagement in the campaign: since ‘her own political ambitions have been thwarted, Cherie is anxious to involve herself ’ in politics (Williams, 1997: 23–​5). Some newspapers suggested that this was inappropriate (and even illegitimate) behaviour for the prime minister’s wife. Blair’s high-​profile legal career also attracted criticism from columnists who sought to suggest that she had overstepped her authority. Richard Littlejohn’s assertion that ‘the Wicked Witch and her mates at Nonces R’Us get £5 million from the taxpayer as a result of “human rights” laws brought in by her husband without anyone actually voting on it’ (Littlejohn, 2001: 8) plays upon these assumptions by insinuating that she directly profited from legislation enacted undemocratically by the Labour government. Littlejohn spuriously attempts to argue that she would personally benefit from laws which protect criminals, and that these were detrimental to public safety. Such coverage reveals the ease with which ‘the spectre of Lady Macbeth is eerily invoked by the press’ (Freeman, 2005: 10). Some columnists did question adverse reactions from the press to politicians’ wives. For example, one commentator wrote that ‘the media will always be a fickle beast for political spouses’ (Hollingshead, 2005: 15) and highlighted that the coverage is gendered because it shows up more than any other the quite frankly ridiculous standards to which women in the public eye are held: if they are silent they are dull; if they talk, they are risky loose cannons. If they are successful career women, they are not supportive of their husband; if they are mutely adoring, they are dull and old fashioned. (Freeman, 2005: 10) These representations also echo the extent to which women like Hillary Clinton were vilified in the US for their activism and unwillingness to behave like traditional wives during their husbands’ terms of office (Brown

110

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

& Gardetto, 2000). During this time, then, those wives who are deemed too political are portrayed as potential liabilities to their husbands, while those who continue to act as apolitical helpers retain a symbolic value as electoral assets. This disparity in representations between activist wives and the deliberately apolitical spouses is underpinned by a normative assumption about how political these women are allowed to be, and arguably serves to impose limits on what behaviour or views are acceptable for women who are not standing for election.

‘Today’s wife must smile nicely. Today’s wife must not rock the boat’: 2010–151 The wives of the main party leaders were extremely visible during the 2010 campaign, being the subjects of a greater proportion of news items than were actual women politicians (Harmer, 2015, 2016). There was some continuity with the previous era in how politicians’ wives were portrayed during these final two elections, in the sense that the coverage was very hostile towards their campaigning. However, instead of being criticized for being overtly political, they were instead condemned as being insipid and passive symbols of their husbands’ political prowess. This is perhaps best exemplified by the Daily Mail’s remark that ‘their role is to be there, be visible, be bland and say nothing of import. In this carefully manicured –​if not pedicured –​election, the days of loudmouth Cherie wading in like a docker with gout have long gone’ (Moir, 2015: 10–​11). In 2010, the Daily Mail ran a regular column called ‘War of the wives’, in which Jan Moir would cynically comment, almost daily, on the activities of politicians’ wives. Sarah Brown, for example, was described as a ‘dehydrated Stepford Wife’ (Moir, 2010a: 7) who had her ‘husband’s hand clasped in a kind of Vulcan death grip’ (Moir, 2010f: 10–​11). Cherie Blair was derided because she ‘displayed an inappropriate amount of cleavage, read a story to the children, tried to force feed kiwi fruit down the throat of a bawling tot and generally made the usual nuisance of herself ’ (Moir, 2010d: 12). The column repeatedly pitted the women against one another in derogatory ways, spinning a second personality contest out of one election (see Harmer, 2015). The nature of the role of party leaders’ wives in the campaigns came under a lot of scrutiny during these last two elections. The press bemoaned the incursion of these non-​political women into the political discourse, while simultaneously bestowing them with an unprecedented amount of coverage (Higgins & Smith, 2013). These two factors display a certain amount of 1

From Moir, J. (2015) ‘Now we know … they DO wear the trousers!’, Daily Mail, 30 April, pp 10-​11.

111

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

cognitive dissonance, but while there was tacit approval by newspapers of their decision to play merely supportive roles, the suspicion of their motives did not go away. As one journalist wrote, ‘It is one thing for a spouse to play a supporting role to a PM, quite another for them to appear to be pulling the strings’ (Richard, 2010: 21). Crucially, in stark contrast to those in the recent past, some women were also often derided as mere appendages who dropped everything to support their husbands’ political careers by newspapers who were critical of their husbands’ politics. For example, Miriam Gonzalez Durantez, wife of Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, was described as ‘just another political wife; engaging in photogenic but laughably unlikely things, all in the name of vote catching’ (Moir, 2010c: 7). In a particularly revealing moment, some newspapers even suggested that the wives of the main party leaders were deliberately stealing coverage directly from female politicians as if the two were interchangeable. It was claimed that ‘women candidates [were] upstaged by wives’ (Gentleman, 2010: 20), and the Daily Mail wrote: ‘Never in British history have leaders’ wives played the dominant role they now enjoy … in sharp contrast, frontline female politicians have been frozen out’ (Oborne, 2010: 45). Having created the conditions in which these women receive more coverage than actual politicians, and in which they must be apolitical to avoid offence, the same organs of the press now turned on the women who fit into this prepared role. Once again, the boundaries of what is considered appropriate campaigning for political spouses shifted so that even those who were relatively apolitical received negative coverage for merely being present on the campaign trail. This hostility towards the presence of women in the political sphere shows that the participation of women in politics remains controversial. It also demonstrates that despite decades of feminist activism, the British press remains suspicious of feminism (Mendes, 2011). Early elections featured a range of different female relatives who were active campaigners on party-​political issues. After 1945, newspapers began to focus much more on their private lives, and began to pay more attention to the wives of party leaders during this time, which correlates with the content analysis results. From the late 1980s onwards, the coverage started to show party leaders’ wives actively campaigning again, however the main difference was that these politically active wives were portrayed as unwelcome intruders into the political sphere who wielded an undue influence over their husbands (or they were portrayed in positive terms if they behaved as a supportive presence). The 2010 campaign saw another shift, whereby politicians’ wives were presented as passive, apolitical supporters of their husbands but were also derided for being interchangeable, appendages of their husbands’ political campaigns. This negative turn in the later 1980s is also reflected in the content analysis. The next section will analyze the way

112

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

their private lives were portrayed in electoral coverage and the gendered implications of these representations.

Personal lives, political interpretations Articles which focused on the personal lives of politicians’ wives and relatives were a consistent feature of the news coverage after 1945. During the 1950 campaign, coverage of both Clementine Churchill and Violet Atlee was framed in terms of their familial responsibilities. On Churchill: ‘As well as being a wife, she has been a mother. There were Randolph, Diana, Sarah, and Mary to be managed! But these are comparatively easy tasks, if you can imagine it. Her main concern has always been that Winston himself should not be overworked’. Similarly, Violet Attlee explained, ‘frankly that it had been difficult bringing up her children also (three girls, one boy) while their father was in public life all the time’ (Leigh, 1950: 4). Here, the domestic responsibilities of caring for their husbands and children are portrayed as the women’s only contribution to the campaigns, and their political views are not discussed. This gendered coverage endures throughout the decades. Almost fifty years later, Cherie Blair was also portrayed putting her family first when two reporters remarked that ‘everyday domestic life in the Blair household seems so ordinary’ (Kavanagh & Roycroft-​Davis, 1997: 8–​9). Blair’s high-​ profile legal career was ignored in this article in favour of her ability to maintain a desirable home life for her family. The tendency here is to play up her ordinariness at all costs. The family background of politicians’ relatives was also deemed newsworthy. In an interview with Ramsay MacDonald’s eldest daughter, Ishbel, she ‘confided in me that she liked railway travel best, air travel next and motoring the least of all’ (Daily Mail, 1931: 18). Cherie Blair’s childhood was also reported on. One journalist emphasized that she had been ‘brought up in the grimy back streets of Liverpool where her mum Gale, a former actress, had been forced to take work in a fish and chip shop after being abandoned by Cherie’s father’ before Blair worked her way up to ‘a high flying career as a QC and junior judge’ (Evison, 1997: 31). This sympathetic retelling of her childhood portrays her as an ordinary person who has worked hard, revealing something about the values and principles which politicians’ spouses wanted to be associated with, or, perhaps more cynically, to portray for the benefit of their husbands. Many of the women also had successful careers of their own. These were often discussed in gendered terms. Mary Wilson and Marion Thorpe are both attributed with suitably feminine artistic interests: Mary Wilson ‘writes poetry’ (Proops, 1966: 17), while ‘as a private woman’, Marion

113

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Thorpe’s ‘interest is music’ (Gaskell, 1974: 7). These are art forms which have always been considered appropriate for women, dating back centuries. More intriguingly, Mary Archer was described as ‘a mother of two small boys, a slim, pretty woman with a … wry wit, and an Oxford First and a brilliant career as a research chemist’ (Leslie, 1974: 12). Noticeably, her role as a mother was the first descriptor listed, which positions this as her most important role. It takes precedence over her less typical career in the historically male-​dominated realm of chemistry. Ffion Hague received similar treatment when it was asserted that, despite having had ‘a powerful career as a City head hunter … she often puts out his clothes, makes sure [Hague] wears the right colours as he’s colour blind’. The article goes on to reinforce Hague’s domestic credentials by reporting that ‘she’s a great cook’ and that she ‘bakes wonderful Welsh cakes’ (Lee-​Potter, 2001: 16–​7). Reporters were keen to gain an insight into the experiences of these wives on the election campaign trail. News items tended to emphasize apolitical responses: ‘The wives of the three party leaders went on BBC television last night to tell of the trials of an election campaign’, and ‘Lady Douglas-​Home said that keeping her husband fit was not proving a problem’, while ‘Mrs Wilson said she was “a little tired”, and had promised herself a day in bed when the campaign was over’ (Daily Telegraph, 1964b: 29). The newspapers frequently discussed the women’s difficulties in enduring the constant criticism or insults that were levelled at their husbands. Jill Craigie, the wife of Labour Party leader Michael Foot, mentioned that ‘she “can’t bear” the personal criticism of her husband’ (The Guardian, 1983: 4). Sandra Howard expressed similar feelings during the 2005 election when she ‘admitted she has been upset by the personal attacks on her husband during the campaign’ (Daily Telegraph, 2005: 6) and ‘was particularly upset by posters portraying the Tory leader –​the most high profile Jewish figure in British politics –​as Fagin’ (Daily Mail, 2005: 8). The same year, Cherie Blair ‘was asked how she felt about Tory leader Michael Howard branding her husband a liar over the Iraq war. She said: “Sad. Sad that it had got that low and personal” ’ (The Sun, 2005: 6). Politicians’ wives also explained that they, too, experienced criticism. In 1987, then shadow foreign secretary Dennis Healey’s wife Edna was revealed to have paid for a private hip replacement, which was treated as hypocrisy by the conservative press given Labour’s commitment to the NHS. Jill Craigie, on the other hand, found the famous ‘criticism of her husband’s dress particularly hard to bear’ because she bought ‘his clothes and it is, therefore, a reflection on me’ (The Guardian, 1983: 4). Similarly, another wife, Cicely Mayhew, stated ‘woe betide the wife who allows her candidate to appear with a hole in the heel [of his sock]. It will be seized upon by the opponent’s female supporters with as much glee as a major political gaffe’

114

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

(Mayhew, 1959: 8). Once again, these women are explicitly domesticated by statements emphasizing that traditionally wives are responsible for cleaning, repairing, and buying their husband’s clothes. While there was much interest in the private lives of these women, strong criticisms awaited those who were deemed to have used private details about their relationship as a political strategy. Cherie Blair was disparaged for the fact that she and her husband ‘succumbed to a long list of bizarre, hypocritical and jaw-​droppingly vulgar disclosures’ (Letts, 2005: 6–​7) about their intimate relationship in an interview. She was criticized for complaining ‘about intrusion into her family’s personal life’ before ‘revealing details that none of us wanted to know’ (Freeman, 2005: 10). Richard Littlejohn in the Sun went further when he wrote: ‘The Wicked Witch went mental when someone took a photo of Damien [his derogatory nickname for the Blairs’ youngest son Leo] in the street. But there she was last week posing with someone else’s [child on the campaign trail]’ (Littlejohn, 2001: 8). The personalized focus of much of the press coverage of politicians’ relatives mainly reported on their experiences as traditional wives. Consequently, their responsibilities in the private sphere were emphasized above their jobs or other activities which might compete for their time. The newsworthiness of these women is derived from what they reveal about their political husbands or fathers. Once again it reinforces that political spouses, in particular, serve as a means to showcase the fact that their husbands are enabled to perform significant roles in political life by their wives taking care of the home. One need not worry about our elected representative being distracted at home, because that side of his life is in capable hands. The depiction of female relatives is another indicator of how politics and political representatives continue to be defined in highly gendered terms. This is further exemplified by the persistent focus on the physical appearance and attractiveness of politicians’ relatives, the subject of the next section.

Visual appeal: ‘looks every inch a budding Prime Minister’s wife’2 The increase in personalized coverage of female relatives of politicians manifested itself most obviously in the attention paid to their physical appearance. As the content analysis demonstrated, references in news items to the physical appearance of female relatives have increased in proportion over time. Inevitably, much of this coverage is explicitly gendered. Discussions of the political events of the day were scattered with casual references to how the female relatives looked or what they were wearing; for example: ‘Mrs

2

Taken from Maung, C.A. (1997) ‘My Cherie Amour’, Daily Mirror, 29 April, p 3.

115

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Lucas, slim and vivacious, who has bustled around the hustings with her husband’ (Daily Telegraph, 1950b: 7), or Mrs Churchill ‘with her elegant figure, delicate hands, and fine features she is truly lovely’ (Daily Mail, 1950: 7). Ffion Hague was celebrated as ‘that curvaceous embodiment of Tory womanhood’ (Letts, 2001a: 8), while Mary Wilson ‘has a soft and pretty face and sexy legs’ (Proops, 1966: 17). The fact that the appearance of women in public life is considered newsworthy is not particularly surprising given what we have already seen in this volume so far. What is perhaps striking about this trend is how their personal image and style is frequently linked to, and portrayed as pertinent to, the electoral fortunes of their male relatives. Examples include an item in the Daily Telegraph which stated that ‘the sartorial prowess of Sarah Brown, Samantha Cameron and Miriam Gonzalez-​Durantez … can be read as a metaphor for their spouses’ credentials’ (Betts, 2010: 25). Sarah Brown is then described as ‘solid, stodgy, with a mumsy approach to fashion’, while Samantha Cameron is ‘young, polished, slick yet insouciant, but provoking anxieties about style over substance’ (Betts, 2010: 25). In each case, the women’s style is seen as mirroring concerns about their husbands’ political performance. Early coverage emphasizes the advantages that a wife’s appearance can have on the campaign trail, because ‘meetings of modern Parliamentary candidates are not complete without an attractive woman sitting on the other side of the chairman’. Their choice of clothing is constructed as being of particular significance: ‘Dress is a matter of extreme importance, and here Mrs Churchill excels. Her platform frocks have an irresistible style, combined with a schoolgirl simplicity’ (Daily Mail, 1923d: 10). Simplicity of dress was a significant factor which was also noted in reports on Ramsay MacDonald’s daughter Ishbel when she was campaigning on behalf of her brother Malcolm; she ‘dressed with extreme simplicity in a green woollen jumper and a rough grey tweed skirt, she spoke slowly and distinctly in a clear voice’ (Daily Mail, 1935a: 7). Simplicity of dress minimizes class and wealth differences, acting also as a signifier of the simple, unostentatious economic philosophies of the pre-​War Labour Party. Lawrence (2009: 120) notes an occasion when working-​class women spat in the face of a ‘be-​pearled Clementine Churchill’ when she tried ‘to deputise for her convalescing husband at a series of rough meetings’ in Dundee. The failure to convey the right kind of femininity for the audience, then, could come with quite severe consequences. Indeed, while the threat of violence may be less overt today, the underlying principle of such concerns persists well into the twenty-​first century: ‘Today’s wife must wear ordinary high street clothes and nothing that hints at secret, massive wealth’ (Moir, 2015: 10–​11). Samantha Cameron’s ‘dress-​down outfit of skinny jeans and cotton jacket spoke of the high street

116

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

and affordability, not privilege and expense’ (Moir, 2010b: 9), and was interpreted as a self-​conscious effort to downplay her husband’s privileged background. The press, then, is consistent in portraying the style of dress adopted by female relatives on the campaign trail as an essential means of appealing to (or at least not alienating) the electorate. Relatives were frequently portrayed as though they were conscious that their appearances were under scrutiny, and there was much discussion of those who adapted their personal styles accordingly. Diana Chamberlain ‘collected a band of her special girl friends, including her cousin, Miss Dundas’ and ‘dressed them all in bright blue frocks and hats with white ties’ (Daily Telegraph, 1931: 7) while campaigning on behalf of her father Austin Chamberlain in his Birmingham constituency. Mary Wilson told an interviewer that ‘she’d bought three new outfits for the campaign’ (Proops, 1966: 17). In 2015, ‘Justine Thornton, Ed Miliband’s wife, transformed herself from a dowdy mouse this time last week in Cardiff to polished political consort in Bradford on Wednesday night. Her face is positively glowing under the layers of expertly applied make-​up’ (Pierce, 2015: 9). It was also claimed that Cherie Blair’s image change in 1997 had resulted in her deciding to throw ‘out her old clothes, cut her hair and plung[e]‌into a diet and keep-​fit regime’ (Evison, 1997: 31) to meet the expectations of the press, revealing a ‘stylish new image’ (Maung, 1997: 3) and leaving the ‘power-​dressing that has become her trademark’ behind her (Kavanagh & Roycroft-​Davis, 1997 8–​9). The fact that the appearance and style of politicians’ wives is deemed newsworthy by the press further demonstrates the gendered nature of election coverage. Quentin Letts’ descriptions of Ffion Hague demonstrate this point: ‘When she alighted from the battle bus in her grey trouser suit and floaty strawberry blouse, I thought an old granny in front of me might explode with excitement. Damn near joined her myself ’ (Letts, 2001a: 8). He goes on to describe her ‘blond hairdo’ and ‘exquisite curves … enwrapped in a suit of cool, pale purple’ (Letts, 2001b: 7) in detail, starkly illustrating the sexist underpinnings of news coverage about these women. Women who fail to live up to these expectations tend to be heavily criticized. For example, when Justine Thornton ‘resolutely wore the exact same outfit she wore last week’, she was mocked for ‘sending out a Take Me Serious message that Clothes Don’t Matter’ and was subsequently described as looking ‘like a grim pixie’ (Moir, 2015: 10–​11). The unfairness of this trend was not lost on the journalists themselves; when Samantha Cameron ‘respectfully took her shoes off before entering the home of businessman Baljinder Hansraas’, she unwittingly revealed that her feet ‘seemed ever so slightly unkempt’. This incident drew the Daily Mail to comment: ‘Poor Sam Cam. If she had unveiled the perfect trimmed pedicure and three, glistening coats of Rouge Noir, she would be accused of being self-​indulgent’ (Moir, 2015: 10–​11).

117

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

One wonders if this is a rare moment of self-​awareness from Moir, one of the most rigid enforcers of this standard in recent years, or if the criticism was solely aimed at her competitors and political rivals. The press’s focus on the appearance of female relatives of politicians is hardly surprising. What is perhaps more unexpected is that their physical appearance and sartorial choices are frequently politicized and portrayed as symbolically important for their male relatives’ campaign, with the outfit chosen for an event being read with an attention to detail usually reserved for the symbolism of an artwork. These women are also explicitly portrayed as utilizing their appearance as a political resource, as a way of making a statement or of downplaying their wealth and privilege, and to emphasize that they (and by extension their male relatives) are somehow ordinary people, just like the voters to whom they are appealing. The political function of these women as far as the press is concerned, then, is to be a feminine embodiment of their husbands’ candidacies (Brown & Gardetto, 2000; Caroli, 2010). They are a tabula rasa that can bear any number of politically convenient symbols. This is obviously problematic for women, both specifically and in general, and this will be expanded upon in the concluding section.

Conclusion The inclusion in news coverage of election campaigns of women who are not themselves campaigning to become political representatives is a consistent feature across time. Furthermore, the depiction of the wives and daughters of candidates as being part of an election campaign communicates something significant about the gendered ways news media frame electoral politics. Interrogating the implications of their inclusion is important because, although these women are not seeking political office for themselves, their mediated representation still contributes to gender-​biased newspaper coverage of elections. This, in turn, reinforces the idea that political life is the domain of men. When it comes to assessing the representation of female relatives over time in the UK, there is little previous scholarship to draw on. Until very recently, the presence of such figures was hardly interrogated. Studies which examine mediated representations of US first ladies offer some insight into the way political spouses might be received in political coverage. However, this can only take us so far, because the UK also differs from the US in some crucial ways, both culturally and due to the variations in our electoral systems. The quantitative and qualitative findings indicated that during the early campaigns, a whole range of different female relatives were reported as contributing to the campaigns of their family members. Over time, the

118

THE SPOUSEs AND RELATIVEs

press began to focus specifically on the spouses of candidates, and those of party leaders received considerable attention. This correlates with previous research which indicates that over time, party leaders have come to occupy an increased proportion of news items compared to other candidates (see Deacon & Harmer, 2019), so the increased presidentialization of UK electoral coverage may help to account for this trend. Along with this streamlining, the role of such women in campaign coverage also changed over time. While news items which reported on them as accompanying politicians to campaign events remained relatively consistent across the decades, the proportion of items which reported female relatives actively campaigning by canvassing voters or giving speeches was relatively high in the interwar years. This then declined over the decades until the late 1980s, when the proportion of such items increases again. In contrast, the proportion of items which were focused on the private lives of female relatives showed a clear trend, significantly increasing over time. Both changes were also evident in the qualitative analysis, which showed that early items incorporated snippets of political speeches made by politicians’ wives in their activist role. Later items were focused on the experiences or family lives of party leaders’ wives. These findings depart dramatically from the academic literature about US first ladies, which usually shows that early first ladies had a very informal and apolitical role and then became more involved in politics as time went on (see Winfield, 1997; Caroli, 2010). The findings of this study suggest that the opposite is true in the case of the UK. The quantitative and qualitative findings also show that the proportion of news items which negatively evaluated politicians’ relatives and their conduct during campaigns increased over time. From 1987 onwards, news items became increasingly hostile towards those women who were deemed too political or who were depicted as trying to influence the political process. The qualitative analysis showed that vocal women, such as Cherie Booth (Tony Blair’s wife), were dismissed as too feminist, too ambitious, and as electoral liabilities. Much of this coverage was overtly sexist in tone. The press’s antipathy to overtly political spouses during the 1990s and beyond is similar to the way that overtly political US first ladies were treated in US media (Scharrer & Bissell, 2001; Winfield & Friedman, 2003). The quantitative findings also indicated that alongside the increased focus on the private lives of political spouses, in particular, a higher proportion of news items scrutinized their physical appearance in the coverage. Such references are most prominent in the 1970s and the 1990s and 2010s. The qualitative analysis revealed that while some news items mentioned their appearance in an incidental way, there were also frequent examples of their appearance and clothing being overtly politicized as a marker of wealth and privilege or as a means of presenting themselves, and by extension

119

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

their spouses or relatives, as ordinary people with whom voters ought to identify. Press coverage, then, positions female relatives as political resources for promoting the political credentials of male politicians. Others have recognized that political spouses can be deployed strategically to compensate for the perceived shortcomings of politicians (see Winfield & Friedman, 2003; Smith & Higgins, 2013); however, this analysis suggests that the way these women are reported on in the press indicates their having a much more expansive role in campaigns than previously acknowledged. Taken together, the results in this chapter suggest that politicians’ female relatives are represented in press coverage as though they are political resources through which male politicians can enhance their image or compensate for perceived deficiencies in their own political personas. Portraying women relatives, especially spouses, in this way underscores how ideas about what makes the ideal politician are gendered insofar as these portrayals position the spouses as visible symbols of heteronormative masculinity. As has already been discussed in previous chapters, media depictions of the ideal political representative often emphasize the importance of their demonstrating traditionally masculine traits (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015). The presence of male politicians’ spouses in campaigns reinforces the desirability of such traits by contrasting the candidates with their spouses, who are most appreciated when they display traditionally feminine behaviour. This explains why later coverage focused on the private lives and appearance of political leaders. It could also help to explain why those wives who were deemed too political during the later elections were subjected to hostile treatment, because their political activities and opinions threaten the prevailing gender order in political news coverage. One thing that cannot be ignored is that newspaper partisanship is also a crucial factor. Examples of news items in which newspapers ostensibly sought to ridicule spouses’ political beliefs were really targeting their husbands’ political ambitions, by presenting the wives as monstrous figures who were power hungry in their own right. These examples also demonstrate that gendered ideas about political representation can be effectively used against leaders towards whom a given publication is antagonistic. Needless to say, these representations also reinforce heteronormative assumptions about political representatives and society as a whole by reinforcing the idea that gender is binary. The presence of gendered portrayals of politicians’ female relatives is revealing because it shows that UK general election coverage reinforces the assumption that the political sphere is a masculinized domain wherein women are only welcome on the basis of their ability to support the family, rather than because of their independent political views, which resonates with findings about the representation of women from other categories in this volume.

120

5

The Leaders: ‘Iron Ladies’ and ‘Dangerous’ Women It took until 1979 for a woman to lead a major political party into a British general election. Since then, an uptick in the number of female leaders offers a chance to assess the way women party leaders are represented in newspaper coverage. Since Margaret Thatcher’s first campaign as Conservative Party leader in 1979, there have been five campaigns in which women leaders have been the subject of press attention. This chapter will therefore focus on these five elections. For the first three, 1979, 1983, and 1987, Margaret Thatcher was the only female leader. In the 2015 and 2017 campaigns, multiple women leaders were visible in the news, including the Conservative’s Theresa May (2017), the Green Party’s Natalie Bennett (2015) and Caroline Lucas (2017), Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood (2015 and 2017), and the Scottish National Party’s (and first minister of Scotland) Nicola Sturgeon (2015 and 2017). Of these elections, three were contested by female prime ministers (1983, 1987, and 2017). While the 2010 election was contested by a female party leader (Caroline Lucas, Green Party), this campaign could not be included because she did not appear in the sampled newspaper coverage. Given that party leaders have a much higher public profile than their female colleagues, it would be significant if this effects how they are reported on in gendered terms. There is some evidence suggesting that as women in Australia and Canada become increasingly prominent, news coverage about them is less likely to centre their gender identity (Trimble et al, 2019). There is very little longitudinal research on women leaders in the UK, although Williams (2020) compared coverage about Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May and found that, contrary to the evidence from other countries, news coverage of May was more explicitly gendered than news about Thatcher. The evidence we have so far, then, is scant and contradictory. As a first step in moving past this, this chapter will present a systematic analysis of the five elections in which women leaders were present in the coverage to assess

121

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

whether there is significant change over time. The content analysis results will be presented in comparison with analysis of coverage about ordinary women politicians (non-​leaders) in those campaigns, to determine if leaders are reported on in less gendered ways than their colleagues. This chapter will first set out what we already know about the mediated representation of women leaders. Much of the pertinent academic scholarship has already been discussed in Chapter 2, therefore the following section will only briefly rehearse the main trends in the literature to introduce the focus of the chapter. This will be followed by the content analysis of coverage about women leaders over time, which will analyze whether and how they were evaluated, how frequently they were directly quoted, and how often coverage of them mentioned their appearance and family situation. These results will also be compared to those for ordinary women politicians to see if women’s being in a leadership position makes any difference to political coverage. The final section presents a qualitative analysis which shows how news coverage of leaders is gendered by analyzing how their leadership is depicted as advantageous for women in general, to what extent news coverage catches women leaders in gendered double binds, and, finally, how personalized coverage is problematic from a gendered perspective.

Women, leadership, and media Gender is a crucial lens through which politics is understood and mediated (Kahn, 1994; Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010). Much of the literature about gender and political news emphasizes that men and women tend to be framed differently (Kahn, 1994; Ross, 2002; Trimble et al, 2013). As we have already seen, this is referred to as ‘gendered mediation’ (Sreberny-​Mohammadi & Ross, 1996). Research indicates that men tend to dominate news coverage, while women are frequently stereotyped, ignored, or have their appearance and private lives reported on at the expense of their political agendas. Earlier chapters in this book have been able to corroborate this research. Crucially, news media takes an active role in positioning gender as an important lens through which the public evaluate the performance and personalities of political leaders (Harmer et al, 2020). For example, studies have shown how news media consistently focuses on traditionally male experiences and activities to discuss and make sense of politics, such as by using war or sporting metaphors in their reports (Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Trimble, 2016). Scholars from across the globe have found that journalists fall into familiar patterns in framing political leadership as a masculinized endeavour (Falk, 2010; Ette, 2017; Trimble, 2017).Gendered news coverage reinforces entrenched assumptions about whose voices and perspectives are valued.

122

THE LEADERS

Since men have historically dominated politics, effective leadership tends to be framed in their image. Men, therefore, embody the ideals of leadership more easily through their cultural association with masculinized attributes such as athleticism, confidence, machismo, single-​mindedness, and strength (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015). Strength and decisiveness in leadership is often emphasized over more feminized traits such as empathy. These tropes consequently position women as either marginal or out of place in public life (Jamieson, 1995; Ross, 2002; Trimble, 2017). Parry-​Giles and Parry-​Giles (1996) analyzed political broadcasts from five US presidential elections. They found that the presidential image is often constructed through masculinized institutions, such as the military. These actively associate the candidate with the necessary ‘masculine’ characteristics desirable in a political leader. Jamieson (1995) identified the multiple ways gendered expectations trap women in double binds that hold them back. For example, the ‘competence/​ femininity’ double bind whereby being considered a good leader is associated with masculine qualities but, in turn, women who adopt masculinized performances risk transgressing gender norms. This can pose problems in election campaigns or debates because framing politics in masculine terms reinforces the idea that women do not fit into political systems which were not designed for their participation (Harmer et al, 2017). The presence of news frames that highlight female politicians’ gender has been well documented internationally (see Falk, 2010; Garcia-​Blanco & Wahl-J​ orgensen, 2012; Campus, 2013). Empirical studies show that women leaders who confound the mediated ideals of femininity are often represented harshly. For example, news coverage of Hillary Clinton’s senate campaigns portrayed her as too power driven and ambitious (Parry-​Giles, 2014). Women who adopt more feminine leadership styles, on the other hand, risk being ignored. Gidengil and Everitt’s (2003) analysis of two Canadian elections (1993 and 1997) showed that women were reported on in more hostile and aggressive language if they were combative and assertive, but received less coverage when they were non-​confrontational. This is not always the case, however, as Harmer et al (2017) found that women candidates receive positive coverage for exhibiting traditionally masculine leadership credentials if they conform to gendered expectations in other ways. Women leaders are often stereotyped in news coverage. For example, on occasion, they become associated with political change or renewal, which unduly emphasizes their position as political outsiders (Norris, 1997; Murray, 2010). Norris (1997) compared news coverage of female leaders from different countries and found that they were framed as breaking through social conventions. Depicting women as having the ability to transform politics can be problematic since it means that women candidates are thus required to rise above the conventions of campaigning while still performing

123

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

well and making politics a more conciliatory process at the same time (Ross, 2002). These framing practices, therefore, simultaneously reinforce hegemonic ideas about leadership which are disadvantageous to women but might also highlight that it is problematic that women have been historically excluded (Trimble, 2017). It has become received wisdom that political coverage became more personalized by focusing on the private lives and personal attributes of candidates (see Trimble et al, 2013). However, it has been left to feminist researchers to point out the gendered nature of such trends. Trimble et al (2013) studied this phenomenon in thirteen party leadership elections between 1975 and 2021. The results suggest that personalization and gendered mediation are inextricably connected because, while overall levels of personalization stayed steady over time, news coverage of women was more likely to be personalized than that of male rivals. Langer’s (2007) study of the personalization of British prime ministers in press coverage between 1945 and 1999 indicated that although Thatcher scored highly on overall visibility compared to her male predecessors and successors, she was more likely to be referred to by personal pronouns such as ‘she’ instead of her official title than were her male equivalents. Langer argues that this implicitly demotes her because her name and post have to be inferred, which subtly afford her a background role. Personalized coverage manifests in particular ways for women politicians, and leaders are no different. Perhaps the most ubiquitous way this occurs is in the amount of attention that is paid to women’s physical appearance (Carroll & Schreiber, 1997; Ross, 2002; Conroy et al, 2015). The evidence suggests this is an international phenomenon. As we have seen in Chapter 2, this trend has been observed in a range of different national contexts (Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010; Lawrence and Rose, 2010). Objectifying women this way presents them as passive objects rather than as active subjects, which positions them as unsuited to political life (Trimble et al, 2015). Studies also indicate that women receive more attention to their personal lives than male candidates (Carroll & Schreiber, 1997; Trimble et al, 2013). Emphasizing women’s private lives highlights the tension between their participating in the masculinized public sphere and their traditional roles in the feminized private realm (van Zoonen, 2006). Personalized coverage contributes to the ‘othering’ of women in politics, and emphasizes the ‘notion of woman as out of place and unnatural in the public sphere’ (Falk, 2010: 37). This focus on women’s private lives is not the only gendered phenomenon in political coverage. Research also shows that there is a persistent gender gap in the visibility of politicians whereby women usually receive less coverage than their male colleagues (Kahn, 1994; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007; Ross et al, 2013; O’Neill et al, 2016; Harmer &

124

THE LEADERS

Southern, 2018). Academic research in this area tends to focus on North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, but some evidence suggests this marginalization extends to other contexts, too. For example, Ette (2017) studied the visibility of women in the 2015 Nigerian presidential election and found the same trends despite the presence of a woman presidential candidate. In addition to being less visible in news coverage, women are typically given fewer opportunities and less time to speak in political news (Hooghe et al, 2015). However, some studies suggest that more prominent and well-​known women, like party leaders, can escape this trend (Trimble, 2017). For example, evidence suggests that Angela Merkel received a similar amount of quotation time to her primary male opponent and was much more likely to be quoted than other women candidates (Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007). In the UK, on the other hand, women’s voices were consistently marginalized in favour of their male colleagues in press and broadcast coverage of the 2017 election, even though the prime minister was female (Harmer & Southern, 2018). Hooghe et al (2015) studied the visibility of Belgian politicians in broadcast media between 2003 and 2011. The authors found that when the level of a candidate’s experience, their place in a party hierarchy, and their being either in government or opposition are all considered, gender became the most significant variable explaining the marginalization of women. Some studies suggest that differences in press treatment for men and women candidates may decrease over time (Bystrom et al, 2001; Jalalzai, 2006). Existing scholarship also suggests that as women leaders become more visible and normalized, news coverage of them may become less gendered due to their losing their novelty status (Trimble et al, 2019). However, Williams (2020) compared coverage of Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May’s first three weeks as prime minister. She found, contrary to expectations, that not only was there more attention paid to May’s gender than Thatcher’s, the coverage was more detailed and elaborate, particularly in the conservative press. Harmer et al (2017) show that regardless of the politicians’ sex, newspapers tend to associate successful political performances with traditionally masculine behaviour, and poor performances with so-​called feminine traits. In countries with a highly partisan press like the UK, there is evidence that the gendered coverage of politicians is highly correlated with the political affiliation of the newspaper in question. For example, coverage of the 2015 leadership debates tended to feminize those leaders that each given publication did not support by depicting them as weak or criticizing their physical appearance (Harmer et al, 2017). Negotiating gendered news coverage is, therefore, a multifaceted and complicated process for women leaders, and one in which the press is more than willing to use their femininity against them.

125

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

The next section will track newspaper coverage over time to determine if women leaders become normalized and therefore receive less gendered coverage. The content analysis also compares the coverage of women leaders with that of ordinary women candidates to see if their prominence results in their receiving less gendered coverage than other women.

Changes and continuities over time This section will present the results of the content analysis. The results will first show what proportion of the coverage of women politicians was accounted for by coverage about women leaders. The analysis then shows what proportion of the coverage about women leaders evaluates them positively and negatively, before comparing both to the percentage of coverage which evaluates ordinary women politicians. The third set of results shows what proportion of news items include direct quotations of women leaders compared to ordinary politicians. Finally, the analysis compares what proportion of news coverage refers to the appearance and family situation of leaders compared to ordinary women politicians. Previous studies of electoral coverage demonstrate that party leaders have come to increasingly dominate the coverage of their parties (see Deacon & Harmer, 2019). Figure 5.1 shows that women leaders also tend to dominate the coverage of women politicians in general. The data demonstrates how much party leaders tend to dominate news coverage of elections, meaning that a broader range of women’s voices is marginalized. This has been observed in other studies (see Hooghe et al, 2015), but it is particularly pronounced when it comes to women leaders in the UK. It is as if there is a finite amount of space that women can occupy in the press, and when female party leaders take up most of this space, there is little room for other women. This also reflects journalists’ preferences for elite sources (Van Leuven et al, 2018). The data is particularly striking for the first three elections, given that Margaret Thatcher was the only female party leader at this time and she manages to take up over 75 per cent of the coverage afforded to women politicians by herself. This is true even in 1979, when she was not yet the prime minister. Perhaps surprisingly, the presence of multiple female party leaders in 2015 and 2017 seems to allow more space for other women politicians. The proportion of coverage afforded to party leaders is at its lowest in 2015, when there were several women leaders, but they were mainly in control of smaller parties such as Plaid Cymru and the Green Party, who even combined have very few seats in Westminster. The data from 2017 shows that even when a woman once again leads the UK

126

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.1: Percentage of items about party leaders 1979–​2017 90 80 70 60 THE LEADERS

50 127

40 30 20 10 0 Leaders (%)

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

76.7

76.4

81.5

50.5

63.6

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

government, the proportion of coverage that women leaders occupy is more than 10 per cent lower than the lowest level dedicated to Thatcher (in 1983). The shift is likely accounted for by a combination of factors. It could reflect the fact that journalists are becoming more accustomed to women in leadership roles, and that they therefore hold much less novelty value than Thatcher did (Trimble et al, 2019). It could also be partly explained by the different campaigning styles employed by these very different women. It should also be noted that throughout the 1980s there were fewer women candidates for parliament that the public would have found familiar, given the low proportion of women MPs at that time, which perhaps meant they were less likely to attract press coverage. Nevertheless, Thatcher’s domination of the coverage about women in politics compared to May is striking. Given the extent to which leaders dominate the coverage that women politicians receive, the remaining quantitative trends will be discussed in comparison to women politicians in general in order to determine if women who are more prominent experience similar patterns of representation to their less well-​known colleagues. This will enable us to determine whether the presence of women leaders in political coverage helps to normalize the presence of women in politics, as has been argued by several scholars (Trimble et al, 2019).

Evaluative coverage Gendered coverage of women politicians often provides overt evaluations of them as candidates or as people (Falk, 2010; Campus, 2013). The data in Figure 5.2 shows the proportion of all items about women party leaders which contained a negative or positive evaluation of them. The majority of items were either mixed or neutral, but those that did explicitly evaluate party leaders were predominantly negative apart from in 1979, when Thatcher received positive coverage in one quarter of the items in which she was mentioned. After 1979, there is a clear shift towards negative coverage of party leaders outweighing positive coverage. In the first three elections, however, a significant percentage of items continued to describe Thatcher in favourable terms. In 2015, positive evaluations fell dramatically and hardly appeared. There was a significant increase in the 2017 campaign, yet negative evaluations outweighed complimentary items by almost half. This complex picture requires a nuanced explanation. Once again, a clear difference can be observed between the first three elections and the last two. Press partisanship is an essential factor in explaining this difference. Thatcher’s dominance of the coverage and her popularity among the right-​wing press could explain her disproportionately positive coverage. The relatively large proportion

128

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.2: Percentage of items which evaluated party leaders 1979–​2017 40 35 30 25 THE LEADERS

20 129

15 10 5 0

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

Negative

16.1

26.1

34

18.9

23.6

Positive

25.8

18.6

27

0.9

12.9

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of items which evaluated her negatively, however, reflects that she was an incredibly polarizing figure who inspired strong and contrasting reactions from journalists and the public alike. The gap between the negative and positive coverage in the later elections shows that favourable evaluations are less forthcoming in campaigns where there are multiple women leaders. These women are usually less prominent, and generally represent political parties and positions which are less enthusiastically received by the press. This could be a factor in 2015, given that most of the women leaders led smaller and regional parties. The presence of a prominent woman in the form of the second female prime minister in 2017 partially explains the increase in positive coverage, perhaps also lending weight to the idea that women leaders become normalized. To test this, Figures 5.3 and 5.4 compare the evaluative coverage that leaders receive to that experienced by ordinary woman candidates. Figure 5.3 shows the difference between negative evaluations. The data show that in all but one election (1983) there is a smaller proportion of news items which evaluate leaders negatively compared to ordinary candidates. This difference is particularly pronounced in 2015 and 2017, when ordinary politicians are about twice as likely to be negatively evaluated as women leaders. The proportion of negative coverage ordinary politicians receive also appears to have increased in the last three elections. There is some evidence that news coverage of politicians in general has become more negative over time (see Deacon & Harmer, 2019), so broader changes in electoral coverage could partially explain this trend. This does not, however, explain why ordinary candidates are evaluated negatively more often than leaders. In contrast, Figure 5.4 shows the proportion of positive evaluations of ordinary politicians and leaders. These results show that as well as receiving fewer negative evaluations than ordinary politicians, leaders are more likely to be evaluated positively (with the exception of the 2015 campaign). This disparity is particularly pronounced in the first three elections, wherein Thatcher was the only female party leader and ordinary women candidates hardly ever received positive coverage compared to the leader. The proportion of positive evaluations of ordinary women politicians remains reasonably consistent between the five campaigns. Crucially, it remains consistently low, only accounting for more than 10 per cent of items in one campaign (2015). The data suggests that party leaders are less likely to be evaluated negatively and more likely to be presented positively than are ordinary women candidates. This means that party leaders have some advantage over ordinary candidates in quantitative terms, which may point to the fact that being recognizable has benefits in terms of coverage. On the one hand, this could be interpreted as evidence for the normalization of women in leadership

130

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.3: Percentage of items which evaluated leaders and politicians negatively 1979–​2017 50 45 40 35 30 THE LEADERS

25 131

20 15 10 5 0

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

Politicians (%)

22.2

15

39.3

37.5

47.1

Leaders (%)

16.1

26.1

34

18.9

23.6

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.4: Percentage of items which evaluated leaders and politicians positively 1979–​2017 30 WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

25 20 15 132 10 5 0 Politicians (%)

1979 6.6

1983 8.5

1987 7.1

2015 12.5

2017 7.8

Leaders (%)

25.8

18.6

27

0.9

12.9

THE LEADERS

roles, such that when they reach the heights of party leadership, women can escape negative coverage if they perform well. Conversely, this trend also suggests that just because the press becomes more used to women as party leaders, their individual successes do not necessarily benefit women as a group in terms of how they are represented in the press. The increased presence of women leaders, then, works like an invisible stop valve, whereby once women ascend to power they have their presence validated by less negative coverage. However, this privilege is prevented from flowing back to benefit ordinary women candidates. These findings suggest that increasing women’s presence as leaders does not serve to normalize women in political coverage as a whole. When it comes to evaluations of any kind, it is essential to remember that these are not necessarily only about gender. Such evaluations could speak directly to their performance on the campaign trail or ability to communicate a specific policy proposal effectively. Likely, the gendered aspects of this variable are better revealed through qualitative analysis which will be developed later in the chapter.

Leaders’ voices Another way in which election coverage is gendered is through the marginalization of women’s voices. Figure 5.5 shows the proportion of items in which women leaders and ordinary politicians are directly quoted. The data show that party leaders are only quoted directly in around a third of all items in which they appear. This is relatively consistent across the five elections, although there is a slight dip in 2015. As party leaders, it is not inconceivable that they are included in lots of news items which discuss them or their party without reporting on a particular incident or set of remarks. In comparison to ordinary politicians, the data show that there is very little difference in the proportion of items in which they are quoted in the first three elections. However, the disparity between the two groups of women increases in 2015 and 2017, when ordinary politicians are quoted in twice the proportion of news items as party leaders. One possible explanation is that leaders are often the subject of much commentary while they are not necessarily included as a sources in those same items. This contradicts some existing evidence which suggests that women leaders are given more space to speak than ordinary politicians (see Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007). It is particularly striking that while women leaders tend to dominate the coverage in terms of representation, they are not

133

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.5: Percentage of items which quoted politicians and leaders 1979–​2017 70 60 WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

50 40 134

30 20 10 0

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

Politicians (%)

28.6

38.7

33.3

46.4

58.8

Leaders (%)

35.6

29.8

28.8

20.7

27.9

THE LEADERS

heard from directly as often as ordinary women candidates are in these later elections.

Personalization Gendered coverage in elections often focuses on the personal lives and appearance of women politicians (Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010). Figure 5.6 shows the proportion of items which refer to party leaders’ appearance compared to other women politicians. The data show that references to the appearance of party leaders are not that common, as they are contained in fewer than 10 per cent of items in which leaders are mentioned in each election. Nevertheless, the data show a steady increase in references to the appearance of party leaders over time; in 1979, less than 3 per cent of items commented on Thatcher’s appearance. In contrast, in 2017, almost 9 per cent of items about party leaders made some reference to their appearance. In comparison, the proportion of items that refer to the appearance of other women politicians is consistently higher than for leaders. This is especially the case in the first three elections, where ordinary women are up to six times more likely to have their appearance mentioned (as in 1979). In the later elections, the gap is much more modest, particularly in 2017. The presence of multiple party leaders (compared to the first three elections) might suggest that the presence of women is more normalized in later press coverage; however, this does not explain why party leaders in 2015 and 2017 are subjected to more commentary about their appearance than their predecessor. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that Thatcher’s dominance of British politics suggests that when party leaders reach this level of prominence, the amount of gendered coverage they receive declines. However, when Thatcher and May are directly compared, the evidence suggests the opposite. Figure 5.7 shows that when Theresa May is separated from the other party leaders, news coverage of May’s appearance is significantly higher than for other party leaders, as well as being higher than that of ordinary women politicians, whose appearance is mentioned in 9.8 per cent of items about them. May dominates the coverage of the 2017 election compared to her fellow leaders, so her being mentioned more leads almost inexorably to their being more discussion of her appearance. Crucially, during the two elections that Thatcher was prime minister, only 3.7 per cent and 5.7 per cent (respectively) of news items mentioned her appearance, compared to 13.6 per cent of news items about May in 2017. These findings reflect Williams’ (2020) study, which found news coverage of May was more

135

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.6: Percentage of items which mention the appearance of leaders and politicians 1979–​2017 25

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

20

15

136

10

5

0 Leaders (%) Politicians (%)

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

2.6

3.7

5.7

8.1

8.6

15.6

10.6

21.4

14.3

9.8

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.7: Percentage of items which mention the appearance of the prime minister and other leaders in 2017 16 14 12

137

THE LEADERS

10 8 6 4 2 0 Appearance (%)

Prime minister

Other leaders

13.6

1.7

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

gendered than that of Thatcher in the first few weeks after they each became prime minister. The extent to which coverage of party leaders refers to their family situation is another means of measuring the personalized aspects of gendered coverage. Figure 5.8 shows the proportion of items which refer to leaders’ families compared to other women politicians. The data show that there is very little coverage of party leaders’ family circumstances. Mentions of leaders’ family commitments peak in 1979, accounting for 6.7 per cent of items about Thatcher. When this is compared to data for ordinary politicians, they show a similar pattern to data on mentions of their appearance. Women leaders are far less likely to be subjected to coverage which discusses their family lives compared to other women politicians. The gap decreases slightly in the last two elections, but the data tell us that it still persists nevertheless. This finding is especially striking because some party leaders have attempted to make use of their private lives to appeal to voters as ordinary people (Stanyer, 2013). Thatcher and May have both used this tactic (Webster, 1990; Harmer & Southern, 2018), and yet coverage of them is less focused on family life than that of ordinary women politicians who are less prominent or well known. The data about personalized coverage shows that leaders are subjected to less focus on their appearance and personal circumstances than are ordinary women candidates. Their lives are already widely known about, certainly in comparison to some of their colleagues, and might consequently be considered less newsworthy. The gap might also be explained by the different types of newspaper item that are written about these women –​with less prominent women being confined to features and constituency profiles, while leaders are routinely mentioned in news items. These findings might indicate that women who gain party leadership start to become normalized, and therefore receive less gendered coverage. The obvious problem here is that women leaders do not normalize women politicians more broadly, who still seem to attract gendered coverage. Backbench women MPs do not appear to benefit much from the normalization of women leaders in the press. Women leaders come across as exceptional figures because they have broken through the gender barrier, but it quickly reseals behind them, like a stop valve. This suggests that we still have some way to go before gendered coverage of women politicians, in general, is a thing of the past. The results from the content analysis showed that when there is a woman party leader, they dominate the news coverage to the detriment of other women politicians, who become increasingly marginal. The analysis also suggested that news coverage of women leaders has become increasingly more cynical, and favourable evaluations have decreased in frequency over time (apart from in 2017). However, compared to ordinary women politicians,

138

newgenrtpdf

Figure 5.8: Percentage of items which refer to the family of leaders and politicians 1979–​2017 30 25 20 THE LEADERS

139

15 10 5 0 Leaders (%) Politicians (%)

1979

1983

1987

2015

2017

6.7

1.1

4.5

1.8

2.1

17.8

21.3

25

10.7

11.8

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

women leaders are subjected to less negative coverage and more positive coverage. Personalized coverage followed a similar pattern: the appearance and family situation of party leaders was only rarely mentioned in news items, although there was an increase over time in mentions of their appearance. Ordinary women politicians, however, were much more likely to have their appearance and family mentioned, although the gap for appearance narrowed in the 2015 and 2017 campaigns. Conversely, ordinary politicians are directly quoted in a higher proportion of news items than party leaders (apart from in 1979). This gap is especially pronounced in the 2015 and 2017 campaigns, when ordinary politicians are quoted in more than double the proportion of items than party leaders. These results suggest that for the most part, news coverage of party leaders is perhaps less gendered than for ordinary women politicians in quantitative terms. This suggests that the presence of women in leadership roles normalizes their own contribution to politics but does not benefit other women politicians. The content analysis results, however, only provide a partial picture of how gendered the newspaper coverage of party leaders might be. The next section examines the coverage of leaders in qualitative terms to explore this in more detail.

Party leaders in the news This section will discuss the mediation of party leaders, first by analyzing the extent to which their leadership is reported as representing a significant gain for women in general. This will be followed by an analysis of how the double binds identified by Jamieson (1995) impact on the way women leaders are discussed in election news. The analysis will then discuss the ways that personalized news coverage about women leaders implicitly genders them.

Gendered leadership: representing women Much like the coverage of politicians in general (see Chapter 2), the reportage on women party leaders has plenty to say about their significance to women’s position in society. This is most pronounced in coverage of the two women prime ministers. What is particularly interesting about this is that, although both women were leaders of the same political party, the amount of personal responsibility they accepted for representing women specifically is starkly different. Thatcher was famously anti-​feminist, preferring to attribute her success in politics to her hard work. May, on the other hand, has openly embraced the importance of feminism, even if her personal politics and policy agenda often suggests that this embrace is, at best, superficial. Regardless of

140

THE LEADERS

the differences between the two women, discussions about their willingness and ability to represent women are one of the ways in which newspaper coverage emphasized their gender identity. Thatcher’s antipathy towards feminism was often remarked upon in the press. In 1983, the Guardian expressed concern that ‘there was much anxious muttering that she might be a woman but she wasn’t a sister’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). The Daily Mail, on the other hand, suggested she ‘didn’t approve of the extremist lib view, which seemed to hate men and was contemptuous of any woman content to be a wife and mother’ (Daily Mail, 1979: 9). It was widely reported that Thatcher herself claimed: ‘I don’t like strident females’ (The Sun, 1979a: 7), and ‘I like people with ability. You get somewhere because of ability not sex’. She even argued that ‘I didn’t get here by being a strident female’ (Daily Telegraph, 1979a: 1), without so much as a hint of irony. The Guardian questioned whether Thatcher’s premiership would benefit women by posing the question: ‘Is Mrs Thatcher really a man? This is not another election smear. The question arises out of the miserable, frustrated, teeth-​clenched bafflement of all those women who used to dream of how much better a place the world would be if only we were led by women rather than men’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). Here, Phillips demonstrates the tension between descriptive and substantive representation referred to in Chapter 1 by stating that simply having a woman in power does not necessarily translate into substantive policy benefits for women. This is neatly summed up later in the article when Phillips suggests that ‘the gender factor seems to have been utterly erased by the Thatcher factor, a phenomenon undreamed of in feminist philosophy’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). Phillips also emphasizes that ‘while she may enthuse the jam-​making battalions of the Tory party conference, she reduces many other women to despair’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). This is a moment of rare recognition by the press that women can have hugely different priorities when it comes to politics. The press also recognized that there were other unintended consequences of having a female party leader. The Guardian suggested that sexist male voters might prevent Thatcher winning the election in 1979, remarking that ‘the male chauvinist pig vote could be the forgotten factor in deciding whether Mrs Thatcher becomes Britain’s first woman Prime Minister’ (The Guardian, 1979: 4). The perception that male voters might not be willing to elect a female prime minister shows the extent to which Thatcher’s gender was an unavoidable factor in her representation in the press. The press also recognized that as the first female prime minister, her actions would have consequences for the women that would follow her. It was suggested that ‘if she turned out to be a failure as a national leader, it would rebound on all women in public life since her inadequacies would be put down to the fact that she was a woman’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). Despite her unwillingness

141

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

to consider her gender as pertinent to her premiership, Thatcher was nevertheless portrayed in gendered ways, as much as were those leaders who followed her. There were also other subsequent examples of women leaders being depicted as important for the position of women in society as a whole. For example: ‘The Women Are Coming … They’ve been bolstered by Nicola Sturgeon, leading the newbie pack, ably abetted by Caroline Lucas, Leanne Wood and Natalie Bennett, all of whom have ensured that, whatever the result following Thursday’s election, bloke-​dominated politics has already been left on the doorstep’ (Phillips, 2015: 21). Here, women leaders are described as being competent and important contributors to electoral politics. There are also some examples which argue that women leaders can transform politics. Zoe Williams in the Guardian responded to criticism of Nicola Sturgeon by asking: ‘What if she is genuinely worried about the entire nation, not just the bits in her purview? What if she’s trying to build a real alliance, based on a shared belief in social justice and humanity’s innate generosity?’ (Williams, 2015: 24). While this example offers a generally positive reading of Sturgeon’s intensions, it remains loaded with the gendered assumption that women are ‘agents of change’ and transform politics by doing things differently (Norris, 1997). Framing women leaders in this way sets up the expectation that they must be able to improve politics, something that they may not be able to achieve (Ross, 2002). The press also displays a tendency to compare women party leaders to each other, as well as to women leaders from other countries. Sturgeon, for example, was frequently compared with other female political figures in 2015. The Daily Mail’s columnist Richard Littlejohn labelled her an ‘Angela Merkel wannabe’ (Littlejohn, 2015: 16). A Daily Mail journalist further claimed that, ‘like Mrs T, the SNP leader transformed her image from that of a dowdy egghead into a glamorous, power-​dressing imperatrix –​ emphasising a mixture of elegant feminine charm and steel’ (Deerin, 2015: 4). This double-​edged comment demonstrates the expectation that women in power should be both traditionally feminine and also strong and decisive actors in a highly masculinized working environment. The comparison to Thatcher suggests that British political journalists rely on a limited conceptual framework when they have to write about women leaders. While some newspapers presented women leaders as necessary for the representation of women, some also occasionally presented them as political outsiders. This is particularly the case when the women were relatively new to the newspapers. During Thatcher’s first campaign as party leader, her exploits on the campaign trail were described in gendered terms. The Daily Mirror suggested that Thatcher ‘travelled 3000 miles on a calf-​cuddling, tea-​ tasting, supermarket-​shopping, broom-​sweeping substitute for a political

142

THE LEADERS

campaign’ (Lancaster, 1979: 1–​2). Here, the journalist is criticizing Thatcher for prioritizing photo opportunities over engagement with ordinary voters. The activities which are mentioned all have gendered implications, including drinking tea, grocery shopping, and housework. Even the reference to ‘calf-​cuddling’ implies she is fulfilling a caring role. This example, therefore, explicitly frames these activities as having no place in formal politics. Similarly, in a column about televised leadership debates, Richard Littlejohn wrote: ‘I still for the life of me can’t understand what Nicola Sturgeon was doing centre stage in the televised leaders’ debate, given that she isn’t even standing in this election and her party isn’t fielding any candidates outside Scotland’ (Littlejohn, 2015: 16). In addition to disparaging the importance of the TV debates for Scottish voters, the author framed Sturgeon’s presence at the centre of political life as problematic. The representation of women leaders standing in elections then seems to follow established patterns within the literature.

Double binds Jamieson (1995) documented the multiple ways in which gendered expectations trap women in double binds that are disadvantageous to their political representation. For example, the ‘competence/​femininity’ double bind, whereby effective leadership is associated with traditionally masculine traits. To be considered a good leader, women must display these qualities, but women also cannot risk being deemed too masculine or else they are judged negatively. Double binds were pervasive throughout the newspaper coverage sampled, particularly the ‘competence/​femininity’ and ‘womb/​ brain’ double binds. These will now be explored in more depth, referring to relevant examples. Women and emotions (the womb/​brain double bind) Jamieson (1995) identifies a ‘womb/​brain’ double bind whereby women’s emotions are thought to hinder their intellectual (and therefore their leadership) abilities. Thus, the double bind dictates that because leadership and intellect are thought of as masculine traits, traditionally feminine qualities are deemed incompatible with them. However, if women fail to be appropriately emotional, they are deemed too masculine and are judged harshly for transgressing gender norms (Harmer et al, 2017). Before she became elected leader of the Conservative Party, Margaret Thatcher downplayed the chances of a woman becoming prime minister by repeatedly claiming that ‘there will not be a woman Premier from any party in her lifetime’ (Bevins, 1974: 7). During an interview with the

143

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Sun, the extent to which women’s emotions and biology were viewed as incompatible with leadership was laid bare: ‘Mrs Thatcher, 49 next Sunday, neatly fends off the inevitable tip that she will become Prime Minister, by saying: “the Premiership needs 100 per cent dedication, which a wife and mother would find hard to give” ’ (The Sun, 1974: 6). In downplaying her chances of becoming prime minister, she also devalues the contribution and capabilities that women bring to public life by arguing that motherhood is considered disqualifying in a way that fatherhood is not. The policing of these double binds was pervasive: indeed, there were frequent examples of women leaders being reported on as though their behaviour contravened standard rules about femininity and emotion. On multiple occasions, women leaders were depicted as lacking emotion or being uncaring. Thatcher’s detractors often framed her as ‘a strong, forceful leader who is, in consequence, unfeeling and heartless about ordinary people’ (Johnson, 1987b: 6). The Guardian described her politics as being detrimental to women ‘with poverty widening and deepening, with intolerance and hatred rampant and with women on the front line of attack’ (Phillips, 1983: 12). Thatcher was also portrayed as insensitive when she defended her use of private healthcare because it meant she could see a doctor at her convenience. The Guardian quoted various political opponents who branded her ‘the Marie Antoinette of British politics’, and who called her ‘callous, inhumane and selfish’ when others could not access the same care and for asking the public to trust her with the national health service when she did not even use it herself (Hencke & Gow, 1987: 1). This mode of representation was typical for Thatcher even before she became party leader. For example, in 1974, the Daily Mirror claimed her plan for cut-​price mortgages would impact the most vulnerable: ‘You get something cheap –​or at least the lucky owner occupiers do –​and in return you have to pay for it in other ways when the money is taken from hospitals and schools and the disabled’ (Lancaster, 1974: 16–​7). This quotation could just as easily have been referring to the Right-​to-​Buy scheme, which allowed council tenants to buy the homes they occupied, implemented by Thatcher’s government in 1980. Sympathetic newspapers later sought to counter her image as an uncaring leader by painting her as ‘The Iron Lady … with a soft centre’ (Kay & Potter, 1983: 9), whose ‘voice cracked with emotion when she talked of the personal and emotional pain when people described her as hard and uncaring’ (Deans, 1987: 15). An incident that stands out in this regard occurred during the 1983 election. Thatcher was accused by Labour deputy leader Denis Healey of ‘glorying in the slaughter’ for making political capital out of the Falkland’s War. Conservative-​supporting newspapers were quick to defend her by branding the remark ‘a shameful and groundless’ and ‘disgraceful attack’ (Daily Mail, 1983a: 6). Even the Daily Mirror suggested that Thatcher had

144

THE LEADERS

been personally ‘stung by war taunt’ (Thompson, 1983: 4). This was also the case when Neil Kinnock responded to a member of the public who had praised Thatcher’s ‘guts’ by saying, ‘It is a pity that other people have to leave theirs on the ground in Goose Green in order to prove it’ (Swain & Foster, 1983: 1). Journalists widely interpreted these remarks as insulting to Thatcher and the families of servicemen who had died during the conflict. While the original accusations could have had gendered implications in suggesting Thatcher was uncaring and therefore unfeminine, in this case, supportive newspapers resisted portraying these incidents in this way. It is clear, then, that press partisanship can also have an impact on the extent to which women leaders are stereotyped or not (Harmer et al, 2017). Thirty years later, May was also portrayed as unemotional and uncaring on the campaign trail. The Conservative manifesto’s pledge to change the way free school meals were distributed led to her being dubbed the ‘lunch snatcher’ (Glaze, 2017: 5). This criticism is implicitly gendered as it implies that May does not care about the wellbeing of children. It is also a clear allusion to the time when Margaret Thatcher was described as the ‘milk snatcher’ for cutting free school milk for young children (Harmer & Southern, 2018). The Daily Mirror quoted a female political opponent making this same comparison: ‘Lib Dem MP Sarah Olney said: “Margaret Thatcher was known as the milk snatcher –​Theresa May will go down as the lunch snatcher. Children under Theresa May will go hungry –​it is that stark and that heartless. But she just doesn’t care” ’ (Bartlett, 2017: 4). Newspapers were similarly critical of May’s perceived inability to empathize with various voters who expressed concerns about cuts to social security and the NHS. One such example was when she ‘faced a string of awkward questions from members of the public, including a challenge from a nurse, Victoria Davey, who left May faltering after confronting her over the 1% pay increase received by NHS staff’ (Asthana & Mason, 2017: 1) during a televised question-​and-​answer session on BBC Question Time Leaders’ Special. May was also portrayed as having a cold personality, which portrayal intensified when she avoided taking part in the televised leaders’ debates by asking her recently bereaved home secretary Amber Rudd to go in her place (Harmer & Southern, 2018). May was heavily criticized in the press when it emerged that Rudd’s father had died. The Daily Mirror quoted the Labour shadow cabinet minister saying, ‘What does it say about Theresa May that knowing that Amber had been through that, she forced her to do it rather than to come in there and stand up for herself?’ (Taylor & Bloom, 2017: 1). This example portrays May’s decision to send Rudd in her place as unkind and unempathetic, but it also crucially implies that she lacks courage for refusing to defend her political record and manifesto on television.

145

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

In 2017, May was also criticized for her campaign style. Her frequently repeating the same slogans was lambasted: ‘After calling the election on April 18 the PM adopted the slogan “strong and stable”. But when she shoehorned it into every quote, voters quickly started to deride her’ (Cole, 2017: 8–​9). This contributed to the perception that she was wooden and robotic. She was repeatedly referred to in the press and on social media as the ‘Maybot’: ‘Despite numerous software updates, the Maybot has continued to crash and burn’ (Crace, 2017b: 26). In the Sun it was claimed that ‘Tory politicians of all ranks demanded changes in her ‘Maybot’ robotic style, as well as her cold messages of gloom to the country’ (Newton-​Dunn, 2017: 2). She was also compared unfavourably to her main political rival by some journalists: ‘While Corbyn’s Labour galvanised the pre-​Glastonbury youth vote with clever use of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat, the Maybot stuck to reading that tired old “strong and stable” script as if she was addressing a nuclear family gathered around the radio in enthralled silence’ (Moore, 2017a: 11). Here she is portrayed as out of touch with younger voters. Both these examples come from a newspaper which ultimately endorsed May’s party during the campaign, which suggests that May’s personality and campaigning style contributed to the negative coverage that she received, and that in this case it cannot be reduced simply to a case of partisanship. We must recognize, however, that while on the face of it these remarks are not overtly sexist, there is a crucial gendered dimension if we consider Jamieson’s concept of the ‘double bind’. Newspapers presenting May as robotic also suggest that she is emotionless and unempathetic. This would likely be a problem for a male politician, but it goes so much further for a woman, calling her entire femininity into question. Nicola Sturgeon also occasionally fell foul of this double bind when negative news coverage sought to frame her as ruthless and cold. For years, the Scottish press frequently referred to as her as ‘nippy Nicola’ or a ‘nippy sweetie’ (Higgins & McKay, 2016). As Higgins and McKay (2016: 288) explain, ‘In Scottish parlance, a “nippy sweetie” is an item of confectionary with a sour or tart taste, and has come to refer to a normally female individual renowned for being sharp-​tongued and abrupt’. Such representations, therefore, demonstrate that Sturgeon is perceived as departing from feminine soft-​spokenness and reserve (Higgins & McKay, 2016). The UK press readily adopted this mode of representing Sturgeon during the 2015 election. She was referred to as ‘the “nippy sweetie” who holds the key to power’ (Raynor, 2015: 10–​11), casting her as sour, disagreeable, and potentially as a ‘kingmaker’. This latter inference was a particular problem for her because her political opponents sought to frame her as ambitious and power-​hungry: ‘Politics, for her, is not the art of the possible, it is the art of getting her own way’ (Raynor, 2015: 10–​11), implying that she is forceful

146

THE LEADERS

and uncompromising. Ideals of femininity have, historically, demanded that women grow from being ‘childish’ girls who want their own way into selfless wives and mothers who are, by definition, endlessly compromising. In any case, both these traits imply that Sturgeon is a capable politician, and yet her gendered identity is seen as somewhat transgressive. This was epitomized by the Daily Mail’s front page which labelled her as the ‘most dangerous woman in Britain’ (Chapman, 2015: 1) when it was alleged that Labour was planning to ask for a coalition with the Scottish National Party in the event of a hung parliament. The Sun also portrayed Sturgeon as dangerous in an overtly misogynistic way. The paper’s veteran political commentator Trevor Kavanagh likened Sturgeon to an animal: ‘Usually fierce Nicola Sturgeon looked doe-​eyed as she bowed and pounced on Mr Miliband like a spider in sight of her prey’ (Kavanagh, 2015: 8). Crucially, news coverage of Sturgeon also conforms to another double bind, that of competency/​ femininity, whereby leadership skills are assumed to be masculine traits and women are subjected to opprobrium for behaving too assertively. Best woman for the job: competence/​femininity Coverage of May’s robotic leadership style, discussed earlier, also invoked the competence/​femininity double bind. Jamieson (1995) describes a ‘competence/​femininity’ bind whereby women who display leadership qualities, popularly associated with masculinity, are vilified for transgressing gender norms. In the Guardian it was argued that ‘May is not a natural. This is the point of her, and that is why accusing her of being robotic is daft. Robots, on the whole, function and, post-​Brexit, all most people want is for things to function’ (Moore, 2017b: 21). Here May’s competence is heavily qualified by suggesting that she does not have a natural ability, but that she will be able to do the bare minimum and function. This comment casts May in an unfavourable light even as it makes the case for her leadership. Thatcher, on the other hand, was frequently portrayed as a competent leader. A Daily Mail editorial in 1983 stated that ‘staunch and trusty leadership is what Margaret Thatcher offers’ (Daily Mail, 1983b: 6). In some cases, positive evaluations of women’s leadership are couched in very masculinized language, which reflects the cultural assumption that leadership is associated with masculinity (Harmer et al, 2017). In 1983, another Daily Mail editorial appraised Thatcher’s political performance in the following way: ‘Since 1979, however, we have had a Prime Minister who has held to her course. She has relentlessly reduced inflation. She has not surrendered to union intimidation. She has not retreated into pay, price and exchange controls’ (Daily Mail, 1983b: 6). Thatcher’s achievements were described in a way that celebrates attributes that are culturally coded as masculine. For example, in

147

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

this case, she has not ‘retreated’ or ‘surrendered’, which recalls the language of war and conflict, an established trope of masculinized political rhetoric (Wahl-​Jorgensen, 2000; Harmer et al, 2017). Some leaders occasionally receive less explicitly gendered evaluations of their competence. For example, Nicola Sturgeon is frequently described as competent. She has been described as ‘self-​assured and poised’ (Deerin, 2015: 4), and as capable of being in full ‘command [of] the airy Chamber before even saying a word’ (Letts, 2015a: 10). May, on the other hand, tended to receive much more qualified assessments of her leadership abilities. In the Guardian, she was described as approaching her campaign ‘the same way she has operated in two decades in Westminster: competently, diligently, and with ruthless discipline. It hasn’t been joyful to follow … but get used to it. It’s working’ (Moore, 2017b: 21). Here May’s style is portrayed as effective but rather dull. It seems to carry the implicit criticism that anyone expecting May to transform British politics is likely to be disappointed. There have also been instances when women’s leadership capabilities were portrayed as potentially sinister, playing on gendered ideas about appropriate behaviour for women. In 2015, the press repeatedly alleged that the only way that Labour could win would be if they formed an alliance with the Scottish National Party. Critics of Sturgeon repeatedly portrayed her as a ‘merciless operator, this one. She’d do to Ed Miliband what Mongolian chefs do to mutton: kebab and speed-​broil him in the flames of her flashing eyes’ (Letts, 2015a: 10). This example describes Sturgeon as a ruthless politician, hugely capable, but with an underlying sinister aura. The gendered aspects of this contradictory representation are apparent when another newspaper argued that she ‘may wear high heels and a skirt, but the eerie silence from noisy ex-​leader Alex Salmond proves she eats her partners alive’ (Kavanagh, 2015: 8). This example not only emphasizes how threatening Sturgeon apparently is to her male colleagues, but outrageously reimagines her political processes as sexual relationships. This is only done, is only even possible, because Sturgeon is a woman, and it carries with it the implication that she is a femme fatale, a transgressive woman not to be trusted with power. In being painted as sinister, Sturgeon’s femininity is undermined, making her more radically other and portraying her as something to be feared. Such examples are not limited only to Sturgeon: other leaders have also had their femininity undermined; for example, Natalie Bennett (leader of the Green Party) was disparagingly labelled ‘Richie Benaud in drag’1 (Letts, 2015b: 8) by a commentator in the Daily Mail.

1

Richie Benaud was a famous Australian cricketer and cricket commentator.

148

THE LEADERS

While the more prominent women leaders were likely to be presented as competent, even if this was at times qualified, female leaders from smaller parties were routinely portrayed in less favourable terms. Some commentators were dismissive of Natalie Bennett and Leanne Wood in 2015. For example, in his column about one of the televised leadership debates, Quentin Letts from the Daily Mail called Bennett and Wood ‘Natalie and the Welsh one’ (Letts, 2015b: 8), while simultaneously referring to all the male leaders by their full or surnames. Letts also made Wood the object of a joke by asking, ‘And Who On Earth was that Welsh woman? Had she walked in from a recording of Gavin and Stacey?’2 (Letts, 2015b: 8). Another columnist was even more dismissive when he referred to Plaid Cymru leader Wood as ‘that dopey bird from the Welsh nationalists’ (Littlejohn, 2015: 16). Wood is explicitly described as unintelligent and incompetent. She is, furthermore, positioned as irrelevant and out of place in the election. Being seen has always been a problem for the smaller parties, but having a woman as leader has consistently given additional licence to journalists to dismiss them.

Personalization Personalization tends to be understood in terms of the increasing importance of leaders’ (as opposed to ordinary politicians) and their personal attributes in the political process. Research has shown that personalized coverage is often gendered (Trimble, 2017). Langer (2012) argues that this catch-​all definition is unsuitable for empirical analysis, as it clusters together too many different aspects. Instead, she deconstructs it into three main analytical categories: 1) presidentialization of power; that is, an increase in leaders’ overall mediated visibility compared to ordinary politicians. This has been addressed in the quantitative section of this chapter. Langer’s (2012) remaining analytical categories are more pertinent to the qualitative analysis. These are: 2) increased emphasis on leaders’ personality traits and skills related to their ability to govern; and 3) politicization of private personae, that is, an increased emphasis on traits originating in the private sphere that contribute to portraying leaders as human beings. These categories were present in the newspaper coverage and will be discussed in turn.

Leadership traits News coverage of the party leaders often emphasizes their personalities and, by implication, their suitability for political leadership. Early coverage

2

Gavin and Stacey is a popular television sitcom which partly takes place in South Wales.

149

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

of Thatcher dismissed her as ‘the Grantham grocer’s daughter with the plummy voice and the Tory garden party hats’ (Lancaster, 1974: 16–​7), rather than recognizing her as a credible leader. Later coverage tended to focus on her formidable reputation as the ‘Iron Lady’. News coverage of Nicola Sturgeon at times evaluated her personality traits and leadership credentials rather critically: ‘Asked to list her personality traits, she described herself as “kind and loyal”. To others, she is intense, ruthless, single-​minded and a workaholic’ (Raynor, 2015: 9). Critics also sought to portray her as ambitious and power-​hungry; for example: ‘Before “Project Nicola” –​the revamp of her image that produced more empathetic, smiley Sturgeon 2.0 –​there were rumours of bullying and she was regarded as prickly and focused to the point of coldness, a “nippy sweetie” ’ (Raynor, 2015: 9). This description of Sturgeon’s leadership style not only trades on gendered perceptions of women leaders discussed earlier but also implicitly suggests that Sturgeon is dishonest –​clearly an undesirable trait in a political leader. Therefore, Sturgeon is simultaneously presented as transgressing the rules of femininity by seeming cold and calculating and as seeming untrustworthy. During the 2017 campaign, Theresa May sought to present herself as a competent and robust leader by light-​heartedly evoking her colleague Ken Clarke’s description of her as a ‘bloody difficult woman’ (Harmer & Southern, 2019). Nevertheless, May struggled to deal with the difficulties of waging a highly personalized campaign which placed her leadership at its centre. The Daily Telegraph noted that ‘in the space of just 60 seconds, May went from Iron Lady to rag doll’ (Deacon, 2017: 10). For example, when May was asked about her personal life in a radio interview and met with heavy criticism for being unable to think of anything ‘naughty’ she had done except running through a wheat field in her youth, critical newspapers used this as an example of her unwillingness to engage meaningfully with voters. The Daily Mirror argued that during the campaign ‘she just stonewalled with clichés. The only two pieces of information anyone managed to draw was that the naughtiest thing she has ever done was run through wheat fields and that her husband Philip puts the bins out’ (Reade, 2017: 5). The Sun reported that her perceived boringness had even ‘unleashed more jibes’ (Cole, 2017: 8–​9) from her colleagues in the Conservative Party. May’s supporters, on the other hand, were keen to use it to paint her as the safe and reasonable (if boring) best choice for prime minister. For example, Daily Mail columnist Sarah Vine (wife of a former Conservative cabinet minister Michael Gove) compared May to her main rival Jeremy Corbyn: ‘The choice at this election is between a man who observed a minute’s silence for IRA killers and called Hamas and Hezbollah his friends, and a woman

150

THE LEADERS

whose self-​confessed biggest crime is running through a farmer’s crop before harvest time’ (Vine, 2017: 22). On the one hand, explicitly linking Jeremy Corbyn to political violence is a devastating indictment of May’s main rival for the premiership, on the other, it can be read as saying even though she compares favourably to him, she is still rather uninspiring.

Private lives Early coverage of Margaret Thatcher emphasized the importance of her home life. A candidate profile during the 1959 election reported that ‘Mrs M Thatcher (Conservative candidate for Finchley) is also a barrister. She and her company director husband have relied on a series of meals from friends during this election, except for breakfast, which she does cook for her husband and twin son and daughter’ (Daily Telegraph, 1959: 17). Presenting herself as an ordinary mother and wife also became an important aspect of her party leadership campaign (Webster, 1990). While she was prime minister, the Guardian accused her of: playing for all she was worth the part of Mrs Average Suburban Housewife. Most women in politics go to some lengths to distance themselves from the patronising, little-​woman image. Not so Mrs Thatcher, whose main concern in 1979 was that voters might think she was too remote from their daily experience (Phillips, 1983: 12) which emphasizes the constructed nature of her political persona. During the 2017 campaign, May appeared alongside her husband on an early-​evening magazine programme, The One Show on BBC1. The interview deliberately avoided any substantive political discussion altogether and instead focused primarily on aspects of the couple’s personal lives and relationship (Harmer & Southern, 2018). The purpose of the interview was widely interpreted as an effort to show a softer, more human side. Supportive accounts suggested that it had worked –​‘The interview showed the PM’s softer side at a time when some have criticised her for being “robotic” by sticking rigidly to the party’s key election slogans’ –​and chose to frame the interview as an ‘intimate interview’ wherein ‘the couple repeatedly glanced at each other and finished each other’s sentences’ (Ferguson & Hawken, 2017). Much of the coverage, however, focused on the awkwardness of the encounter: ‘Theresa could hardly have appeared more awkward if she tried … Philip tried to liven things up but the supreme leader somehow managed to kill every exchange stone dead’ (Crace, 2017c: 10). The press focused heavily on one exchange from the interview: ‘Mrs May said there are specific

151

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

“boy jobs and girl jobs” around the house after her husband said that he takes the bins out at their home’ (Ferguson & Hawken, 2017). This examination of the gendered division of labour in the prime minister’s household draws attention to the fact that May is a woman who is expected to fulfil specific tasks. The Guardian’s political sketch writer John Crace remarked that it was as though ‘we were right back in a 1960s chat show. A world where men were boys and women were girls’ (Crace, 2017c: 10), suggesting that May’s gendered outlook was old-​fashioned and out of touch. Some of the coverage was even more problematic. During the interview, Philip May alluded to the fact that May had expressed a desire to become party leader very early during her career. Crace lampooned May by describing her reaction as though she ‘shot him a death stare. Revealing she had had her eyes on the top job since 1999 wasn’t necessarily the look she was hoping for’ (Crace, 2017c). The implication here is that May attempted to conceal her political ambition, knowing it is an unattractive trait in the eyes of the electorate. Crace’s commentary is gendered insofar as being described as ambitious is often seen as off-​putting in women. Crace further undermines May by stating that ‘with the interview dying on its feet and most viewers thinking it a pity Philip wasn’t the prime minister’ (Crace, 2017c), which positions her husband as a more appealing candidate than May herself. The piece makes it clear that this conclusion was reached because May struggled to convey her human side effectively, and indeed the suggestion is not that Philip would make a better prime minister but that people would prefer him in that role. While this might seem a glib comment on the face of it, the fact that a political commentator can so easily suggest that the public might prefer to be governed by a man who has never held an elected office is tremendously revealing.

Appearance The content analysis results suggested that party leaders were much less likely to have their appearance mentioned than were other women politicians. Nevertheless, when these references were made, they were often problematic. Some were seemingly irrelevant passing comments on their haircuts and clothing choices in the in the middle of routine discussions of the campaign, which drew attention to their gendered identity. For example, Sturgeon was described as wearing a ‘svelte burgundy suit and nude power shoes’ (Letts, 2015a: 10), and reports mentioned ‘her stilettoes and new hairstyle’ (Deerin, 2015: 4). Other references were more overtly sexist. In coverage of the televised leadership debates, Leanne Wood and Natalie Bennett’s looks were portrayed as grotesque: ‘Gurning Green Aussie Natalie Bennett and Welsh Socialist Leanne Wood, wearing a lethal smile’ (Kavanagh, 2015: 8).

152

THE LEADERS

Daily Mail commentator Quentin Letts derided Sturgeon for ‘her Bay City Rollers hairdo, her Thunderbirds-​puppet gestures, the slender hands curled under her pointy chin’ (Letts, 2015a: 10). Sturgeon’s haircut was also positioned as illustrative of her politics. In an item that mentioned her opposition to nuclear weapons, her dedication to the cause was portrayed as being ‘as committed as she was in the days when she sported a haircut in tribute to eighties singer Limahl’ (Raynor, 2015: 9). Some newspapers chose to overtly sexualize the women candidates. Anderson (2011) has argued that it is a common trope to frame politics as though it is akin to physical intimacy. Framing women leaders in sexualized ways is a means of trivializing and objectifying them, which ultimately ‘puts them in their place’. This mode of framing was repeatedly used in the coverage of women leaders in 2015. We have already seen its use against Nicola Sturgeon described. The Sun published a political cartoon on 20 April which portrayed Labour leader Ed Miliband as James Bond, while Sturgeon, Wood, and Bennett were dressed in revealing red dresses, draping themselves over him. The caption ‘The Scarlet Sisterhood’ conjured up ideas about sexually available women, and also echoes the cartoon of ‘Scarlet Shirley’ discussed in Chapter 2 (The Sun, 2015). While women leaders were sometimes sexualized as part of a campaign to trivialize them, the newspapers also occasionally sought to portray them as unattractive and therefore unfeminine. In an item titled ‘a menage a trois in sandals is unthinkable’, Natalie Bennett was described as ‘the lacklustre Green leader, and a woman who, whatever her other qualities, would never be described as having a bit of Ooh-​la-​la about her’ (Moutet, 2015: 24). These problematic forms of representation were, however, reasonably rare and tended to be reserved for the less well-​known women leaders. This lends more weight to the idea that as women become more prominent in politics, the coverage of them becomes less gendered, at least in such explicitly sexualized ways.

Conclusion There have been comparatively few women who have occupied the role of party leader during UK general elections, making it difficult to judge the extent to which changes in their mediated portrayal stem from journalists getting used to their presence or from reporters’ responses to the specific circumstances and leadership styles of individual women. Nevertheless, the analysis revealed some interesting findings which tell us something about whether women leaders help to normalize the participation of women in politics more generally.

153

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Not unexpectedly, the results from the content analysis showed that when at least one woman is leading a political party during a campaign, they dominate the news coverage to the detriment of other, increasingly marginal women politicians. There is evidence to suggest that party leaders have become ever more dominant in UK election coverage in general (see Deacon & Harmer, 2019). However, the fact that women already tend to be on the fringes of news coverage compared to men (see Ross et al, 2013; Harmer & Southern, 2018) means that if there is one prominent woman, other women become even more excluded. Even if women leaders become normalized, then, there appears to be no benefit to other women politicians. In terms of tone, the analysis also suggested that news coverage of women leaders has become increasingly negative, and positive evaluations have decreased over time (apart from in 2017). Negative coverage of women leaders painted them as uncaring and ruthless, meaning that they were guilty of transgressing gendered ideas about femininity (Jamieson, 1995; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Parry-​Giles, 2014). Positive coverage cast women leaders as competent and robust; however, these evaluations tended to masculinize or qualify their performance, suggesting that mediated leadership ideals remain gendered in ways that disadvantage women (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015; Harmer et al, 2017). Even though negative coverage increased, when compared to ordinary women politicians, women leaders were subjected to less damaging and more favourable coverage. The qualitative analysis, however, showed that when those leaders were less well known, they did tend to have their competence questioned. This once again suggests that the presence of women leaders does not necessarily improve ordinary women candidates’ chances of avoiding being subjected to explicitly gendered coverage. Personalized coverage followed a similar pattern. Trimble et al (2013) remind us that as far as women are concerned, personalized coverage is necessarily gendered. Reporting on the appearance and family situation of party leaders was relatively rare in news items, although there was an increase over time for mentions of their appearance. This correlates with the findings from a recent study which compared coverage of Thatcher and May. Williams (2020) found that news coverage of May was more gendered than reporting about Thatcher. Nevertheless, even though such references were not included in the vast majority of items, they remain a persistent feature of the coverage of women leaders (Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010; Conroy et al, 2015). Once again, leaders had their appearance and family situation reported on less frequently than did ordinary women politicians, although this gap narrowed in the 2015 and 2017 campaigns. The qualitative analysis showed that news coverage that focused on women leaders’ personalities included some gendered assumptions

154

THE LEADERS

about their ability to lead. Both measures of personalization, then, suggest that the coverage of women leaders is less gendered in quantitative terms than news reporting on ordinary women politicians (Trimble et al, 2019). This suggests once again that women leaders are seen as exceptional compared to ordinary women in politics. Party leaders were directly quoted in about a third of news items in which they were mentioned, meaning that they were more likely to be written about than employed as a source. Conversely, ordinary politicians were directly quoted in a higher proportion of news items that they were mentioned in than were party leaders (apart from in 1979). This gap is especially pronounced in the 2015 and 2017 campaigns, when ordinary politicians are quoted in more than double the proportion of items as are party leaders. This contradicts findings from previous studies which found that more prominent women were afforded more opportunities to speak than ordinary women politicians (Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007; Hooghe et al, 2015). At the very least, we cannot say that these findings extend to the UK context. The analysis, then, suggests overall that for the most part news coverage of party leaders is perhaps less gendered than for ordinary women politicians in quantitative terms (Bystrom et al, 2001; Trimble et al, 2019). So, while there is some evidence to suggest that the presence of women in leadership roles normalizes their mediated contribution to politics, it does not significantly benefit other women politicians. The fact that so few women have contested UK general elections as party leaders makes it difficult to dismiss the possibility that these individuals are in some way exceptional because of their political performance or personalities. However, it is equally difficult to reject the idea that women in leadership roles may occupy a privileged position which means that they can, to some extent, ameliorate the adverse effects of gendered news coverage. However, this ability works as a stop valve whereby women have to reach a certain threshold before gendered news coverage abates for them. This throws into doubt the idea that the increased presence of women in leadership positions might lead to a reduction of gendered tropes and stereotypes in the mediation of women in politics.

155

6

Lessons from a Century of Reporting on Women in Elections This book has provided a systematic quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mediated representation of women in UK election coverage. The preceding chapters have shown that there have been both significant continuities and changes over time, and they also demonstrate how some of the observable changes in political communication have gendered consequences for the representation of women party leaders, ordinary politicians, voters, and female relatives of male politicians. In this final chapter of the book, the similarities and differences between these groups of women will first be discussed, showing the importance of analyzing the mediated representation of more than just political representatives, then the chapter will revisit the academic literature on changes to election coverage to demonstrate that taking gendered mediation into account is crucial for our understanding of these trends, and to call for more scholars of election coverage to engage with the literature on gendered mediation.

Women in election news: similarities and differences There have been many studies which compare the representation of men and women politicians in order to determine gender differences between their portrayal (see Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2005; Trimble et al, 2013; Harmer et al, 2017; Trimble, 2017; Harmer et al, 2020). For the most part, however, studies of gendered mediation take women politicians as their focus. This study followed in that tradition, but also sought to extend the value of such work by analyzing how women voters and female

156

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

relatives of politicians were represented. It is also necessary to compare the four groups of women to identify any disparities, because the mediated representation of women goes a long way to determining how both the public and political elites alike conceive of who matters in formal politics. This inevitably impacts on how they campaign. Stereotypical and partial coverage of even one group of women has consequences for the way all women are represented politically. There were several similarities and differences in the way all four groups of women were mediated over time. This section will bring together these findings to assess how UK election news represents women. Firstly, the presence and voices of women in the coverage will be explored. The discussion will then consider whether women are portrayed as specifically interested in gendered policy areas, followed by some discussion of how regardless of their role in elections, women are always presented as women first and politicians, activists, or citizens second. The final two sections will demonstrate how women experience sexist stereotyping and negative news coverage, followed by some discussion of how personalized coverage is inevitably gendered.

Presence and voices The presence of women and their voices in election news are important means by which they are validated as political representatives, campaigners, or citizens. While this study has focused on analyzing the representation of women, previous research has suggested that electoral coverage tends to be dominated by men (Ross et al, 2013; Hooghe et al, 2015; Harmer & Southern, 2018). It is crucial that women’s voices are included in the coverage so that their political platforms and opinions are circulated (and interrogated) in the public discussion of politics, and to ensure that they are given the opportunity to contribute so that policymakers recognize their views and interests. Although this study has not compared the voices of women to the voices of men, it does show that some women are invited to speak more than others, something that has profound consequences for the political representation of women. The results show that the representation of women varies considerably, depending on their role in the coverage. There is no straightforward trend when considering the inclusion of women’s voices in the media. While the proportion of news items in which women politicians were quoted increased over time until the 1970s, the analysis also showed that women were directly quoted in a higher proportion of news items between the 1950s and 1970s than in the period that followed. It follows, then, that their mediated visibility has not

157

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

necessarily progressed despite there being many more women successfully elected in later elections. The content analysis also showed that party leaders were directly quoted in a lower proportion of items than were ordinary politicians between 1979 and 2015. This difference between leaders and ordinary candidates was especially pronounced in the final two elections (2015 and 2017), when ordinary politicians were quoted in more than double the proportion of items in which they were mentioned than were party leaders, meaning that leaders were more likely to be written about than employed as sources. This is particularly concerning because women leaders dominated the news coverage of these campaigns, compared to ordinary women candidates. The content analysis showed that when at least one woman is leading a political party during a campaign, they dominate the news coverage to the detriment of other women politicians. The lack of direct quotation of them, despite their dominance, contradicts findings from previous studies which found that more prominent women were afforded more opportunities to speak than ordinary women politicians (Semetko & Boomgaarden, 2007; Hooghe et al, 2015). Since party leaders dominate the coverage in later elections but are quoted less frequently than ordinary women politicians, the voices of all women politicians have therefore become more marginal in recent decades. Like ordinary women politicians, women voters have been quoted in a higher proportion of items over time; however, the qualitative analysis revealed that while the proportion of items quoting them increased, the ways that their voices were included changed considerably. While earlier elections carried many readers’ letters, which allowed women to convey their thoughts, this later gave way to news items which asked a handful of women for their views on the campaign trail, or which featured a selected panel of readers who were given space to share their opinions. Consequently, this shift led to women voters being represented as less engaged in politics, less interested in the substantive issues, and less specific about their political views as time went on. The propensity of newspaper coverage to include the voices of women in electoral discourse has therefore changed over time. Although the remarks of voters were increasingly included in the coverage, ordinary politicians have been quoted less and less ever since the 1950s and ’60s. The results of the content analysis which measured the inclusion of direct quotations for all three groups of women suggest that while direct quotation of their remarks has generally increased, these quantified gains are qualified by other factors which limit the extent to which newspaper coverage of elections has become more nuanced or inclusive of women in politics.

158

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

Women’s issues? In addition to the presence of women in electoral coverage, this study also considered which political issues or motivations were ascribed to women politicians and voters in press coverage. This is significant because, for women to be considered as effective political representatives or engaged citizens, their political priorities need to be included in the public discussion of politics that takes place in the press. Previous research from the United States indicates that women politicians are often associated with so-​called feminized policy areas, such as education and healthcare (see, for example, Herrnson et al, 2003; Kittilson & Fridkin, 2008). The content analysis indicated that there was very little evidence to support this in the UK context. Moreover, the qualitative analysis revealed that women politicians discussed a range of policy issues over the course of the century. The dearth of evidence for women campaigning on feminized policy agendas might mean that there is less gendering of policy areas than some suggest. Equally, and more problematically, it might reflect that political parties in the UK tend to employ democratic means to determine policy platforms, and that those bodies are still male dominated. Crucially, it also reflects the dearth of newspaper coverage of gendered policy issues such as childcare and violence against women in UK election coverage. In stark contrast, news items about women voters almost exclusively related them to domestic policy issues such as the cost of living and social security. Indeed, the issues women were most frequently associated with remained remarkably stable over time. The cost of living dominated coverage of women voters for the first half of the century, and subsequently press reporting became more focused on health and welfare issues in the 1980s and beyond. Similarly, women voters’ political decisions were frequently portrayed as almost exclusively motivated by their responsibilities to their children or broader families. While the issues voters were concerned about remained stable over time, in the latter half of the century women were shown as less engaged and active in their demands for particular policies. Instead, women voters began to be framed as passive beneficiaries of the state’s funding concerning health and childcare and other social security benefits. Women voters, then, are almost exclusively associated with policy areas which emphasize their gender identity and familial roles, which ignores the considerable diversity among women and reinforces heteropatriarchal assumptions about women’s role in society. The analysis showed that despite women politicians and voters being mostly associated with the same three policy areas (the economy, international affairs, and health and welfare), their mediated representations were very different. Voters were portrayed in specifically gendered ways which emphasized their

159

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

familial roles, while politicians were not. This stereotyping of women voters and their political interests in electoral discourse is a persistent dimension of political coverage, which works to emphasize that female citizenship is often conceived in gendered ways by journalists and politicians alike (Harmer & van Zoonen, 2016).

Inescapable womanhood The results for all four groups of women demonstrated that women in election news are always framed as women first, regardless of whether they are leaders, politicians, voters, or female relatives of candidates. The gender identity of women is, therefore, consistently reported as newsworthy by the press (Falk, 2010; Ross et al, 2013; Trimble, 2017). Women who serve as party leaders or ordinary politicians are consistently portrayed as necessary because of a deep-​seated assumption that they are better able to represent women in general. The rise of women as party leaders has been framed as advantageous for all women, even if in some cases this claim is difficult to substantiate. Similarly, ordinary candidates are constituted as representatives with the ability to communicate politics to women voters and speak on their behalf in parliament, even if these women do not make any claims of their own about their ability or willingness to represent women of all socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. Political womanhood is therefore constructed so as to exclude those whose lives are not reflected in the experiences of their political representatives. Crucially, although male politicians have not been analyzed here, there is no evidence from the extensive academic literature about election coverage that male politicians have ever been thought of as representing other men based exclusively on their sex. This is likely because the default political actor, whether seen as a representative or rational citizen, has historically been presumed to be male. Unsurprisingly, given their role in the newspaper coverage of elections, female relatives of politicians are defined as women first, and for the most part as the spouses of male candidates and party leaders. The representation of these women is particularly pertinent here, because they are often framed as offering insights into the character traits of their relatives and as visible reminders of their male (and associated masculine) credentials. These representations usually reinforce the idea that men are more appropriate political representatives than women. Even when these women were portrayed as active political campaigners, they were still positioned as well placed to communicate with women voters. In this situation, we once again encounter the erroneous implication that women all share similar life experiences and political opinions.

160

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

Similarly, women voters were portrayed in very narrow terms in the sampled press coverage. Their womanhood was emphasized by portraying them mostly as mothers and housewives whose political motivations were almost entirely attributed to their role in the family. This was not an unexpected finding considering the academic literature that preceded this study (Bingham, 2004). What was surprising, however, was the extent to which this narrow representation persists for almost one hundred years, despite the profound social and political changes that have taken place in that time. Women’s role in society is no longer contained in the private sphere as it once was, and yet the trend continues. The analysis also suggests that there was a renewed focus on women as mothers from the 1980s onwards, with the mediated representation of women voters partially explaining why they are often targeted by political parties as women first and citizens second (Harmer & Wring, 2013). All four groups of women are conceived of by newspapers primarily in terms of their gender, above any other role they play in politics, and this has remained remarkably stable over time. Crucially, portraying women like this unhelpfully homogenizes them into a monolithic group, with the same desires and lived experiences, which women politicians are thought to draw on to make political decisions or to represent their constituents. This view not only fails to stand up to close scrutiny, it also has significant democratic consequences because it ignores the other aspects of women’s identities which inform their politics. It is especially disadvantageous to women from minority groups, who must also negotiate additional forms of othering and discrimination, because it means these experiences are rarely captured in election coverage.

Undermining women Women in election coverage are also routinely the subject of negative coverage which perpetuates sexist assumptions about their role in politics. Previous research has highlighted the extent to which news reporting about women in politics is often patronizing, overly critical, and sexist (see Ross, 2002; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Carlin & Winfrey, 2009; Sheeler & Anderson, 2013). While most previous studies focus on the portrayal of women candidates and leaders, this study demonstrates that voters and politicians’ relatives are also the subject of sexist coverage. It is often employed as a defence of sexist behaviour that women who have entered the public sphere must therefore deal with the judgment of the electorate, however challenging. This is a harder claim to make when these same tactics are applied to private citizens.

161

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

The content analysis showed that women party leaders were subjected to a significant amount of negative coverage, accounting for between 15 and 35 per cent of news items about them. Ordinary women politicians during these same campaigns received a higher proportion of negative evaluations in news items about them. The results for ordinary women politicians over time, however, revealed that early twentieth century election coverage was very optimistic about women’s potential contribution to public life, and the interwar years in particular featured meagre proportions of negative coverage of them. From these fairly positive beginnings, negative coverage about women politicians has increased over time. The results for female relatives followed a similar pattern. The proportion of news items which negatively evaluated politicians’ relatives and their conduct during the campaign increased significantly over time. The content analysis showed that after 1987, news items became increasingly hostile towards male party leaders’ spouses who were deemed too overtly political. This antipathy to overtly political spouses during the 1990s and beyond is comparable with the treatment of overtly political US first ladies in US media (Scharrer & Bissell, 2001; Winfield & Friedman, 2003). While the content analysis did not measure if evaluative references were explicitly gendered, in qualitative terms, what sexist coverage looked like in practice differed according to who was being represented. The news coverage of women voters offered little more than stereotypes of mothers and housewives while marginalizing women who did not fall into these categories. The analysis also revealed that women voters were consistently presented as unpredictable or undecided voters whose support is crucial to the outcome of elections. The persistence of this trend over time presents female citizens as a homogenous group of voters who all want the same thing (and yet who are somehow still unpredictable), thus excluding women who do not conform to patriarchal assumptions about the role of women in society. Sexist news coverage about women voters is problematic because it restricts the position of women in the mainstream political discourse, placing them in preconceived boxes and ignoring other experiences that might inform their politics. The assumptions which underpin the mediated representation of women voters are troublesome for the reasons outlined previously; however, descriptions of voters were hardly ever openly misogynistic, which is not the case for the other groups of women in this study. In qualitative terms, party leaders received a mixture of overtly and implicitly sexist evaluations. News coverage of women leaders often framed them in familiar ways which demonstrated their falling foul of the gendered double binds outlined by Jamieson (1995) whereby women struggle to overcome the competing tensions inherent in having to appear as a confident and capable leader while not appearing so confident and capable that their

162

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

femininity is called into question. Negative coverage of women leaders painted them as uncaring and ruthless, targeting traditional expectations of their femininity (Jamieson, 1995; Gidengil & Everitt, 2003; Parry-​Giles, 2014). Even positive coverage of women leaders tended to masculinize or qualify their political performance, reinforcing gendered assumptions about effective leadership (Campus, 2013; Conroy, 2015; Harmer et al, 2017). Leaders, however, were criticized in news items less frequently than were ordinary candidates. In the early elections, newspapers reported various incidents of sexism faced by women candidates on the campaign trail. As time went on, however, this was replaced by increased sexism from journalists themselves. Women candidates were referred to as ‘girls’, presented in sexualized ways, and were described using overly emotional language. There were also examples explicitly questioning their competence or political loyalties. These forms of representation present women politicians as unfit and out of place in the political realm, a troubling attitude to hold towards a group that makes up more than half the electorate. As time progressed, the female relatives of politicians were also increasingly portrayed in ways which undermined the role of women in politics. This was most marked in the way newspapers reported on their role on the campaign trail. In early elections, the proportion of items which reported on female relatives actively campaigning (by canvassing voters or giving speeches) was relatively high. These women were presented as having much to offer the new women voters by communicating about politics in an accessible way. The percentage of items which portray female relatives as activists, however, declines over the decades following the Second World War, until there is another rise in the late 1980s. In contrast, the proportion of items which were focused on the private lives of female relatives significantly increased. Negative coverage of these women also increased, and those who were perceived as particularly political or ambitious received the most opprobrium. As time has passed, female relatives have gone from being portrayed as contributing to political debate to merely acting as symbolic representatives who attest to the political credibility of their male relatives. These findings depart dramatically from the academic literature about US first ladies, which tends to show that early first ladies held very informal and apolitical roles and became more involved in politics as time went on (see Winfield, 1997; Caroli, 2010). The representation of political spouses in later UK elections serves to underscore the notion that the ideal politician is male and that women remain outsiders in the public sphere. Newspaper partisanship played an important role in the representation of women in political coverage. There were frequent examples of female party leaders and politicians’ relatives experiencing negative commentary

163

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

from hostile newspapers which manifested in gendered ways. Some women party leaders were frequently dismissed as dangerous, sinister, or out of their depth by newspapers whose editorial line was opposed to their electoral success. While this is to be expected from the highly partisan UK press, the extent to which these negative evaluations targeted their gender was remarkable. Similarly, some newspapers portrayed male politicians’ spouses as power hungry and monstrous, often overtly ridiculing their political beliefs and activities to discredit their husbands. The extent to which the political affiliation of newspapers affects their willingness to deploy explicitly gendered tropes to cast doubt on the credibility and sincerity of political opponents has until-​now, been an under-​researched aspect of electoral coverage in the UK, with a few exceptions (see Harmer et al, 2017). All four groups of women were presented in stereotypical and sexist ways. While women voters were routinely portrayed as wives and mothers whose political priorities are determined by their relationship to their families, the other three groups were subjected to increasing amounts of sexist and hostile news coverage as the century progressed. It is reasonable to assume that the increased participation of women in politics, as well as other significant social gains during the twentieth and twenty-​first centuries, has served to normalize the presence of women in election coverage. The evidence from this analysis, however, shows that this assumption is not borne out by the data. The increase in negative commentary about women leaders, ordinary politicians, and spouses proves that electoral coverage remains hostile to women and, in some cases, is getting worse rather than better. Although there is some evidence to suggest that the increase in negative news coverage is not necessarily driven solely by sexism, the form it takes for women in the public eye means that women continue to be represented as trivial and marginal figures in election coverage.

Personalization There is some evidence to suggest that political coverage in the UK has become more personalized and focused on party leaders in recent years (Stanyer, 2013; Langer, 2012; Deacon & Harmer, 2019). This has been mooted as an explanation for the increased presence of leaders’ wives in electoral coverage (Higgins & Smith, 2013). Previous studies show that news coverage of women politicians is often personalized in unhelpful ways which position them as unsuited to the political sphere (see Falk, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Garcia-​Blanco & Wahl-​Jorgensen, 2012; Trimble et al, 2015). Trimble et al (2013) remind us that as far as women are concerned, personalized coverage is inexorably gendered.

164

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

Much of the negative scrutiny of women in election coverage also focused on their personal lives and characteristics more than their political perspectives. In some cases, their personal lives were deliberately politicized in ways which emphasized their gender identity and threw their political legitimacy into question. The analysis showed that the political priorities of women voters were consistently linked to their position in the family over time. Newspaper reporting on politicians always deemed comments about their appearance and family situations to be newsworthy. However, the content analysis shows that the proportion of items which reference their appearance was particularly pronounced during the 1950s through the 1970s, before dropping off in later campaigns. Reporting on the appearance and family situation of women party leaders was confined to a low proportion of news items, although there was an increase over time for mentions of their appearance. This has also been observed by scholars in more recent elections (see Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010; Conroy et al, 2015; Williams, 2020). In comparison to ordinary women politicians, party leaders’ appearance and family situation was reported on in a lower proportion of news items which mention them (although the gap for mentions of appearance narrowed in the 2015 and 2017 campaigns). The qualitative analysis showed that news coverage that focused on their personalities included some gendered assumptions about their ability to lead. Both measures of personalization, then, suggest that the coverage of women leaders is less gendered in quantitative terms than news reporting on ordinary women politicians (Trimble et al, 2019). Personalized press coverage of female relatives showed a more straightforward increase over time. During the interwar years, this category consisted of a wide range of different female relatives who actively contributed to the political campaigns of their family members. Over time, the press began to focus more heavily on the spouses of candidates and, in particular, on the spouses of party leaders and their private lives. The quantitative findings also indicated that alongside the increased focus on their private lives, a higher proportion of news items scrutinized their physical appearance over time. Such references are most prominent in the 1970s and the 1990s and 2010s. The qualitative analysis revealed some similarities between the reportage on the appearance of both ordinary politicians and female relatives of male politicians. While some news articles mentioned their physical appearance or clothing choices in an incidental way, there were also frequent examples of their appearance and personal style being overtly politicized. Negative references either questioned the perceived femininity of the women in question by scrutinizing their clothing or appearance or framed their outfits as potentially alienating markers of wealth and privilege. Newspapers also

165

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

suggested that some politicians and relatives deliberately used their appearance to present themselves as ordinary people with whom voters could identify. The analysis showed that women from all groups were the subject of personalized news coverage, strongly suggesting that the personalization of election reporting is often explicitly gendered. Focusing on the private lives, domestic situations, and physical appearance of women distracts from their political concerns and trivializes women who are seeking election. It also invites sexist judgements about their credibility or qualifications for office. For women voters, relentlessly emphasizing that their familial relationships primarily inform their political views homogenizes them into one interest group whose life experiences and political priorities are the same, ignoring the significant socioeconomic and demographic differences between the many women who make up the electorate. Personalized election coverage, therefore, works to marginalize and trivialize women across the board and reinforces their peripheral status in public life. There were then some crucial differences between the four groups of women which demonstrate the value of comparing their mediated representation. The results also revealed a good number of similarities between these categories of women. News coverage always framed them as women first, and political activists or citizens second. Reporters also repeatedly linked the personal lives of women to their political stances in ways that would seem unimaginable for men. Finally, they were all repeatedly subjected to gendered stereotyping, which undermined their ability to participate in politics. The mediated representation of women in UK election reporting is therefore failing to adequately reflect the diversity of experience and opinions of women, which calls into question the ability of UK newspapers to serve their female publics. Given the range of academic studies of gendered mediation that this volume is in debt to, such conclusions may not be entirely surprising. However, there is also a broader academic tradition of analyzing developments in political coverage in which such questions have never seemingly never been raised, or have been considered too niche and marginal to be worth considering. It is to these studies that this chapter will now turn, to demonstrate that academic research into election news really should be paying attention to how gendered mediation might help us to understand changes in political communication over time.

Gendering election studies The findings in this volume have already demonstrated that gender is a crucial element of election reporting in the UK. As well as contributing

166

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

significantly to our understanding of how the representation of women in election news has changed across history, it also tells us a lot about how vital it is to account for gendered differences between men and women leaders, candidates, and voters when studying the mediation of elections. This next section will show the many ways in which broader trends in election reporting also interact with gendered assumptions and biases, and will argue that ignoring gendered differences or biases in news coverage might lead to incomplete or unsatisfactory conclusions about the causes and drivers for changes regarding election coverage. Studies of election coverage have tended to analyze key features of reporting. Existing scholarship has analyzed the proliferation of so-​called process news or meta-​coverage (Esser et al, 2001; Esser & D’Angelo, 2003), how campaigns have become increasingly presidentialized (Kriesi, 2011; Deacon & Harmer, 2019), and how election news has become more personalized or ‘intimized’ (Langer, 2012; Stanyer, 2013). Moreover, research shows the extent to which campaign coverage has become increasingly hostile or adversarial (Lengauer et al, 2011). In the next section, these trends will be discussed in relation to the empirical findings in this volume to demonstrate that accounting for gendered differences in reporting is essential. It is vital for understanding these broader trends, just as much as it is necessary to analyze the representation of women in their own right. This section will explain what the results from this study mean for our understanding of the different aspects of election coverage, to show that it is crucial that gendered mediation is accounted for in studies of election news.

Campaign agenda setting There is a wealth of evidence that news media, particularly in the UK context, have an agenda-​setting function insofar as they foreground specific issues above others and explain the importance of these issues to the public (Cushion & Thomas, 2018). It has been repeatedly argued that this agenda-​setting ability enables news media to have a hand in shaping political reality for politicians and the public alike (Street, 2001; McCombs & Shaw, 1995). The press plays a significant role in this regard in the UK, and their overt partisanship and lack of independent regulation mean that they play a crucial role in framing what substantive policy issues are of most importance to the broader public, even if these claims are not representative. This is because they are entirely free to pursue their own agenda as media organizations free from any expectation of balance or impartiality about the issues. While this has been extensively theorized and researched, there have been relatively few studies about why media choose to frame political

167

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

agendas which ignore the perspectives of women voters altogether, or which pigeonhole them as caring about specific issues. There is an equally conspicuous absence of research that questions why media fail to present issues which disproportionately impact on women (such as gender-​based violence, sex discrimination, or childcare), as though they are not issues about which society as a whole should be concerned. While some studies include gender as a variable, its impact on press coverage is hardly ever discussed in serious depth. If scholars researching agenda setting are right about the way politicians respond to the priorities that journalists set for them, it stands to reason that framing women voters in gendered ways which ignore their other contributions to society means that politicians may also come to perceive of them in these narrow terms. The agenda-​setting function of the UK press means journalists have a responsibility to represent women as actively engaged citizens who are the possessors of diverse life experiences and political priorities. The evidence in this volume suggests that UK political journalism is inadequate when it comes to representing women. Accounting for the marginalization or even erasure of certain issues would help us form a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between journalists and political actors. An important aspect of agenda setting concerns the question of who is called upon to speak. Previous research on sourcing patterns shows that news media tend to prefer elite male sources (Zoch & Turk, 1998; Ross, 2007). The results from this analysis reveal that the inclusion of women’s voices in news items was dependent on the group to which they belong. What is especially important, though, is the fact that some elite sources are more likely to be quoted than others. In those elections which included a female party leader, the content analysis showed that women party leaders were directly quoted in a lower proportion of news items than ordinary politicians. The difference was especially pronounced in 2015 and 2017, when ordinary politicians were quoted in more than double the proportion of items about them as were party leaders. Taken together with the fact that, during these same campaigns, coverage of women party leaders dominated the overall coverage of women, it would suggest that the presence of powerful women leads to women in general being given fewer opportunities to speak. This poses a challenge to the conventional understanding of agenda setting and indexing because despite representing the most elite kind of female source, women party leaders remain more likely to be written about than quoted directly. Ignoring the gendered nature of sourcing means that gender biases are not included as explanations for the media’s preference for elite male sources.

168

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

Process news versus policy Scholars have claimed that, since political communications have become increasingly professionalized, journalists have treated party-​p olitical strategies and the attempts of politicians to manage the news as newsworthy (Esser & D’Angelo, 2003; Vreese et al, 2017). Empirical evidence from the UK suggests that reporting on the political process and election strategies has a much longer history than previously theorized (Deacon & Harmer, 2019). News which focuses on the political process (rather than on policy agendas) can also have gendered consequences. Studies specifically analyzing the coverage of women have noted that election coverage of politicians often focuses on the ‘first woman frame’, which interrogates the electability of women candidates or speculates about their potential to transform the political landscape (Norris, 1997; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Adcock, 2010; Ward, 2017; Trimble et al, 2019). While it is essential to recognize and report on women’s electoral strategies and gains, emphasizing their credentials and private lives instead of their political agendas can be especially problematic for women candidates, as we have already seen in Chapters 2 and 5. The results from this study show that as far as women are concerned, policy coverage is less prominent than are process stories. It also shows that news which focuses on the conduct of a campaign is often gendered in a variety of ways. For example, the data showed how women voters were often positioned as a homogenous group, or as an unpredictable key target demographic which politicians needed to win over, rather than as a diverse section of the population with different motivations and priorities. News coverage which emphasizes the extent to which women candidates are able to adequately represent women voters also reinforces this homogeneity. Equally, individual women voters who engaged in controversial interactions with politicians on the campaign trail (such as Gillian Duffy) came to be represented as symbols of the gaffes and failures of politicians rather than as active political figures in their own right. Electoral process coverage also represents female relatives of politicians as political resources for them to showcase their family-​man credentials. Horserace coverage of the political strategies of women politicians and party leaders can also be gendered, and openly sexist, as when women party leaders are described as cold and calculating or their political strategies are described as sexual or romantic relationships. Others have already described the consequences of the press attacking their femininity or impugning their ability to be strong and effective leaders (see Ross, 2002; Falk, 2010; Lawrence & Rose, 2010; Harmer et al, 2020).

169

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Presidentialization/​personalization Presidentialization and personalization are related concepts, both of which have gendered implications. Presidentialization mainly refers to a tendency to focus on party leaders, while personalization can be thought of as an increased focus on the personal credentials and private lives of politicians. While studies of presidentialization in the UK tend to show that there has been an increased focus over time on the top two candidates in any given race (Kriesi, 2011; Deacon & Harmer, 2019), there has been very little research into the gendered implications of this trend. Langer (2012) is an exception in that she notes that gender may explain why news coverage of Thatcher showed she was more often written about than directly quoted when compared with other (male) leaders. The results from this volume also reveal that women party leaders are given fewer opportunities to speak for themselves, but now we see this is also true in comparison to ordinary women politicians. The analysis also showed that the presence of female party leaders led to their dominating the news about women politicians in general. This suggests that presidentialization is problematic for women, not only for the obvious reason that men dominate leadership positions, but equally because the news coverage focuses on one woman, or very few women, at the expense of others. Overall, then, focusing on leadership at the expense of a more comprehensive set of political actors privileges men, not only due to their over-​representation at the top of political parties but also because when women are present their portrayal reinforces their otherness. The gendered mediation of presidentialized campaigns is, therefore, problematic and deserves further scrutiny. Studies of the personalization of political coverage show that the emphasizing of the personalities or private lives of candidates depends on several factors, such as political culture, the system of government, media systems, and national context (see Stanyer, 2013). In the UK context, Langer’s (2012) work concludes that personalization fluctuates across time and can depend heavily on the personalities of individual political leaders. Likewise, Deacon and Harmer (2019) found that between 1918–​2015 mentions of the private lives of politicians were the most consistent, while there was an increase in evaluations of politicians’ competence over time. Most accounts of personalization, however, pay very little attention to gendered differences between political actors. Research on the gendered mediation of political leaders, however, indicates that reporting of women candidates often focuses on perceptions of their character and suitability for office (see Falk, 2010; Lawrence and Rose, 2010; Murray, 2010). Such research also demonstrates how news items’ focus on the private lives of women candidates is often mediated differently to news coverage of

170

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

men (van Zoonen, 2006; Ross, 2002). The importance of accounting for gender when measuring personalization has been convincingly argued by Trimble et al (2013). Their study of news coverage of political leadership candidates in Canada found that intense scrutiny of the personal attributes of women candidates helped to explain the overall increase in personalization, highlighting that accounting for gendered differences may offer important explanations for these broader trends. Results from this study corroborate what studies of women in political news have been arguing for at least three decades: that personalized coverage of women is often implicitly gendered but also at times overtly sexist. The content analysis results suggest that scrutiny of the appearance, body shape, and clothing of ordinary women politicians was a consistent feature of the news coverage sampled, although such reporting did increase during the first half of the twentieth century before declining again. There was also a fluctuating emphasis on their familial situation, but this was less prominent than the focus on their appearance. Party leaders, by contrast, were subjected to a lesser frequency of such references in news items about them. However, the qualitative analysis showed that leaders were described in terms of their characteristics in sexist ways. Thatcher, May, and Sturgeon were all described as cold and calculating or dangerous, subtly calling in to question their femininity as well as their ability to perform as leaders, demonstrating that the gendered double binds faced by women leaders are still relevant (see Jamieson, 1995). News coverage of female relatives (particularly politicians’ wives) was similarly personalized, perhaps unsurprisingly given their inclusion is premised on their familial relationships. However, they were also positioned as gendered political resources for their male relatives, and framed so as to assert heterosexist claims of normalcy and, therefore, the ability of their male relatives to be good political representatives. Politicians’ wives, in particular, were portrayed in ways that underlined gendered assumptions about the appropriate role of women in the family and public life. As such, the inclusion of female relatives in news coverage is highly revealing about how male candidates campaign for election. Women voters were also presented as representatives of their families, whose political motivations and priorities reflect their relationships to men and children. The gendered character of personalized election reporting summarized here shows that neglecting the gender-​biased ways in which political reporting can shape perceptions of women as viable and effective leaders, or as engaged and diverse voters, can lead to a woefully incomplete picture. So, those studies which fail to account for gendered mediation could be missing out on a whole range of potential explanations for the phenomenon of personalization.

171

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Negativity Most scholars studying the development of election news over time agree that it has become increasingly confrontational and hostile. Lengauer et al (2011) argue that the overwhelming evidence suggests that negativity towards individual politicians is increasing. Deacon and Harmer’s (2019) study of UK election news found an evident rise in adverse reporting. Increased adversarial or negative coverage is often explained by changes in the cultural and professional norms of journalists, changes in the relationship between journalists and political public-​relations spokespersons, and changes in the competitiveness and commercialization of news (Lengauer et al, 2011). Once again, if we take evidence from studies which have analyzed gendered mediation of women politicians, there is some evidence to suggest that news coverage which evaluates women politicians negatively is often also sexist (Ross, 2002; Harmer et al, 2017; Trimble, 2017). Moreover, news coverage can evaluate the behaviours and abilities of politicians through a gendered lens, emphasizing traditionally masculinized political performance at the expense of softer political strategies (Harmer et al, 2017). The analysis in this volume also conforms to the overall trend identified by others, and shows that negative coverage of elite figures such as party leaders, candidates, and female relatives of politicians has increased over time. This was the case in terms of both the quantitative and qualitative analyses. Negative news items about female relatives increased over time and were especially prominent from 1987 onwards. Qualitative analysis of coverage about these women also showed that in early campaigns they were broadly accepted (and even occasionally celebrated) as helpful political activists in their own right. However, later newspapers began to scorn their presence on the campaign trail and presented overtly political wives (in particular) as too political and even as dangerous for democracy. The proportion of news items about ordinary women politicians which evaluated them negatively also increased. The qualitative analysis showed that as well as becoming increasingly hostile, news coverage became increasingly sexist (and at times displayed outright misogyny). A proportion of the coverage was incredibly personal, as previously discussed in Chapter 2. While party leaders were less likely to receive the same volume of negative coverage as other candidates, media scrutiny of their leadership abilities and personality often demonstrated the double bind to which women are subject, reinforcing that politics is a masculine enterprise for which they are ill-​suited. Previous research which aims to track if electoral coverage is becoming increasingly adversarial or negative often completely ignores that gender-​ biased reporting can have an impact on the overall negativity of election news. Ignoring the importance of the gendered language and assumptions

172

LESSONS FROM A CENTURY OF REPORTING

which underpin political reporting is increasingly untenable in a political environment in which more women are being elected as legislators and party leaders than ever before. So, while it is not possible to prove that sexist assumptions drive the increased negativity of electoral coverage, it does suggest that negative commentary about prominent individuals is often expressed in gendered and sexist terms. As far as the representation of women is concerned, the fact that journalists are not necessarily motivated by sexism is beside the point. The point is that some women are portrayed in ways that undermine them as political actors, which is damaging to our democracy. Given just how many of the trends identified in studies of election coverage may have gendered consequences, or may be partially explained by gendered differences in news reporting, it is striking that gender is not measured or even accounted for by most scholars. In addition to demonstrating the importance of analyzing how election coverage is gendered dependent on the role women occupy in the news story, this book has argued that ignoring studies of gendered mediation means researchers miss important data which can help to explain how election coverage has changed. The continued marginalization of scholarship about the representation of women in election studies has widespread consequences, because it means researchers may be ignorant of explanations for important trends. It also means men are not studied as gendered participants in politics, which reinforces their position as the default citizens and political representatives.1 This book demonstrates that women’s political and mediated representation are inextricably linked. It has argued, furthermore, that to ensure that women are appropriately represented in public life it is crucial to ensure that they are included in the public discussion of politics that takes place within news media. This book is indebted to the work on the gendered mediation of women in politics that has gone before, much of which is cited within. Crucially though, this volume also adds substantially to our knowledge of how gendered and sexist news coverage has developed and fluctuated since 1918. It is somewhat novel in its approach, because voters and female relatives of politicians were included in the analysis to demonstrate how crucial it is to consider how all women are represented. This aspect of the study was productive, because it shows that, despite their different roles in political life, the variety of ways that news coverage stereotypes and marginalizes women voters and relatives was similar to that experienced by women politicians, and reveals just how central gendered ideas of who belongs, and who can claim political authority and representation, are to the news reporting on elections. 1

I am keenly aware that just like studies which have gone before me, this call for more scholars who study media and politics to read work about gendered mediation is likely to be ignored because those reading this book are probably already engaging with this work, but the point stands, and it would be remiss of me not to make it!

173

References Primary sources Allan, M. (1945) ‘These are the issues for women’, Daily Herald, 4 July, p 4. Asthana, A. and Mason, R. (2017) ‘May falters during challenge over record on public services’, The Guardian, 2 June. Bartlett, N. (2017) ‘Theresa May’s “lunch snatcher” policy would hit 900,000 children from struggling families’, Daily Mirror, 21 May. Battle, B. (2010) ‘Mums’ Labour pains’, The Sun, 4 May, pp 28–​9. Beattie, J. (2010) ‘Widows in fury at Cameron plans’, Daily Mirror, 29 April, pp 6–​7. Bell, M. (1918) ‘Backward male electors’, Daily Mail, 13 December. Betts, H. (2010) ‘So who wins the sartorial debate?’, Daily Telegraph, 21 April. Bevins, A. (1974) ‘A slog to the top’, The Sun, 4 October. Bevins, A. (1979) ‘Jim in TV row over Left threat’, Daily Mail, 28 April, p 9. Bloom, U. (1935) ‘Women! Today it’s up to you’, Daily Mirror, 14 November, p 10. Bowness, M. (2001) ‘Jack’s on board with us’, The Sun, 4 June, p 6. Bradshaw, D. (1987) ‘Kid’s pledge woos mums’, Daily Mirror, 9 June. Burton, P. (1979) ‘Mum’s the word on prices!’, Daily Mirror, 27 April, p 7. Callan, P. (1979) ‘The OTHER women at the heart of the election’, Daily Mirror, 1 May. Carroll, R. (1974) ‘Sun readers plump for Labour’, The Sun, 10 October. Chapman, J. (2015) ‘Most dangerous woman in Britain’, Daily Mail, 4 April. Chilvers, S. (2010) ‘Stylewatch: Labour in the pink’, The Guardian, 13 April. Chippindale, P. (1974) ‘Rich farm village sees red light of socialism’, The Guardian, 5 October. Churchill, R. (1950) ‘So “Gorgeous Gorsky” carries the banner’, Daily Mail, 20 February. Churchill, R. (1951) ‘Battle of the ladies in grey’, Daily Mail, 19 October, p 7. Cole, H. (2017) ‘BLAME GAME! Meet the bickering pair of Theresa May’s closest aides Tories are blaming for the worst campaign in modern political history’, The Sun, 10 June.

174

References

Cook, A. (1959) ‘Gaitskell looks up his train’, Daily Mail, 8 October. Coolican, D. (1979) ‘Housewives’ final choice’, Daily Mail, 2 May. Cousins, J. (1979) ‘Housewives’ choice for a better deal’, Daily Mirror, 3 May, p 5. Crace, J. (2017a) ‘Diane Abbott has several numbers on police costs –​sadly they are all wrong’, The Guardian, 2 May. Crace, J. (2017b) ‘Up against the Maybot, Corbyn struggles not to be a personality’, The Guardian, 1 June. Crace, J. (2017c) ‘Supreme leader produces pure TV valium on The One Show’, The Guardian, 10 May. Daily Herald (1922a) ‘Why we want women MPs’, Daily Herald, 9 November. Daily Herald (1922b) ‘How women can win the fight for peace and happy homes’, Daily Herald, 11 November. Daily Herald (1923) ‘How Tor-​Libs raided housewife’s purse’, Daily Herald, 4 December. Daily Herald (1924) ‘Women’s Party is Labour’, Daily Herald, 24 October. Daily Herald (1931) ‘A word to women’, Daily Herald, 22 October, p 8. Daily Herald (1935) ‘Her plea is “save the mother” ’, Daily Herald, 8 November. Daily Herald (1945) ‘We have fought for years’, Daily Herald, 30 June. Daily Herald (1950a) ‘Notebook’, Daily Herald, 17 February. Daily Herald (1950b) ‘Notebook’, Daily Herald, 20 February. Daily Mail (1918a) ‘Women’s Charter’, Daily Mail, 10 December. Daily Mail (1918b) ‘A woman’s smiles’, Daily Mail, 12 December. Daily Mail (1918c) ‘Miss Phipps converts in Chelsea’, Daily Mail, 12 December. Daily Mail (1918d) ‘Woman’s appeal to women: Politics only ordinary life’, Daily Mail, 13 December. Daily Mail (1922b) ‘Women’s power’, Daily Mail, 14 November. Daily Mail (1923a) ‘Platform Chivalry’, Daily Mail, 1 December. Daily Mail (1923b) ‘Premier and women voters’, Daily Mail, 3 December. Daily Mail (1923c) [No title], Daily Mail, 3 December. Daily Mail (1923d) ‘Ideal election wife’, Daily Mail, 3 December. Daily Mail (1924a) ‘Lady Diana Cooper’, Daily Mail, 23 October. Daily Mail (1924b) ‘Premier’s speech to women’, Daily Mail, 23 October. Daily Mail (1931) ‘Appeal to Women’, Daily Mail, 23 October. Daily Mail (1935a) ‘Mr M. MacDonald’s Hustle’, Daily Mail, 9 November. Daily Mail (1935b) ‘Smile that is shaking a tradition’, Daily Mail, 12 November. Daily Mail (1935c) ‘Women’s election drive: Kissing babies “not part of campaign” ’, Daily Mail, 13 November. Daily Mail (1935d) ‘Miss Graves’s stern fight’, Daily Mail, 9 November. Daily Mail (1950) [No title], Daily Mail, 21 February.

175

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Daily Mail (1955a) ‘Butler and Housewife: You can advise me’, Daily Mail, 24 May. Daily Mail (1955b) ‘Flo vote chooses the right road’, Daily Mail, 25 May. Daily Mail (1959a) [No title], Daily Mail, 2 October, p 9. Daily Mail (1959b) [No title], Daily Mail, 7 October. Daily Mail (1959c) ‘Bessie wants to spank Hailsham’, Daily Mail, 2 October. Daily Mail (1970a) ‘How much in our pockets? How big a hole in the bank?’, Daily Mail, 15 June. Daily Mail (1970b) ‘Tories go for the wives’ vote’, Daily Mail, 15 June, p 2. Daily Mail (1970c) ‘Heath woos the wives’, Daily Mail, 18 June. Daily Mail (1970d) [No title], Daily Mail, 18 June. Daily Mail (1974) ‘Top of the beauty poll’, Daily Mail, 10 October. Daily Mail (1979) ‘Maggie woos the mothers’, Daily Mail, 27 April. Daily Mail (1983a) ‘The real Healey stands forth’, Daily Mail, 3 June. Daily Mail (1983b) ‘The Tory’s hold to their course’, Daily Mail, 19 May. Daily Mail (1987) ‘The eye catcher who’s after Thatcher’, Daily Mail, 9 June. Daily Mail (1992) ‘Odd timing’, Daily Mail, 9 April. Daily Mail (1997) [No title], Daily Mail, 29 April, p 12. Daily Mail (2005) [No title], Daily Mail, 4 May. Daily Mail (2010a) ‘No, I’m not glamorous says Labour girl Gloria’, Daily Mail, 17 April. Daily Mail (2010b) ‘Figures show Cameron’s family crusade is vital’, Daily Mail, 17 April. Daily Mail (2010c) ‘Labour are the real immigration bigots’, Daily Mail, 29 April, p 14. Daily Mirror (1922) ‘Whirlwind finale today to election struggle’, Daily Mirror, 14 November. Daily Mirror (1923) ‘Women who stand for Parliament: Good looks as a means of catching votes’, Daily Mirror, 4 December, p 7. Daily Mirror (1929) ‘How will women vote this week?’, Daily Mirror, 27 May. Daily Mirror (1931) ‘Let women consider’, Daily Mirror, 27 October. Daily Mirror (1935a) [Untitled letter], Daily Mirror, 9 November, p 14. Daily Mirror (1935b) ‘Women in parliament’, Daily Mirror, 13 November, p 11. Daily Mirror (1945a) ‘I’ll vote for them’, Daily Mirror, 30 June. Daily Mirror (1945b) [Untitled letter], Daily Mirror, 30 June. Daily Mirror (1945c) ‘Your sacred trust’, Daily Mirror, 30 June. Daily Mirror (1945d) ‘Churches call on people of Britain’, Daily Mirror, 2 July. Daily Mirror (1951) ‘Housewives, beware!’, Daily Mirror, 23 October. Daily Mirror (1955) ‘Young Labour: Textiles’, Daily Mirror, 21 May. Daily Mirror (1959) ‘The hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that writes the decisive X’, Daily Mirror, 5 October.

176

References

Daily Mirror (1964) ‘Look what’s happened to the Tory £’, Daily Mirror, 14 October. Daily Mirror (1970) ‘Woman or man, who are you putting your money on?’, Daily Mirror, 17 June. Daily Mirror (1974a) ‘The unacceptable face of Mr Barber’, Daily Mirror, 21 February. Daily Mirror (1974b) ‘Women in power’, Daily Mirror, 10 October. Daily Mirror (1979) ‘Women care! That’s why their vote is so vital’, Daily Mirror, 27 April. Daily Mirror (1992) ‘Remember me: “We must stop the Tory rot before it’s too late” ’, Daily Mirror, 8 April. Daily Mirror (1997) ‘My 25p insult’, Daily Mirror, 26 April. Daily Mirror (2010) ‘Cameron wins over mums’, Daily Mirror, 19 April. Daily Telegraph (1918) ‘Women and their vote: Question of apathy’, Daily Telegraph, 13 December. Daily Telegraph (1922a) ‘Independent wives’, Daily Telegraph, 10 November. Daily Telegraph (1922b) ‘North Camberwell’, Daily Telegraph, 10 November. Daily Telegraph (1922c) [No title], Daily Telegraph, 14 November. Daily Telegraph (1923) ‘Lady Warwick’s jewels’, Daily Telegraph, 5 October. Daily Telegraph (1929) ‘Women and their vote’, Daily Telegraph, 29 May. Daily Telegraph (1931) ‘Miss Chamberlain’s blue and white brigade’, Daily Telegraph, 23 October. Daily Telegraph (1935) [No title], Daily Telegraph, 11 November. Daily Telegraph (1950a) ‘Forfeited deposits’, Daily Telegraph, 23 February, p 4. Daily Telegraph (1950b) ‘Holing out’, Daily Telegraph, 23 February. Daily Telegraph (1959) ‘Colourful candidate’, Daily Telegraph, 5 October. Daily Telegraph (1964a) ‘And may the best woman win!’, Daily Telegraph, 9 October. Daily Telegraph (1964b) ‘Party leaders’ wives waiting for a rest’, Daily Telegraph, 13 October. Daily Telegraph (1970) ‘Votes from women …’, Daily Telegraph, 9 June. Daily Telegraph (1974a) ‘Housewives hold key to election, says Thorpe’, Daily Telegraph, 7 October. Daily Telegraph (1974b) ‘Socialist’s nationalisation platform may save Welwyn Tories’, Daily Telegraph, 8 October. Daily Telegraph (1979a) ‘I am no strident female’, Daily Telegraph, 27 April. Daily Telegraph (1979b) ‘Constituencies’, Daily Telegraph, 27 April. Daily Telegraph (1979c) [No title], Daily Telegraph, 27 April. Daily Telegraph (2005) [No title], Daily Telegraph, 4 May. Deacon, M. (2017) ‘In the space of just 60 seconds, May went from Iron lady to rag doll’, Daily Telegraph, 10 June.

177

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Deans, J. (1987) ‘The people who must vote for me, by Maggie’, Daily Mail, 6 June. Deerin, C. (2015) ‘Woman who holds all the aces’, Daily Mail, 4 April. Derby, O. (1955) ‘Who’ll help a working girl?’, Daily Mirror, 21 May. Evison, S. (1997) ‘Britain’s First Lady’, The Sun, 1 May. Ferguson, K. and Hawken, A. (2017) ‘ “Theresa May’s on TV making sexist comments!”: PM comes under fire for saying there are jobs for “boys and girls” during One Show chat with her husband’, Daily Mail, 10 May. Freedland, J. (1997) ‘Eggs and insults draw smile as nation watches’, The Guardian, 1 May. Freeman, H. (2005) ‘The week the first ladies went mad’, The Guardian, 5 May. Gaskell, J. (1974) ‘The question that really stopped Marion Thorpe in her tracks …’, Daily Mail, 26 February. Gentleman, A. (2010) ‘Women candidates upstaged by wives’, The Guardian, 21 April. Glaze, B. (2017) ‘Theresa May raids free school dinners to feed grammar and free school plans –​and buy off Tory revolt’, Daily Mirror, 18 May. Glover, S. (2001) ‘The last stand’, Daily Mail, 2 June. Hall, U. (1970) ‘Dame Irene, mother of Mother of Parliaments’, The Sun, 8 June. Hencke, D. and Gow, D. (1987) ‘PM defends right to private choice’, The Guardian, 5 June. Hinton, L. (1974) ‘Time for a nice cuppa for Mrs T’, The Sun, 7 October. Hollingshead, I. (2005) ‘A quiet life on the fringes of power’, Daily Telegraph, 3 May. Jackson, W. (1959) ‘Electioneering wives have helpful husbands’, Daily Telegraph, 5 October. Johnson, D. (1974) ‘Labour insists it can win in Bolton’, The Guardian, 27 February. Johnson, P. (1987a) ‘The sinister conspiracy of silence’, Daily Mail, 5 June. Johnson, P. (1987b) ‘Who cares? If you compare the deeds of Maggie with the words of Kinnock there’s one clear answer’, Daily Mail, 9 June. Kavanagh, T. (2015) ‘Sisterhood politics won’t be ladylike’, The Sun, 20 April. Kavanagh, T. and Roycroft-​Davis, C. (1997) ‘The Blair Necessities’, The Sun, 29 April. Kay, J. and Potter, C. (1983) ‘Soft side of the Iron lady’, The Sun, 6 June. Kay, R. (2010) [No title], Daily Mail, 6 May, p 43. Lancaster, T. (1974) ‘Remember the February men’, Daily Mirror, 7 October. Lancaster, T. (1979) ‘What would life be like … under Mrs Thatcher’s broomstick?’, Daily Mirror, 2 May.

178

References

Lee-​Potter, L. (1974) ‘A 10p ticket to watch Vanessa play the rebel’, Daily Mail, 23 February. Lee-​Potter, L. (1992) ‘Glenys flirts, but her eyes are cold’, Daily Mail, 8 April. Lee-​Potter, L. (1997) ‘Winning wives’, Daily Mail, 30 April. Lee-​Potter, L. (2001) ‘For the love of Ffion’, Daily Mail, 5 June. Leigh, V. (1950) ‘The leading ladies of the poll’, Daily Mail, 23 February. Leslie, A. (1974) ‘The candidate’s wife’, Daily Mail, 8 October. Leslie, A. (1987) ‘The dogs who don’t bark’, Daily Mail, 6 June. Letts, Q. (2001a) ‘Like a butcher bawling pork belly prices at market wives’, Daily Mail, 1 June. Letts, Q. (2001b) ‘Amid the aggro, Mr Hague was beaming and relished the scrap’, Daily Mail, 6 June. Letts, Q. (2005) ‘The man who took this country to war chatted about how many times a night he can manage to have sex with Cherie’, Daily Mail, 5 May, pp 6–​7. Letts, Q. (2010) ‘She was magnificent, she was eloquent. And she spoke, I suspect, for millions’, Daily Mail, 29 April. Letts, Q. (2015a) ‘Merciless Nicola would make a meal of Miliband’, Daily Mail, 30 April. Letts, Q. (2015b) ‘Leanne from the valleys –​straight from a recording of Gavin & Stacey’, Daily Mail, 3 April. Letts, Q. (2017) ‘Eek! She was like a frogman wading into cow manure’, Daily Mail, 2 May. Levin, B. (1970) ‘Bernard Levin at the election’, Daily Mail, 18 June, p 8. Linton, M. (1987) ‘Giving the fair sex more of a fair look-​in’, The Guardian, 6 June. Littlejohn, R. (2001) ‘Mud, sweat and smears’, The Sun, 6 June. Littlejohn, R. (2015) ‘Trust Labour? I’d rather trust Jimmy Savile to babysit’, Daily Mail, 5 May. Lockett, J. (2017) ‘Labour’s First Lady’, The Sun, 9 June. MacKenzie, K. (2010) ‘Has Gillian from Rochdale killed the Labour party?’, The Sun, 29 April. Mackie, L. (1979) ‘How the parties woo women’, The Guardian, 1 May. Martin, G. (1974) ‘Sally hates cover-​up labels’, Daily Mail, 23 February. Maung, C.A. (1997) ‘My Cherie amour’, Daily Mirror, 29 April. Mayhew, C. (1959) ‘The candidate’s wife’, The Guardian, 2 October, p 8. McHugh, P. (1979) ‘My key to happy families, by Jim’, The Sun, 27 April. Miller, M. (1966) ‘Why so few women want your vote’, The Sun, 30 March. Moir, J. (2010a) ‘War of the wives’, Daily Mail, 8 April, p 7. Moir, J. (2010b) ‘Sam goes solo … but did she really need to call on Daddy?’, Daily Mail, 9 April. Moir, J. (2010c) ‘Now pass me that boulder, compadre’, Daily Mail, 12 April.

179

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Moir, J. (2010d) ‘Was it the kisses or the cleavage that terrified the babies, Cherie?’, Daily Mail, 16 April. Moir, J. (2010e) ‘Sam Cam’s got a new election role … as a latter-​day Princess Diana’, Daily Mail, 21 April. Moir, J. (2010f) ‘When Sarah’s not by his side, out pops the cloven hoof ’, Daily Mail, 30 April. Moir, J. (2015) ‘Now we know … they DO wear the trousers’, Daily Mail, 30 April. Moncur, A. (1987) ‘Sheltering from verbal fall-​out’, The Guardian, 5 June. Moore, J. (2005) ‘I’ll vote … but it’s hard to give a XXXX’, The Sun, 4 May. Moore, J. (2017a) ‘Theresa May is like X Factor’s Steve Brookstein –​a “winner” who won’t last a year’, The Sun, 14 June. Moore, S. (2017b) ‘This election is vitally important: So why is it so deathly boring?’, The Guardian, 4 May. Mount, F. (1974) ‘Tele-​election’, Daily Mail, 22 February. Moutet, A.E. (2015) ‘A menage a trois in sandals is unthinkable’, Daily Telegraph, 5 May. Newton Dunn, T. (2017) ‘TEZZARECTION!’, The Sun, 12 June. Oborne, P. (2010) ‘Whatever happened to female politicians in this election?’, Daily Mail, 17 April. Oliver, J. (2010) ‘The Obama election’, The Sunday Times, 4 April. Palmer, J. (1997) ‘Vote for her … and a better NHS’, Daily Mirror, 1 May. Pascoe-​Watson, G. (2001) ‘Docs and Sirs blast Blair’, The Sun, 1 June, p 8. Phillips, M. (1983) ‘The politics of sex’, The Guardian, 8 June. Phillips, F. (2015) ‘Our leading ladies’, Daily Mirror, 2 May. Pierce, A. (2015) ‘Is Justine getting tips off dapper Ed?’, Daily Mail, 1 May. Platell, A. (2010) ‘Have Cameron’s cuties really got what it takes to transform politics?’, Daily Mail, 8 April, p 58. Potter, C. (1979) ‘Mrs T. isn’t up to it, says Jim’, The Sun, 3 May. Proops, M. (1966) ‘Ssh … he’s having a little nap in the other room’, Daily Mirror, 24 March. Proops, M. (1974a) ‘Your vital X’, Daily Mirror, 28 February, p 17. Proops, M. (1974b) ‘We must all make our mark …’, Daily Mirror, 9 October. Rayner, G. (2010) ‘Land Girl “betrayed and treated worse than an animal” ’, Daily Telegraph, 28 April. Raynor, G. (2015) ‘The “nippy sweetie” who holds the key to power’, Daily Telegraph, 2 May. Reade, B. (2017) ‘Jeremy Corbyn was everything Theresa May was not: genuine, witty, relaxed –​and human’, Daily Mirror, 9 June. Richard, J. (2010) ‘Is Sarah Brown the PM’s wife or his nurse?’, Daily Mail, 17 April, p 21.

180

References

Roberts, M. (1951) ‘A young woman warns the women of Britain’, Daily Mirror, 23 October. Rose, P. (1974) ‘A tuck box of votes’, The Sun, 4 October. Shrimsley, A. (1970) ‘A 7% boost for Labour’, The Sun, 18 June, p 1. Sloan, J. (2010) ‘Goodbye, Gord’, The Sun, 16 April. Smithers, R. (1997) ‘Lib Dems’ pledge to women’, The Guardian, 25 April. Smithers, R. and Harding, L. (1997) ‘Labour pledges to bring in crime bill in first year’, The Guardian, 26 April. Southworth, J. (1974) ‘Shirley wants farm-​gate control’, Daily Mail, 23 February. Steele, A. (1966) ‘ “We’re Tories”, the whisper in the heart of Dockland’, Daily Telegraph, 30 March. Suich, M. (1964) ‘A puzzle of pollsters’, The Sun, 9 October. Sutherland, M.E. (1935) ‘Defend your shopping basket’, Daily Herald, 9 November. Swain, G. and Foster, H. (1983) ‘Kinnock war jibe starts storm’, Daily Mail, 7 June. Tapsfield, J. and Robertson, A. (2017) ‘Diane Abbott goes underground’, Daily Mail, 5 June. Taylor, J. and Bloom, D. (2017) ‘Theresa May under fire for sending Amber Rudd to TV debate just 48 hours after her dad’s death’, Daily Mirror, 31 May. The Guardian, (1918a) ‘Two years of progress’, The Guardian, 9 December. The Guardian (1918b) ‘The women voters’, The Guardian, 11 December. The Guardian (1918c) ‘Candidate’s children’, The Guardian, 14 December. The Guardian (1918d) ‘Late candidate’s widow to be nominated’, The Guardian, 14 December. The Guardian (1923a) ‘The problems of the election: Is there a woman’s point of view?’, The Guardian, 30 November. The Guardian (1923b) ‘Miscellany’, The Guardian, 30 November, p 7. The Guardian (1923c) ‘Mrs Barclay’s explanation of an “unnecessary election” ’, The Guardian, 1 December. The Guardian (1924a) ‘Women and food taxes: Mrs Masterson’s address at Levenshulme’, The Guardian, 23 October. The Guardian (1924b) ‘The women candidates: Their chances of success’, The Guardian, 25 October. The Guardian (1931) ‘Food taxes: Miss Ll. George’s strong warning’, The Guardian, 23 October. The Guardian (1935a) ‘Lady (Ernest) Simon’s decision’, The Guardian, 9 November. The Guardian (1935b) ‘14-​year-​old speaker’, The Guardian, 11 November. The Guardian (1945) ‘Prospects at Mossley’, The Guardian, 3 July.

181

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

The Guardian (1951a) ‘The undecided: Women’s votes key to Leicestershire’, The Guardian, 20 October. The Guardian (1951b) ‘Tory threat in Anglesey’, The Guardian, 23 October. The Guardian (1964) ‘The woman voter –​a political enigma’, The Guardian, 13 October, p 2. The Guardian (1979) ‘A man’s life at No. 10’, The Guardian, 30 April. The Guardian (1983) ‘The wife who would not set foot in No. 10’, The Guardian, 7 June. The Guardian (1997) ‘Women in the right place: Politically, it’s still a long way off’, The Guardian, 26 April. The Guardian (2010a) ‘The voters’ verdict: “They need to start asking us what we’d like them to do” ’, The Guardian, 13 April. The Sun (1966a) ‘Back benchers in the front line’, The Sun, 25 March. The Sun (1966b) ‘Mr Butler taking on Mr Heath at Bexley’, The Sun, 25 March. The Sun (1966c) ‘Politics so polite in Petersfield’, The Sun, 25 March. The Sun (1966d) [No title], The Sun, 26 March. The Sun (1974) ‘The women who brought life to a dead-​end election’, The Sun, 10 October. The Sun (1979a) [No title], The Sun, 27 April. The Sun (1979b) ‘Whose hand is in your pocket?’, The Sun, 28 April. The Sun (1979c) ‘I’ll slash prices, Jim promises mums’, The Sun, 1 May. The Sun (1983) ‘The two faces of Sister Shirley’, The Sun, 7 June. The Sun (1987) [No title], The Sun 10 June, p 5. The Sun (2001a) ‘The Widde-​mobile’, The Sun, 1 June. The Sun (2001b) ‘Eight women tell us how they’ll vote –​and why’, The Sun, 6 June. The Sun (2005) ‘My Tony is NOT a liar’, The Sun, 4 May. The Sun (2010) ‘My great-​g reat gran was jailed FIVE times to get us the vote: Don’t let it be in vain’, The Sun, 21 April. Thompson, D. (1979) ‘Winning way with women’, Daily Mirror, 3 May, p 5. Thompson, D. (1983) ‘Thatcher’s anger’, Daily Mirror, 3 June. Thomson, A. (2005) ‘Howard in a hurry to win his own place in history’, Daily Telegraph, 4 May. Topping, A. (2010) ‘The voters’ verdict: “We just have to go with the best of a bad bunch” ’, The Guardian, 12 April. Topping, A. (2017) ‘ “I’m suffering’: woman who confronted May tells of disability cuts ordeal’, The Guardian, 16 May. Toynbee, P. (2005) ‘Take a Break made me a voter’, The Guardian, 5 May. Travis, A. (2001) ‘Apathetic women make Labour nervous’, The Guardian, 1 June, p 18. Vine, S. (2017) ‘Give the Millwall man a medal’, Daily Mail, 7 June.

182

References

Wakeford, G. (1951) ‘Wives hold the key to last “ifs” ’, Daily Mail, 20 February. Walker, A. (1922) ‘The sphinx in the general election: women not captured by mere party appeal’, Daily Mirror, 11 November. Walker, T. (2010) ‘Berger happy to be uncommitted’, Daily Telegraph, 17 April. Wallace, M. (1924) ‘Why women must use their votes: How politics affects life in the home’, Daily Mirror, 29 October. Watkins, F. (1923) ‘Mothers and the next parliament: Feminine influence on legislation’, Daily Mirror, 30 November. Wilkes, D. (2010) ‘Inhumane betrayal of Land Girl left to die in squalor on NHS ward’, Daily Mail, 28 April. Williams, J. (1997) ‘Cherie is my rock’, Daily Mirror, 1 May. Williams, Z. (2015) ‘The Nicola Sturgeon memo: Westminster’s nasty machinations have been exposed’, The Guardian, 6 April. Willoughby, F. (1922) ‘Armistice Day and its lessons: How it should inspire the voter this week’, Daily Mirror, 13 November. Wilson, G. (2010) ‘Gillian only popped out for a loaf: She came back with … BROWN TOAST’, The Sun, 29 April. Winnett, R. (2010) ‘Vote for me, asks Tory ladies’ man’, Daily Telegraph, 14 April. Wintour, P. and Edemariam, A. (2010) ‘Women voters are “discerning” rather than floating’, The Guardian, 17 April. Woollett, E. (1950) ‘Equal rights’, Daily Mirror, 20 February. Young, S. (1992) ‘We have a big job to do in those inner cities’, Daily Mirror, 6 April.

Secondary sources Adcock, C. (2010) ‘The Politician, the Wife, the Citizen, and Her Newspaper: Rethinking Women, Democracy, and Media(ted) Representation’, Feminist Media Studies, 10(2): 135–​59. Allen, P. and Childs, S. (2019) ‘The Grit in the Oyster? Women’s Parliamentary Organizations and the Substantive Representation of Women’, Political Studies, 67(3): 618–​38. Anderson, K.V. (2011) ‘ “Rhymes with Blunt”: Pornification and US Political Culture’, Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 14(2): 327–​68. Beddoe, D. (1989) Back to Home and Duty, Glasgow: Pandora. Beers, C. (2010) Your Britain: Media and the Making of the Labour Party, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

183

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Billig, M., Deacon, D., Golding, P., and Middleton, S. (1993) ‘In the Hands of the Spin-​doctors: Television, Politics and the 1992 General Election’, in N. Miller and R. Allen (eds) It’s Live –​But Is It Real? Proceedings of the 23rd University of Manchester Broadcasting Symposium, London: John Libbey, pp 111–​21. Bingham, A. (2002) ‘ “Stop the Flapper Vote Folly’: Lord Rothermere, the Daily Mail, and the Equalization of the Franchise 1927–​28’, Twentieth Century British History, 13(1): 17–​37. Bingham, A. (2004) Gender, Modernity, and the Popular Press in Inter-​war Britain, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Blumler, J.G. and Kavanagh, D. (1999) ‘The Third Age of Political Communication: Influences and Features’, Political Communication, 16(3): 209–​30. Booth, C. and Haste, K. (2005) The Goldfish Bowl: Married to the Prime Minister 1955–​1997, London: Vintage. Braden, M. (1996) Women Politicians and the Media, Lexington: University of Kentucky Press. Brookes, R., Lewis, J., and Wahl-​Jorgensen, K. (2004) ‘The Media Representation of Public Opinion: British Television News Coverage of the 2001 General Election’, Media, Culture and Society, 26(1): 63–​80. Brown, N.E. (2014) Sisters in the Statehouse: Black Women and Legislative Decision Making, New York: Oxford University Press. Brown, M.E. and Gardetto, D.C. (2000) ‘Representing Hillary Rodham-​ Clinton: Gender, Meaning and News Media’, in A. Sreberny and L. van Zoonen (eds) Gender, Politics and Communication, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Bruley, S. (1999) Women in Britain Since 1900, Basingstoke: MacMillan. Bystrom, D.G., Robertson, T.A., and Banwart, M.C. (2001) ‘Framing the Fight: An Analysis of Media Coverage of Female and Male Candidates in Primary Races for Governor and US Senate in 2000’, American Behavioral Scientist, 44: 1999–​2013. Campbell, R. and Childs, S. (2010) ‘Wags, Wives and Mothers … But what about Women Politicians’, Parliamentary Affairs, 63(4): 760–​77. Campbell, R. and Lovenduski, J. (2005) ‘Winning Women’s Votes? The Incremental Track to Equality’, in P. Norris and C. Wlezien (eds) Britain Votes 2005, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 181–​97. Campus, D. (2013) Women Political Leaders and the Media, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Cappella, J.N. and Jamieson, K.H. (1997) Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good, New York: Oxford University Press.

184

References

Carlin, D.B. and Winfrey, K.L. (2009) ‘Have You Come a Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage’, Communication Studies, 60: 326–​43. Caroli, B.B. (2010) First Ladies: From Martha Washington to Michelle Obama, New York: Oxford University Press. Carroll, S.J. and Schreiber, R. (1997) ‘Media Coverage of Women in the 103rd Congress’, in P. Norris (ed) Women, Media and Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 131–​48. Carter, C., Branston, G., and Allan, S. (eds)(1998) News, Gender and Power, London: Routledge. Celis, K., Childs, S., and Curtin, J. (2016) ‘Specialised Parliamentary Bodies and the Quality of Women’s Substantive Representation: A Comparative Analysis of Belgium, United Kingdom and New Zealand’, Parliamentary Affairs, 69: 812–​29. Childs, S. (2004) New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Representing Women, London: Routledge. Childs, S. (2005) ‘Feminising British Politics: Sex and Gender in the Election’ in A. Geddes and J. Tonge (eds) Britain Decides: The UK General Election 2005, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, pp 150–​67. Childs, S. (2008) Women and British Party Politics: Descriptive, Substantive and Symbolic Representation, Abingdon: Routledge. Childs, S. and Krook, M.L. (2009) ‘Analyzing Women’s Substantive Representation: From Critical Mass to Critical Actors’, Government and Opposition, 44: 125–​45. Coleman, S. and Ross, K. (2010) The Media and the Public: ‘Them’ and ‘Us’ in Media Discourse, Chichester: Wiley-​Blackwell. Conboy, M. (2004) Journalism: A Critical History, London: Sage. Conroy, M. (2015) Masculinity, Media and the American Presidency, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Conroy, M., Oliver, S., Breckenridge-​Jackson, I., and Heldman, C. (2015) ‘From Ferraro to Palin: Sexism in Media Coverage of Vice Presidential Candidates’, Politics, Groups, and Identities, 3(4): 573–​91. Cowley, P. and Childs, S. (2003) ‘Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour Women MPs’, British Journal of Political Science, 33(3): 345–​65. Cowman, K. (2010) Women in British Politics, c.1689–​1979, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Cowman, K. (2020) ‘A Matter of Public Interest: Press Coverage of the Outfits of Women MPs 1918–​1930’, Open Library of Humanities, 6(2): 17. Curran, J. and Seaton, J. (2010) Power Without Responsibility: Press, Broadcasting and the Internet in Britain (7th edn), London: Routledge. Cushion, S. and Thomas, R. (2018) Reporting Elections: Rethinking the Logic of Campaign Coverage, Cambridge: Polity Press.

185

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Day, B. (1982) ‘The Politics of Communication, or the Communication of Politics’, in R.M. Worcester and M. Harrop (eds) Political Communications: The General Election of 1979, London: George Allen and Unwin, pp 112–31. Deacon, D. and Harmer, E. (2019) ‘The Present in Retrospect: UK Election Reporting (1918–​2015)’, Journalism, 20(8): 994–​1013. Deacon, D., Wring, D. and Golding, P. (2006) ‘Same Campaign, Differing Agendas: Analysing News Media Coverage of the 2005 General Election’, British Politics, 1(2): 222–​56. Deacon, D., Pickering, M., Golding, P., and Murdock, G (2007a) Researching Communication: A Practical Guide to Methods in Media and Cultural Analysis (2nd edn), London: Hodder Arnold. Deacon, D., Wring, D., and Golding, P. (2007b) ‘The Take a Break Campaign? National Print Media Reporting of the Election’, in D. Wring, J. Green, R. Mortimore, and S. Atkinson (eds) Political Communications: The British General Election Campaign of 2005, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Deacon, D., Wring, D., Billig, M., Downey, J., Golding, P., and Davidson, S. (2005) Reporting the 2005 UK General Election, Loughborough: Loughborough Communication Research Centre. Djerf-​Pierre, M. (2011) ‘The Difference Engine: Gender equality, Journalism and the Good Society’, Feminist Media Studies, 11(1): 43–​51. Dolan, K. (2005) ‘Do Women Candidates Play to Gender Stereotypes? Do Men Candidates Play to Women? Candidate Sex and Issues Priorities on Campaign Websites’, Political Research Quarterly, 5(1): 31–​44. Dolan, K. and Lynch, T. (2014) ‘It Takes a Survey: Understanding Gender Stereotypes, Abstract Attitudes, and Voting for Women Candidates’, American Politics Research, 42(4): 656–​76. Edstrom, M. (2018) ‘Visibility Patterns of Gendered Ageism in the Media Buzz: A Study of the Representation of Gender and Age Over Three Decades’, Feminist Media Studies, 18(1): 77–​93. Esser, F. and D’Angelo, P. (2003) ‘Framing the Press and the Publicity Process: A Content Analysis of Meta-​Coverage in Campaign 2000 Network News’, American Behavioral Scientist, 46(5): 617–​41. Esser, F. and D’Angelo, P. (2006) ‘Framing the Press and Publicity Process in US, British, and German General Election Campaigns: A Comparative Study of Metacoverage’, The Harvard International Journal of Press/​Politics, 11: 44–​66. Esser, F. and Spanier, B. (2005) ‘News Management as News’, Journal of Political Marketing, 4(4): 27–​57. Esser, F., Reinemann, C., and Fan, D. (2001) ‘Spin Doctors in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany: Metacommunication About Media Manipulation’, The International Journal of Press/​Politics, 6: 16–​45.

186

References

Ette, M. (2017) ‘Where are the Women? Evaluating Visibility of Nigerian Female Politicians in News Media Space’, Gender, Place and Culture, 24(10): 1480–​97. Falk, E. (2010) Women for President: Media Bias in Nine Campaigns, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Falk, E. (2013) ‘Clinton and the Playing-the-Gender-Card Metaphor in Campaign News’, Feminist Media Studies, 13(2): 192–​207. Franceschet, S. and Thomas, G. (2010) ‘Renegotiating Political Leadership: Michelle Bachelet’s Rise to the Chilean Presidency’, in R. Murray (ed) Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, pp 177–​95. Freelon, D. (2010) ‘ReCal: Intercoder Reliability Calculation as a Web Service’, International Journal of Internet Science, 5(1): 20–​33. Freelon, D. (2013) ‘ReCal OIR: Ordinal, Interval, and Ratio Intercoder Reliability as a Web Service’, International Journal of Internet Science, 8(1): 10–​6. Gabriel, D. (2017) ‘The Othering and Objectification of Diane Abbott MP’, in E. Thorsen, D. Jackson and D. Lilleker (eds) UK Election Analysis 2017: Media, Voters and the Campaign, Bournemouth: Centre for the Study of Journalism, Culture and Community, Bournemouth University, p 129. Garcia-​B lanco, I. and Wahl-​Jorgensen, K. (2012) ‘The Discursive Construction of Women Politicians in the European Press’, Feminist Media Studies, 12(3): 422–​41. Gershon, S. (2012) ‘When Race, Gender, and the Media Intersect: Campaign News Coverage of Minority Congresswomen’, Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 33(2): 105–​25. Gidengil, E. and Everitt, J. (2003) ‘Talking Tough: Gender and Reported Speech in Campaign News Coverage’, Political Communication, 20: 209–​32. Gill, R. (2007) Gender and the Media, Cambridge: Polity Press. Halevi, S. (2003) ‘She Who Must Be Obeyed: The Media and Political Spouses in Israel’, Women’s Studies in Communication, 26(2): 165–​90. Hansen, A., Cottle, S., Negrine, R., and Newbold, C. (1998) Mass Communication Research Methods, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Harmer, E. (2015) ‘Seen and Not Heard: The Popular Appeal of Postfeminist Political Celebrity’, in H. Savigny and H. Warner (eds) The Politics of Being a Woman: Feminist Media and 21st Century Popular Culture, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, pp 27–​47. Harmer, E. (2016) ‘Public to Private and Back Again: The Role of Politicians’ Wives in British Election Campaign Coverage’, Feminist Media Studies, 16(5): 852–​68.

187

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Har mer, E. and Wr ing, D. (2013) ‘Julie and the Cyber mums: Marketing and Women Voters in the UK 2010 General Election’, Journal of Political Marketing, 12(2–​3): 262–​73. Harmer, E. and Southern, R. (2018) ‘More Stable than Strong: Women’s Representation, Voters and Issues at the 2017 General Election’, Parliamentary Affairs, 71: 237–​54. Harmer, E. and Southern, R. (2019) ‘Alternative Agendas or More of the Same? Online News Coverage of the 2017 UK Election’, in D. Wring, R. Mortimore, and S. Atkinson (eds) Political Communication in Britain 2017, Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp 99–​115. Harmer, E. and Southern, R. (2020) ‘Girly Swots and the Most Diverse Parliament Ever: Women’s Representation, Voters and Issues in the 2019 Election Campaign’, Parliamentary Affairs, 73(S1): 243–​58. Harmer, E., Savigny, H., and Siow, O. (2020) ‘Trump, Clinton and the Gendering of Newspaper Discourse About the 2016 US Presidential Election Debates’, Women’s Studies in Communication, 44(1): 1–​21. Harmer, E., Savigny, H., and Ward, O. (2017) ‘Are you Tough Enough? Performing Gender in the UK 2015 Leader Debates’, Media, Culture and Society, 39(7): 960–​75. Harmer, E. and Van Zoonen, L. (2016) ‘Representations of Women Voters in Newspaper Coverage of UK Elections 1918–​2010’, in H. Danielson, K. Jegerstedt, R.L. Muriaas, and B. Ytre-​Arne (eds) Gendered Citizenship: The Challenges of Representation, Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp 161–83. Harris-​Perry, M.V. (2011) Sister Citizen: Shame, Stereotypes, and Black Women in America, New Haven: Yale University Press. Harrison, B. (1986) ‘Women in a Men’s House: The Women MPs, 1919–​ 1945’, The Historical Journal, 29(3): 623–​54. Heldman, C., Carroll, S.J., and Olson, S. (2005) ‘ “She Brought Only a Skirt”: Print Media Coverage of Elizabeth Dole’s Bid for the Republican Presidential Nomination’, Political Communication, 22(3): 315–​35. Herrnson, P.S., Lay, J. C., and Stokes, A.K. (2003) ‘Women Running “as Women”: Candidate Gender, Campaign Issues, and Voter-Targeting Strategies’, The Journal of Politics, 65: 244–​55. Higgins, M. and McKay, F. (2016) ‘Gender and the Development of a Political Persona: The Case of Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’, British Politics, 11(3): 283–​300. Higgins, M. and Smith, A. (2013) ‘ “My Husband; my Hero”: Selling the Political Spouses in the 2010 General Election’, Journal of Political Marketing, 12(2–​3): 197–​210.

188

References

Hinojosa, M. (2010) ‘ “She’s Not my Type of Blonde”: Media Coverage of Irene Sáez’a Presidential Bid’, in R. Murray (ed) Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, pp 31–​48. Holland, P. (1998) ‘The Politics of the Smile: “Soft News” and the Sexualisation of the Popular Press’, in C. Carter, G. Branston, and S. Allan (eds) News, Gender and Power, London: Routledge, pp 17–​32. Holtz-​Bacha, C. (2004) ‘Germany: How the Private Life of Politicians Got Into the Media’, Parliamentary Affairs, 57(1): 41–​52. Hooghe, M., Jacobs, L., and Claes, E. (2015) ‘Enduring Gender Bias in Reporting on Political Elite Positions: Media Coverage of Female MPs in Belgian News Broadcasts (2003–​2011)’, International Journal of Press/​ Politics, 20(4): 395–​414. Ibroscheva, E. and Raicheva-​S tover, M. (2009) ‘Engender ing Transition: Portrayals of Female Politicians in the Bulgarian Press’, The Howard Journal of Communications, 20(2): 111–​28. Jalalzai, F. (2006) ‘Women Candidates and the Media: 1992–​2000 Elections’, Politics & Policy, 34(3): 606–​33. Jamieson, K.H. (1995) Beyond the Double Bind: Women and Leadership, New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Jarvis, D. (1994) ‘Mrs Maggs and Betty: The Conservative Appeal to Women Voters in the 1920s’, Twentieth Century British History, 5(2): 129–​52. Kahn, K.F. (1994) ‘The Distorted Mirror: Press Coverage of Women Candidates for Statewide Office’, The Journal of Politics, 56(1): 154–​73. Kittilson, M. and Fridkin, K. (2008) ‘Gender, Candidate Portrayals and Election Campaigns: A Comparative Perspective’, Politics & Gender, 4: 371–​92. Kriesi, H. (2011) ‘Personalization of National Election Campaigns’, Party Politics, 18(6): 825–​44. Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Krogstad, A. and Gomard, K. (2003) ‘Doing Politics, Doing Gender, Doing Power’, in F. Engelstad (ed) Comparative Studies of Culture and Power. Comparative Social Research 21, Oxford: Elsevier Science. Kuhn, R. (2004) ‘ “Vive la Difference”? The Mediation of Politicians’ Public Images and Private Lives in France’, Parliamentary Affairs, 57(1): 24–​40. Langer, A.I. (2007) ‘A Historical Exploration of the Personalisation of Politics in the Print Media: The British Prime Ministers (1945–​1999)’, Parliamentary Affairs, 60(3): 371–​87 Langer, A.I. (2012) The Personalisation of Politics in the UK: Mediated Leadership from Attlee to Cameron, Manchester: Manchester University.

189

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Lawrence, J. (2009) Electing Our Masters: The Hustings in British Politics from Hogarth to Blair, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lawrence, R. and Rose, M. (2010) Hillary Clinton’s Race for the White House: Gender Politics & the Media on the Campaign Trail, Boulder: Lynne Reinner. Lengauer, G., Esser, F., and Berganza, R. (2011) ‘Negativity in Political News: A Review of Concepts Operationalizations and Key Findings’, Journalism, 13(2): 179–​202. Lewis, J., Inthorn, S., and Wahl-​Jorgensen, K. (2005) Citizens or Consumers? What the Media tell us about Political Participation, Maidenhead: Open University Press. Liebler, C.M. and Smith, S.J (1997) ‘Tracking Gender Differences: A Comparative Analysis of Network Correspondents and their Sources’, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41: 58–​68. Livingstone, S. and Bennett, W.L. (2003) ‘Gatekeeping, Indexing and Live Event News: Is Technology Altering the Construction of News?’, Political Communication, 20: 363–​80. Lovenduski, J. (2005) Feminizing Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press. McCombs, M.E. and Shaw, D.L. (1995) ‘The Agenda-​setting Function of the Mass Media’, in O. Boyd-​Barrett and C. Newbold (eds) Approaches to Media: A Reader, London: Arnold, pp 86–​102. Melman, B. (1988) Women and the Popular Imagination in the Twenties: Flappers and Nymphs, Basingstoke: MacMillan. Mendes, K. (2011) Feminism in the News: Representations of the Women’s Movement since the 1960s, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Meyers, M. (2004) ‘African American Women and Violence: Gender, Race, and Class in the News’, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 21(2): 95–​118. Meyers, M. (2013) African American Women in the News: Gender, Race, and Class in Journalism, London: Routledge. Moy, P. and Pfau, M. (2000) With Malice Toward All? The Media and Public Confidence in Democratic Institutions, Westport, CT: Praeger. Murray, R. (2010) ‘Madonna and Four Children: Ségolène Royal’, in R. Murray (ed) Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, pp 49–​68. Musolf, K.J. (1999) From Plymouth to Parliament: A Rhetorical History of Nancy Astor’s 1919 Campaign, New York: St. Martins Press. Negrine, R. (1994) Politics and the Mass Media, London: Routledge. Norris, P. (1997) ‘Women Leaders Worldwide: A Splash of Colour in the Photo Op’, in P. Norris (ed) Women, Media and Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 98–​121.

190

References

Norris, P. (2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Norris, P., Curtice, J., Sanders, D., Scammell, M., and Semetko, H.A. (1999) On Message: Communicating the Campaign, London: Sage. North, L. (2016) ‘The Gender of “Soft” and “Hard” News: Female Journalists’ Views on Gendered Story Allocations’, Journalism Studies, 17(3): 356–​73. Nunn, H. (2002) Thatcher, Politics and Fantasy: The Political Culture of Gender and Nation, London: Lawrence & Wishart. O’Neill, D. and Savigny, H. (2014) ‘Female Politicians in the British Press: The Exception to the “Masculine” Norm? ’, Journalism Education, 3(1): 6–​27. O’Neill, D., Savigny, H., and Cann, V. (2016) ‘Women Politicians in the UK Press: Not Seen and Not Heard?’ Feminist Media Studies, 16: 293–​307. Parry-​Giles, S.J. (2000) ‘Mediating Hillary Rodham Clinton: Television News Practices and Image Making in the Postmodern Age’, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 17(2): 205–​26. Parry-​Giles, S.J. (2014) Hillary Clinton in the News: Gender and Authenticity in American Politics, Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Parry-​Giles, S.J. and Parry-​Giles, T. (1996) ‘Gendered Politics and Presidential Image Construction: A Reassessment of the “Feminine Style” ’, Communication Monologues, 63: 337–​53. Pederson (2016) ‘Press Response to Women Politicians’, Journalism Studies, 19(5): 709–​25. Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics of Presence, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pitkin, H. (1972) The Concept of Representation, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Pugh, M. (1998) ‘The Daily Mirror and the Revival of Labour 1935–​1945’, Twentieth Century British History, 9(3): 420–​38. Puwar, N. (2004) Space Invaders: Race, Gender and Bodies Out of Place, Oxford: Berg Publishers. Reeves, R. (2019) Women of Westminster: The MPs Who Changed Politics, London: Bloomsbury Caravel. Reyes, O. (2003) ‘Cheriegate! Celebrity, Scandal and Political Leadership’, Mediactive, 2: 26–​43. Rosenbaum, M. (1997) From Soapbox to Soundbite: Party Political Campaigning in Britain since 1945, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Ross, K. (2002) Women, Politics, Media: Uneasy Relations in Comparative Perspective, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Ross, K. (2007) ‘The Journalist, the Housewife, the Citizen and the Press: Women and Men as Sources in Local News’, Journalism, 8(4): 449–​73.

191

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Ross, K. (2010) Gendered Media: Women, Men and Identity Politics, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Ross, K. (2011) ‘Silent Witness: News Sources, the Local Press and the Disappeared Woman’, in T. Krijnen, C. Alvares, and S. Van Bauwel (eds) Gendered Transformations: Theory and Practices on Gender and Media, Bristol: Intellect, pp 45–​61. Ross, K. and Carter, C. (2011) ‘Women and News: A Long and Winding Road’, Media, Culture and Society, 33(8): 1148–​65. Ross, K. and Sreberny, A. (2000) ‘Women in the House: Media Representation of British Politicians’, in A. Sreberny and L. van Zoonen (eds) Gender, Politics and Communication, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp 79–​99. Ross, K., Evans, E., Harrison, L., Shears, M., and Wadia, K. (2013) ‘The Gender of News and News of Gender: A Study of Sex, Politics, and Press Coverage of the 2010 British General Election’, The International Journal of Press/​Politics, 18(1): 3–​20. Scharrer, E. and Bissell, K. (2001) ‘Overcoming Traditional Boundaries’, Women and Politics, 21(1): 55–​83. Seaton, J. (2003) ‘Public, Private and the Media’, The Political Quarterly, 74: 174–​83. Semetko, H. and Boomgaarden, H.G. (2007) ‘Reporting Germany’s 2005 Bundestag Election Campaign: Was Gender an Issue?’, International Journal of Press/​Politics, 12(4): 154–​71. Semetko, H.A. and Schoenbach, K. (2003) ‘News and Elections: German Bundestag Campaigns in the Bild, 1990–​2002’, The International Journal of Press/​Politics, 8(3): 54–​69. Sheeler, K.H. and Anderson, K.V. (2013) Woman President: Confronting Postfeminist Political Culture, College Station: Texas A&M University Press. Shoemaker, P.J. and Reece, S.D. (1996) Mediating the Message: Theories of Influence on Mass Media Content (2nd edn), White Plains: Longman. Schuck, A.R.T., Vliegenthart, R., and de Vreese, C.H. (2016) ‘Who’s Afraid of Conflict? The Mobilizing Effect of Conflict Framing in Campaign News’, British Journal of Political Science, 46(1): 177–​94. Smooth, W. (2011) ‘Standing for Women? Which Women? The Substantive Representation of Women’s Interests and the Research Imperative of Intersectionality’, Politics & Gender, 7(3): 436–​41. Sreberny-​Mohammadi, A. and Ross, K. (1996) ‘Women MPs and the Media: Representing the Body Politic’, Parliamentary Affairs, 49(1): 103–​15. Stanyer, J. (2013) Intimate Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press. Stephenson, M.A. (1998) The Glass Trapdoor: Women, Politics and the Media During the 1997 General Election, London: Fawcett. Street, J. (2001) Mass Media, Politics and Democracy, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

192

References

Temple, M. (2008) The British Press, Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Thane, P. (2020) ‘Nancy Astor, Women and Politics, 1919–​1945’, Open Library of Humanities, 6(2): 1. Thomas, J. (2005) Popular Newspapers, the Labour Party and British Politics, Abingdon: Routledge, Tibballs, S. and Adcock, C. (1997) What Women Want in Politics, London: Women’s Communication Centre. Tolley (2015) ‘Racial Mediation in the Coverage of Candidates’ Political Viability: A Comparison of Approaches’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41 (6): 963–​84. Trimble, L. (2016) ‘Julia Gillard and the Gender Wars’, Politics & Gender, 12: 296–​316. Trimble, L. (2017) Ms. Prime Minister: Gender, Media and Leadership, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Trimble, L. and Treiberg, N. (2010) ‘ “Either Way, There’s Going to be a Man in Charge”: Media Representations of New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark’, in R. Murray (ed) Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, pp 115–​36. Trimble, L., Wagner, A., Sampert, S., Raphael, D., and Gerrits, B. (2013) ‘Is it Personal? Gendered Mediation in Newspaper Coverage of Canadian National Party Leadership Contests, 1975–​2012’, International Journal of Press/​Politics, 18(4): 462–​81. Trimble, L., Raphael, D., Sampert, S., Wagner, A., and Gerrits, B. (2015) ‘Politicizing Bodies: Hegemonic Masculinity, Heteronormativity, and Racism in News Representations of Canadian Political Party Leadership Candidates’, Women’s Studies in Communication, 38(3): 314–​30. Trimble, L., Curtin, J., Wagner, A., Auer, M., Woodman, V.K.G., and Owen, B. (2019) ‘Gender Novelty and Personalized News Coverage in Australia and Canada’, International Political Science Review, 42(2): 164 –​78. Tuchman, G., Daniels, A.K., and Benit, J. (1978) Hearth and Homes: Images of Women in the Mass Media, New York: Oxford University Press. Van Aelst, P., Sheafer. T., and Stanyer, J. (2012) ‘The Personalization of Mediated Political Communication: A Review of Concepts, Operationalizations and Key Findings’, Journalism, 13(2): 203–​20. Van Leuven, S., Kruikemeier, S., Lecheler, S., and Hermans, L. (2018) ‘Online and Newsworthy: Have Online Sources Changed Journalism?’, Digital Journalism, 6(7): 798–​806. van Zoonen, L. (1998) ‘Women and the Media “Finally, I Have My Mother Back”: Politicians and Their Families in Popular Culture’, International Journal of Press/​Politics, 3(1): 48–​64.

193

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

van Zoonen, L. (2000) ‘Broken Hearts, Broken Dreams? Politicians and Their Families in Popular Culture’, in A. Sreberny and L. van Zoonen (eds) Gender, Politics and Communication, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp 101–​19. van Zoonen, L. (2006) ‘The Personal, the Political and the Popular: A Woman’s Guide to Celebrity Politics’, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(3): 287–​301. van Zoonen, L. and Harmer, E. (2011) ‘The Visual Challenge of Celebrity Politics? Female Politicians in Grazia’, Celebrity Studies, 2(1): 94–​6. Vavrus, M.D. (2000) ‘ “From Women of the Year to ‘Soccer Moms”: The Case of the Incredible Shrinking Women’, Political Communication, 17: 193–​213. Vavrus, M.D. (2002) Postfeminist News: Political Women in Media Culture, Albany: State University of New York Press. Vliegenthart, R., Boomgaarden, H.G., and Boumans, J.W. (2011) ‘Changes in Political News Coverage: Personalization, Conflict and Negativity in British and Dutch Newspapers’, in K. Brants and K. Voltmer (eds) Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy, Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp 172–​201. Vreese, C.H., Esser, F., and Hopmann, D.N. (2017) Comparing Political Journalism, London: Routledge. Wahl-​Jorgensen, K. (2000) ‘Constructed Masculinities in US Presidential Campaigns: The Case of 1992’, in A. Sreberny and L. van Zoonen (eds) Gender, Politics and Communication, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp 53–​78. Ward, O. (2016) ‘Seeing Double: Race, Gender, and Coverage of Minority Women’s Campaigns for the US House of Representatives’, Politics & Gender, 12: 317–​43. Ward, O. (2017) ‘Intersectionality and Press Coverage of Political Campaigns Representations of Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic Female Candidates at the UK 2010 General Election’, International Journal of Press/​Politics, 22 (1): 43–​66. Webster, W. (1990) Not a Man to Match Her: The Marketing of a Prime Minister, London: The Women’s Press. Wiliarty, S.E. (2010) ‘How the Iron Curtain Helped Break Through the Glass Ceiling: Angela Merkel’s Campaigns in 2005 and 2009’, in R. Murray (ed) Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office, Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Publishers, pp 137–​57. Wilke, J. and Reinemann, C. (2001) ‘Do Candidates Matter? Long Term Trends of Campaign Coverage: A Study of German Press Since 1949’, European Journal of Communication, 16: 291–​314. Williams, B. (2020) ‘A Tale of Two Women: A Comparative Gendered Media Analysis of UK Prime Ministers Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May’, Parliamentary Affairs, 74(2): 398–​420.

194

References

Winfield. B.H. (1997) ‘The First Lady, Political Power, and the Media: Who Elected Her Anyway?’, in P. Norris (ed) Women, Media and Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 166–​79. Winfield, B.H. and Friedman, B. (2003) ‘Gender Politics: News Coverage of the Candidates’ Wives in Campaign 2000’, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(3): 548–​66. Wring, D. (2002) ‘The “Tony” Press: Media Coverage of the Election Campaign’, in A. Geddes. and J. Tonge (eds) Labour’s Second Landslide, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp 84–​100. Wr ing, D. (2005) The Politics of Marketing the Labour Par ty, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Zaller, J. (1999) A Theory of Media Politics: How the Interests of Politicians, Journalists, and Citizens Shape the News, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zhurzkenko, T. (2014) ‘Yulia Tymoshenko’s Two Bodies’, in M. Raicheva-​ Stover and E. Ibroscheva (eds) Women in Politics and Media: Perspectives from Nations in Transition, New York: Bloomsbury, pp 256–​83. Zoch, L.M. and Vanslyke Turk, J. (1998) ‘Women Making News: Gender as a Variable in Source Selection and Use’, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(4): 762–​75. Zweiniger-​Bargielowska, I. (2001) Women in Twentieth Century Britain, Harlow: Pearson Education.

195

Index References to figures appear in italic type. A Abbott, Diane  45, 48–​9 Adamson, Jenny  40 Adcock, C.  7, 10, 14, 22, 25, 43, 62, 63, 88, 89, 96, 169 adversarial coverage  9, 12, 167, 172 affairs and sexual indiscretions  46, 96 age  7–​8, 51, 53 agenda-​setting functions of the news media  167–​8 agents of change, women as  25, 142 Allan, M.  75 Allen, P.  4 all-​women shortlists  43 ambition in women  24, 110, 119, 123, 146, 152 Anderson, K.V.  24, 56, 153, 161 appearance  beauty ideals  52 body shape/​size  51–​2 candidates  26–​8, 36, 38, 45, 46, 50–​2 hair  26, 51, 63, 106, 117, 152–​3 May, Theresa  135 normative functions of journalism  5 party leaders  124, 135, 136, 137, 140, 142, 152–​3, 164–​6 Sturgeon, Nicola  27, 152, 153 Thatcher, Margaret  27, 135 wives/​relatives of politicians  95, 99, 101, 106, 107, 111, 115–​18, 119–​20, 165–​6 see also dress Archer, Mary  107, 114 Asian women  26 see also intersectionality Asquith, Mrs  105 Astor, Nancy  21, 22, 54, 92 Attlee, Violet  96, 106, 113 austerity  78–​9 Australia  27, 46, 121, 125 authority  24, 48, 95, 110, 173–​4

B Bachelet, Michelle  23 Bagshawe, Louise  50 Baldwin, Lucy  97 Baldwin, Stanley  48, 78 Barclay, Mrs  105 Bartlett, N.  145 Battle, B.  86 Beattie, J.  82 beauty ideals  52 Beddoe, D.  21 Beers, C.  16, 59 Belgium  125 Bell, M.  44 Bennett, Natalie  121, 142, 148, 149, 152, 153 Bennett, W.L.  7 Berger, Luciana  55 Betts, H.  116 Bevins, A.  41, 54, 86, 143 Billig, M.  62 Bingham, A.  58, 59, 60, 64, 67, 74, 88, 89, 106, 161 Black women  8, 26, 48–​9, 95 Blair, Cherie  108–​9, 111, 113, 114, 115, 117 see also Booth, Cherie Blair, Tony  43, 63, 88, 95, 96, 110 ‘Blair Babes’  43 Bloom, U.  70 Blumler, J.G.  9 body shape/​size  51–​2 Bondfield, Margaret  21, 47 Boomgaarden, H.G.  23, 29, 124, 125, 133, 155, 156, 158 Boot, Rita  86 Booth, Cherie  95, 96, 108, 119 Bowness, M.  86 Braddock, Bessie  51 Braden, M.  22, 25 Bradshaw, D.  75

196

Index

Brookes, R.  88, 89 Brown, Gordon  87 Brown, M.E.  95, 110–​11, 118 Brown, N.E.  4 Brown, Sarah  95, 96, 111, 116 Bruley, S.  59 Burton, P.  80 Butler, Rab  79, 85 Bystrom, D.G.  28, 125, 155 C cabinet ministers  21–​2, 47 Callaghan, Jim  40, 75, 83 Callan, P.  53 Cameron, David  43 Cameron, Samantha  95, 116–​17 ‘Cameron’s cuties’  43 campaign agenda setting  167–​8 campaign trails  party leaders  128, 142–​3, 145, 146, 172 spouses/​relatives  96, 97, 100, 103–​18 and women voters  85–​6 Campbell, R.  24, 62 Campus, D.  24, 93, 94, 120, 123, 128, 154, 163 Canada  25, 26, 121, 123, 171 candidates  21–​57, 92, 107, 109, 112 Cappella, J.N.  9, 12 caring responsibilities  24, 31, 41, 143 Carlin, D.B.  24, 56, 161 Caroli, B.B.  94, 118, 119, 163 Carroll, S.J.  26, 28, 72, 124 Carter, C.  59 cartoons  46, 153 Castle, Barbara  40, 47, 50 Celis, K.  4 Chamberlain, Diana  117 changes in politics, women supposed to bring about  25, 26, 142, 148, 169 Chapman, J.  147 childcare  23, 28, 159 children, women’s concern with their  44, 60–​1, 73–​5, 79, 89, 145, 159 children of politicians  44, 54, 93, 96, 104–​5, 113, 115 see also family life; wives/​relatives of politicians Childs, S.  3, 4, 24, 25, 42, 43, 46, 63 Chilvers, S.  50 Chippindale, P.  51 Churchill, Clementine  97, 105, 106, 113, 116 Churchill, Jennie  91 Churchill, R.  41, 50, 54 Churchill, Winston  91 Clark, Helen  26 Clegg, Nick  112 Clinton, Hillary  24–​5, 26, 95, 110–​11, 123

clothing  see dress coding of data  16–​17 Cole, H.  146, 150 Coleman, S.  59 collaboration in politics  25, 26 Colman, Grace  41 commercialization of news  12 competence/​femininity double bind  24, 123, 143, 147–​9, 162–​3, 171 competition  12, 60 Conboy, M.  34 confrontational news  12 Conroy, M.  26, 77, 93, 94, 120, 123, 124, 154, 163, 165 consequences for future women  48, 141 Conservative Party  women MPs  43 and working-​class women  80 consumerism  60 content analysis  candidates  29–​39 methodology  14–​15 party leaders  126–​40 wives/​relatives of politicians  96–​103 women voters  63–​9 Cook, A.  106 Coolican, D.  86 Cooper, Lady Diana  105 Cosmopolitan  63 cost of living  77, 78, 79, 80, 84, 89, 159, 167 see also prices Cousins, J.  74 Cowley, P.  43 Cowman, K.  1, 21, 22, 27, 58, 91, 92 Crace, J.  49, 146, 151, 152 Craigie, Jill  114 Curran, J.  13, 16, 34 Cushion, S.  8, 10, 16, 167 D Daily Herald  16, 39, 40, 45, 48, 58, 69, 70, 74, 75, 78, 83, 106 Daily Mail  16, 39–​40, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 58, 60, 71, 72, 73, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 87, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 111, 112, 114, 116, 117, 141, 142, 144, 147, 148, 149 Daily Mirror  16, 42, 47, 53, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78–​9, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 144, 150 Daily News  58 Daily Telegraph  16, 40, 41, 42, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 55, 70, 71, 73, 76, 80, 81, 105, 114, 116, 117, 141, 150, 151 D’Angelo, P.  9, 10, 167, 169 data coding  16–​17 daughters of politicians  93, 104–​5, 113 ‘Dave’s dolls’  43

197

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Davey, Victoria  145 Davies, Anne  41 Day, B.  80 de la Motte, Mabel  51 de Piero, Gloria  50 Deacon, D.  10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26, 31, 34, 62, 63, 119, 126, 130, 150, 154, 164, 167, 169, 170, 172 Deans, J.  144 Deerin, C.  142, 148, 152 default males  5–​6, 160, 173 defence  84 Derby, O.  85 descriptive representation  3–​4, 141 digital news media, history of  16 Dolan, K.  23 domesticity  candidates  39–​40, 41, 55 caring responsibilities  31, 41, 143 housewives, labelling as  41, 54, 59, 60, 67, 72, 77–​80, 86, 89, 106, 161 party leaders  142–​3 in the political sphere  44 stereotypes  41, 162, 164 wives/​relatives of politicians  105, 107, 113, 114 women voters  59, 60, 73, 77–​8 see also motherhood double binds  24, 123, 140, 143–​9, 162–​3, 171 double gendering  6 Douglas-​Home, Lady  114 dress  candidates  22, 26, 38, 50, 51, 53, 165 party leaders  152 wives/​relatives of politicians  106, 116, 117, 119–​20 see also appearance Duffy, Gillian  87, 169 E economy  male candidates  23 Thatcher  147 wives/​relatives of politicians  105 women candidates  31, 33 women voters  66, 67, 77–​80, 86, 159 see also cost of living; prices Edemariam, A.  72 Eden, Clarissa  107 education  31 Eligibility of Women Act 1918  21 elites  focus on elite women  13, 165, 172 party leaders  119–​20, 126 tendency to be male  7 wives/​relatives of politicians  96, 116–​17 emasculation  47

emotional terms  May, Theresa  145, 146, 171 tone of media coverage  25, 45–​6, 49 womb/​brain double bind  143–​7 women voters  81 empathy  123, 145 employees, women as  85 employment policy  31, 33 equality policies  82–​4 Esser, F.  9, 10, 167, 169 Ette, M.  5, 22, 122, 125 evaluative newspaper coverage  34, 35, 39, 128–​33, 154, 161–​2 see also negative evaluative coverage; positive evaluative coverage Everitt, J.  22, 25, 56, 122, 123, 124, 154, 161, 163 Evison, S.  109, 110, 113 exceptional, women politicians as  47, 138, 155 experts, women as  58, 59, 62 F Falk, E.  2, 11, 13, 24, 27, 28, 56, 122, 123, 124, 128, 135, 154, 160, 164, 165, 169, 170 Falklands Conflict  67, 88, 144 family life  candidates  28–​9, 37, 38, 54–​5, 164–​6 normative functions of journalism  5 party leaders  138, 139, 151, 154, 165 wives/​relatives  91–​120, 169, 171 women voters  67, 68, 73–​5, 86, 89, 159 see also private lives Fawcett Society  62 female journalists  6, 7 feminist political science  3–​4 feminist scholarship  2–​3, 6, 14, 58 first ladies (US)  94, 118, 119, 162, 163 ‘first woman’ frame  10, 169 Fletcher, Celia  51 Foot, Michael  114 foreign policy/​economics  40 see also international affairs Foster, H.  145 France  27, 28, 95 free school meals  145 free school milk  24, 145 Freedland, J.  70 Freelon, D.  17 Freeman, H.  108, 110, 115 Fremantle, Anne  54 Fridkin, K.  23, 56, 159 Friedman, B.  95, 120, 162 G Gabriel, D.  49 Gaitskell, Dora  106

198

Index

Garcia-​Blanco, I.  5, 24, 27, 28, 38, 56, 123, 164 Gardetto, D.C.  95, 111, 118 Gaskell, J.  114 gender norm transgressions  24, 143, 147, 150, 154 gendered mediation thesis  5, 9–​13, 20, 165, 170–​1, 173 gendering of election coverage  8–​13, 166–​73 Germany  23, 95 Gibbs, Jennie  52 Gidengil, E.  22, 25, 56, 122, 123, 124, 154, 161, 163 Gill, R.  28, 59 ‘girl,’ use of  45, 163 Gladstone, Catherine  91 Glaze, B.  145 Global Media Monitoring Project  59 Glover, S.  108 Gonzalez Durantez, Miriam  112, 116 Gould, Diana  87–​8 Gow, D.  144 Graves, Marjorie  40 Grazia  51 Green Party  121, 126, 148, 153 Guardian  16, 42–​3, 44, 45, 48–​9, 53, 54, 70, 71, 72–​3, 74, 75–​6, 86, 87, 104, 105, 106, 114, 141, 142, 144, 147, 148, 151 Gwynne-​Vaughan, Helen  45 H Hague, Ffion  108, 116, 117 hair  26, 51, 63, 106, 117, 152–​3 Hall, U.  50, 51 Hansen, A.  15 Harding, L.  81 Hare, David  108 Harman, Harriet  47, 53 Harmer, E.  6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 23, 26, 29, 31, 34, 49, 51, 56, 62, 67, 70, 77, 80, 88, 89, 93, 104, 111, 119, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 130, 138, 143, 145, 147, 148, 150, 151, 154, 156, 157, 160, 161, 163, 164, 167, 169, 170, 172 Harrison, B.  92 Harris-​Perry, M.V.  95 Healey, Dennis  114, 144 Healey, Edna  114 health and welfare policy  31, 33, 66, 67, 80–​2, 159 Heath, Ted  75, 79, 80, 97 Heldman, C.  22, 24 Hencke, D.  144 Herrnson, P.S.  24, 31, 56, 159 heteronormativity  8, 77, 94, 107, 120 Higgins, M.  27, 95, 111, 120, 146, 164 Hinojosa, M.  26 Hinton, L.  55

Hollingshead, I.  109, 110 Hollis, Pat  41, 54 homophobia  46–​7, 83 Hooghe, M.  23, 56, 125, 126, 157, 158 Hornsby-​Smith, Pat  45 housewives, labelling as  41, 54, 59, 60, 67, 72, 77–​80, 86, 89, 106, 161 Howard, Michael  63, 114 Howard, Sandra  108, 109, 114 humanization  28 husbands, women following into politics  21, 54, 92 husbands, women voting according to their  73, 75–​7, 84–​5 I Ibroscheva, E.  5, 6 identity politics  26 imagery, heavily gendered  5 individualization  75, 93 inferiority, women’s presumed  47–​8 inter-​coder reliability  17 international affairs  31, 33, 66, 67, 73, 84, 159 intersectionality  7–​8, 25–​6, 48–​9, 83–​4 intimization  9, 94 Iraq War  67, 114 Israel  95 issues  candidates  31–​4, 159–​60 issue stereotyping  31 women voters  64–​7, 69–​88, 89 see also domesticity; health and welfare policy; international affairs Italy  27, 28 J Jackson, W.  55 Jalalzai, F.  28, 125 Jalland, Marjorie  53 James, Marilyn  54 Jamieson, K.H.  9, 12, 24, 123, 140, 143, 147, 154, 162, 163, 171 Jarvis, D.  59 Jeger, Lean  54 Johnson, D.  53 Johnson, P.  45, 46, 144 Jowell, Tessa  50 K Kahn, K.F.  22, 122, 124 Kavanagh, D.  9 Kavanagh, Trevor  113, 117, 147, 148, 152 Kay, J.  144 Kay, R.  50 Kinnock, Glenys  109, 110 Kinnock, Neil  145 Kittilson, M.  23, 56, 159 Knight, Jill  50

199

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

Kriesi, H.  9, 11, 26, 167, 170 Krippendorff, K.  17 Krook, M.L.  4 L Labour Party  all-​women shortlists  43 women MPs  43 and women voters  86 and working-​class women  80 Lancaster, T.  41, 143, 144, 150 Langer, A.I.  9, 11, 26, 93, 124, 149, 164, 167, 170 language  heavily gendered  5 housewifery/​motherhood  106 masculine  5 misogynistic  46, 60 Lawrence, J  10, 11, 26, 56, 91, 106, 116, 135, 164, 169, 170 Lawrence, Susan  40 Lee, Jennie  54 Lee-​Potter, Lynda  50, 108, 109, 110, 114 left-​wing press  25, 59 see also newspaper partisanship; specific newspapers Leigh, Virginia  106, 113 Lengauer, G.  9, 12, 167, 172 Leslie, A.  51, 53, 107, 114 Letts, Quentin  47, 49, 87, 108, 109, 115, 116, 117, 148, 149, 152, 153 Levin, B.  46, 47 Lewis, J.  59, 88, 89 LGBTQ+  63, 82 Liebler, C.M.  7 Linton, M.  43 Littlejohn, Richard  110, 115, 142, 143, 149 Livingstone, S.  7 Lloyd George, David  96 Lloyd George, Margaret  97 Lloyd George, Megan  54 Lockett, J.  48 longitudinal studies, importance of  13–​15 long-​term perspectives, importance of  13–​14 Loughborough University  22, 63 Lovenduski, J.  3, 4, 62 Lucas, Caroline  121, 142 Lynch, T.  23 M MacDonald, Ishbel  113, 116 MacDonald, Ramsay  78, 113 MacKenzie, K.  87 Mackie, L.  73 Major, Norma  108 male voters  default males  5–​6, 160, 173 and domestic issues  44

and female party leaders  141 Mallalieu, Anne  45 marginal constituencies  71 marital status  54 marketing segments  62, 70 Markievicz, Constance  21 Martin, G.  53 masculine qualities, women displaying  24, 25, 26, 123 masculinized attributes of leadership  122–​3, 125, 143, 147–​8, 169 Maung, C.A.  109, 117 May, Philip  150, 151–​2 May, Theresa  appearance  135 competence/​femininity double bind  148 emotional terms  145, 146, 171 family life  138, 151–​2 and feminism  140 ‘lunch snatcher’  145 ‘Maybot’  146, 147, 151 personalization  87, 150 positive evaluative coverage  130 press coverage compared to Margaret Thatcher  28, 121, 125, 135–​8, 154 Mayhew, Cicely  107, 114, 115 McCombs, M.E.  5, 167 McHugh, P.  40 McKay, F.  27, 146 media studies  3 media-​politics relationship  8–​9 Melman, B.  58, 60 Mendes, K.  14, 112 Merkel, Angela  23, 125, 142 meta-​coverage  9, 10 metaphor  domesticity  42, 105 masculine  5 sporting  49 Middleweek, Helene  45, 50, 51 Miller, M.  43 ministers  21–​2, 47 misogyny  25, 46, 60, 147, 162 mistakes, women criticized heavily for  48–​9 mixed-​methods approaches  14 Moir, Jan  53, 111, 116–​17, 118 Moncur, A.  86 Moore, J.  74, 146, 147 Moore, S.  148 Morris, Estelle  46 motherhood  candidates  28, 38, 44, 54 party leaders  144, 151 wives/​relatives of politicians  95, 106, 113, 114 women voters  59, 60, 67, 74–​5, 77, 89, 161

200

Index

see also children, women’s concern with their mothers of politicians  104–​5 Mount, F.  45 Moutet, A.E.  153 MPs  Black women  8 Blair government  43 candidates  21–​57 history of female  21, 42–​3 male MPs’ sexism towards female  44 and the normalization of women leaders  138 percentage of female  6 women blamed for lack of female  42 Murray, R.  11, 23, 25, 123, 170 N negative evaluative coverage  candidates  34, 35, 39, 161–​2 gendering of election coverage  12–​13 increasing  172–​3 party leaders  128, 129, 131, 154, 162, 163–​4, 172 wives/​relatives of politicians  99, 102, 103, 108, 109, 119, 163 Negrine, R.  5 Netanyahu, Sara  95 Netherlands  28 New Zealand  26, 125 newspaper partisanship  16, 25, 59, 120, 128, 145, 163–​4, 167 newspapers, reason for study focus on  16 Newton-​Dunn, T.  146 NHS  81 Nigeria  125 normalization of women leaders  20, 125–​6, 128, 130, 133, 135, 138, 155 normative functions of journalism  5–​6, 58, 59 Norris, P.  9, 10, 12, 25, 123, 142, 169 O Obama, Michelle  95 objectification of women  28, 51 see also sexualization Oborne, P.  112 Oliver, J.  71 Olney, Sarah  145 O’Neill, D.  22, 29, 56, 124 Oppenheim, Sally  52–​3 ordinariness, presenting women’s  55, 62, 96, 120, 138, 151, 166 ‘othering’  28, 39, 124 outsiders, women as  5, 25, 45, 48, 51, 123, 163

P Palmer, J.  75 Pankhurst, Christabel  21 Parry-​Giles, S.J.  24, 123, 154, 163 partisanship, press  16, 25, 59, 120, 128, 145, 163–​4, 167 Party Election Broadcasts  80 party leaders  11, 22–​3, 121–​55, 160, 162–​3, 168, 170, 171 party leaders’ wives  96–​103 Pascoe-​Watson, G.  81 passive roles  28, 61–​2, 64, 72, 81, 82, 108, 111 patriarchy  74, 77, 93, 159, 162 Pederson, S.  27 pensioners  81 personality politics  93 personalization  candidates  25, 26, 28–​9, 34–​9, 49–​55, 56 conclusions on  164–​6, 170–​1, 172 gendering of election coverage  9, 10–​12, 172 party leaders  124, 135–​40, 149–​53, 154–​5 wives/​relatives of politicians  93–​4, 96, 106–​7, 165 women voters  67–​9, 87, 89 Philipson, Mabel  92 Phillips, A.  3, 48, 141, 142, 144, 151 Pierce, A.  117 Pitkin, H.  3 Plaid Cymru  121, 126, 149 Platell, Amanda  43 policy coverage  issue stereotyping  23–​4, 31, 160 versus process news  169 traditional ‘feminine’  23, 31–​4, 40, 56–​7, 159 wives/​relatives of politicians  104–​5 women voters  59, 64–​7, 66, 86–​7, 89 see also domesticity; economy; health and welfare policy; international affairs political engagement, women’s presumed lack of  87, 89, 158 political marketing techniques  70 political science  3 politicization of the private persona  93 positive evaluative coverage  34, 35, 39, 129, 132, 162, 163 Potter, C.  83, 144 present-​centred viewpoints  13–​14 presidential elections (US)  23, 60, 123 presidentialization  9, 10–​12, 119, 170–​1 prices  41, 42, 60, 73, 77, 79–​80, 86 see also cost of living prime ministers  coverage of party leaders  23, 121–​55 female candidates  121

201

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

number of female  6 Primrose League  91 private lives  candidates  53 conclusions on  170 focus of election coverage on  11 party leaders  151–​2 wives/​relatives of politicians  93, 99, 100, 103–​4, 106, 113–​15, 120 women voters  74 see also family life privatization  93 process news  9, 10, 31, 169 Proops, M.  71, 76, 77, 107, 113, 116, 117 public opinion in the news  59 Pugh, M.  16, 84–​5 Puwar, N.  7, 24, 48 Q Quennell, Joan  50 quoted sources  candidates  29, 30, 31, 38 conclusions on  157, 158 party leaders  133–​5, 140, 155, 168 sexism of  45 tendency to be male  7 women voters  64, 65, 86 R race  7–​8, 24, 48, 82, 83, 95 radio coverage, history of  16 Raicheva-​Stover, M.  5, 6 Rayner, G.  81 Raynor, G.  146, 150, 153 Reade, B.  150 readers’ letters  84, 85, 158 ReCal web resource  17 Redgrave, Vanessa  50 Reece, S.D.  7 Reeves, R.  42, 48 representation, definitions  3 Representation of the People Act 1918  21 Representation of the People Act 1928  70 Reyes, O.  95, 96 Richard, J.  112 right-​wing press  25 see also newspaper partisanship Roberts, M.  85 Robertson, A.  49 Roche, Barbara  51, 53 Rose, M.  10, 11, 26, 135, 169, 170 Rose, P.  55 Rosenbaum, M.  16 Ross, Karen  1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 38, 40, 46, 51, 52, 56, 59, 63, 122, 123, 124, 135, 142, 154, 157, 160, 161, 164, 165, 169, 172 Rothermere, Lord  58, 60

Royal, Ségolène  23 Roycroft-​Davis, C.  113, 117 Rudd, Amber  145 S Sáez, Irene  26 sampling  16–​17 Savigny, H.  29 Scandinavia  23 ‘Scarlet Shirley’ cartoon  46, 153 schoolmistress stereotypes  41 Schreiber, R.  26, 28, 124 Schröder-​Köpf, Doris  95 Schuck, A.R.T.  12 Seaton, J.  13, 16, 34, 96, 106 Section 28 (LGA 1986)  46 selection committees  43 Semetko, H.  23, 29, 124, 125, 133, 155, 156, 158 sexism  candidates  24–​5, 44–​9, 56, 57 gendering of election coverage  161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 169 negative evaluative coverage  173 personalization  171 tone of media coverage  24–​5, 57 wives/​relatives of politicians  108, 119 sexual relationships, women’s  46, 96 sexuality  7–​8 sexualization of women  28, 50–​1, 148, 153, 163, 169 Shaw, D.L.  5, 167 Sheeler, K.H.  24, 56, 161 Shoemaker, P.J.  7 Short, Clare  25, 45–​6, 47 Shrimsley, A.  80 significant reference to women, definition of  17 Sinn Féin  21 Sloan, J.  87 Smith, A.  111, 120, 164 Smith, S.J.  7 Smithers, R.  81, 83, 95 Smooth, W.  4 ‘soccer moms’  60 social class  52–​3, 72, 95–​6, 116 ‘soft news’  7 source selection  7, 168 see also quoted sources South Africa  27, 46 Southern, R.  6, 23, 29, 49, 56, 125, 138, 145, 150, 151, 154, 157 Southworth, J.  41 Spain  27, 28 Spokes, Ann  41–​2 spouses  see wives/​relatives of politicians Sreberny-​Mohammadi, A.  1, 3, 5, 6, 122 Stanyer, J.  9, 11, 93–​4, 138, 164, 170

202

Index

Steele, A.  52 Stephenson, M.A.  63 stereotypes  candidates  24 conclusions on  166 domesticity  41, 162, 164 issue stereotyping  23–​4, 31, 160 newspaper partisanship  145 normative functions of journalism  5 party leaders  123–​4 wives/​relatives of politicians  95, 108 women as a voting bloc  71 women voters  62–​3, 73, 77, 81, 82 Steven, Jessie  40 Stoiber, Karin  95 Storer, Sharron  63, 88 Strachey, Rachel  44 Street, J.  5, 167 structural barriers to representation  42–​3 structural inequalities  55 Sturgeon, Nicola  appearance  27, 152, 153 competence/​femininity double bind  148 emotional terms  150, 171 emotions  146–​7 “nippy sweetie”  146, 150 personalization  150 place in politics  142, 143 visibility in 2015 and 2017  121 substantive representation  3, 4, 141 suffragettes  42, 58 Suich, M.  71, 76 Summerskill, Edith  40 Sun, The  16, 40, 42–​3, 46, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 55, 71, 73–​4, 75, 76, 80, 81, 87, 109, 114, 115, 141, 144, 146, 147, 150, 153 see also Daily Herald super surveillance  24 supportive wives  106–​7 Sutherland, M.E.  78, 79 Swain, G.  145 symbolic annihiliation  6 symbolic representation  3 symbolic value of candidates’ wives  107 T Tapsfield, J.  49 Taylor, Ann  53 Temple, M.  1, 16 Thane, P.  22 Thatcher, Margaret  anti-​feminism  140–​2 appearance  27, 135 competence/​femininity double bind  147 consequences for future women  48 domesticity  41, 55 emotional terms  171 emotions  143–​5

evaluative newspaper coverage  130 family life  54–​5, 138, 151 femininity of  24 foreign policy/​economics  23–​4 gendered descriptions of campaign trails  142–​3 as the ‘Iron Lady’  144, 150 ‘milk snatcher’  24, 145 misogyny directed towards  46 as party leader  121 percentage of coverage  126, 128 personalization  124, 150, 170 press coverage compared to Theresa May  28, 121, 125, 135–​8, 154 relatives  97 women challenging  88 Thomas, J.  85 Thomas, R.  8, 10, 16, 167 Thompson, D.  83, 145 Thomson, A.  108 Thornton, Justine  117 Thorpe, Marion  113–​14 Tibballs, S.  63 time to speak, women get less  23 Tolley, E.  15 tone of media coverage  24–​6, 34, 39–​55, 57 Topping, A.  87 Toynbee, P.  70 transformative politics  25, 26, 142, 148, 169 transgressions of gender norms  24, 143, 147, 150, 154 Travis, A.  72 Treiberg, N.  27 Trimble, L.  2, 10, 12, 13, 26, 27, 28, 56, 94, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 128, 149, 154, 155, 156, 160, 164, 165, 169, 171, 172 trivialization of women  6, 13, 28, 52, 153, 164 Tuchman, G.  6 TV coverage, history of  16 Tymoshenko, Yulia  27 U Ukraine  27 unexpected, women’s political success framed as  25 unmarried mother benefit scrounger trope  82 ‘unnatural,’ women in politics as  27, 28 unwomanliness  24 US  1992 New York state primaries  25 adversarial coverage  12 candidates’ appearance  27 female journalists  7 first ladies  94, 118, 119, 162, 163 presidential elections  23, 60, 123 ‘soft’/​feminine policy areas  23

203

WOMEN, MEDIA, AND ELECTIONS

women voters  60 women’s issues  159 V Van Aelst, P.  11, 26, 93 Van Leuven, S.  126 van Zoonen, L.  28, 38, 51, 77, 124, 160, 171 Vanslyke Turk, J.  7 Vavrus, M.D.  60, 88 Venezuela  26 victims, women portrayed as  6, 81 Vincent, Michelle  51 Vine, Sarah  150–​1 violence against women  159 Vliegenthart, R.  9, 11 ‘Vote for Him’ campaign  84–​5 Vreese, C.H.  10, 12, 169 vulnerable groups, women as emblems of  81 W Wahl-​Jorgensen, K.  5, 24, 27, 28, 38, 56, 123, 148, 164 Wakeford, G.  71 Walker, T.  55 Wallace, M.  73 Ward, Irene  41, 50, 51 Ward, O.  8, 10, 25, 48, 169 Watkins, F.  78 Webster, W.  24, 27, 138, 151 weight  51–​2 welfare policy  31, 33, 66, 67, 80–​2, 159 white male power  3, 7 Widdecombe, Ann  52 Wiliarty, S.E.  23 Wilkes, D.  81 Williams, B.  28, 121, 125, 135, 138, 154, 165 Williams, J.  108, 110 Williams, Shirley  41, 46, 50, 53, 54, 55 Williams, Zoe  142 Willoughby, F.  78 Wilson, Cathy  54 Wilson, G.  87 Wilson, Harold  42, 47 Wilson, Mary  106–​7, 113–​14, 116, 117 Winfield, B.H.  95, 119, 120, 162, 163 Winfrey, K.L.  24, 56, 161 Winnett, R.  71

Wintour, P.  72 Wintringham, Margaret  48, 92, 95 wives/​relatives of politicians  91–​120, 162, 163, 164, 169, 171, 172 woman-​first framing  160, 166 womb/​brain double bind  143–​7 women of colour  7–​8, 25–​6, 48–​9, 63 women voters  58–​90 agenda-​setting functions of the news media  168 assumption of disinterest in politics  71–​2, 73 on the campaign trail  85–​6 as decision-​makers  69–​70 finding out about the needs of  5 ‘floating’/​swing voters  71, 72, 89 and male representation  39–​40 not a homogenous group  4, 62, 70, 72, 79, 85, 89–​90, 160–​1, 169 representation of perspectives of  3, 4, 39–​ 42, 159, 160 unpredictability of  71–​2, 89 wives/​relatives of politicians used to appeal to  104–​5 women party leaders representing  140–​3, 160 women-​blaming  42 Women’s Liberal Federation  91 women’s rights  23 Women’s Social and Political Union  58 women’s suffrage  1, 21, 27, 58–​9, 60, 69–​70 Wood, Leanne  121, 142, 149, 152, 153 Woodhull, Victoria  27 Woollett, E.  83 ‘Worcester woman  62, 70 working class women  40, 52, 53, 72, 80 working women  59, 83, 85 work-​life balance  55, 83 Wring, D.  40, 62, 63, 67, 70, 80, 88, 89, 161 Y Young, S.  81 Z Zaller, J.  12 Zhurzkenko, T.  27 Zoch, L.M.  7 Zweiniger-​Bargielowska, I.  22, 78

204

“This is a solid, important, and original book, showcasing the ways women in politics have historically been marginalized and why it matters. It highlights the important lessons that the public and scholars can draw – including challenging the continued marginalization of female politicians and voters.” Kaitlynn Mendes, Western University

Emily Harmer is Lecturer in Media at the University of Liverpool.

In the century since women were first eligible to stand and vote in British general elections, they have relied on news media to represent their political perspectives in the public realm. This book provides a systematic analysis of electoral coverage by charting how women candidates, voters, politicians’ spouses, and party leaders have been portrayed in newspapers since 1918. The result is a fascinating account of both continuity and change in the position of women in British politics. The book demonstrates that for women to be effectively represented in the political domain, they must also be effectively represented in the public discussion of politics that takes place in the media.

ISBN 978-1-5292-0494-0

@BrisUniPress BristolUniversityPress bristoluniversitypress.co.uk

@policypress

9 781529 204940