Martina Santia

This study investigates differences in news beat coverage between female and male journalists and their potential effects on audiences. We employ data from a representative survey of 1,600 U.S. journalists to show that female journalists are more likely to cover feminine beats (i.e., culture and health) and less likely to cover masculine beats (i.e., politics and sports) than male journalists. We complement this data with an online experiment to examine whether audiences value feminine beats covered by female journalists less than masculine beats reported by male journalists. Our results show that female journalists are not necessarily rated more positively when reporting on feminine beats—and feminine beats are not seen as more important when delivered by a female journalist.

We develop and test a theory of gendered political times, which argues that the gendered political climate during an election shapes the extent to which female candidates emphasize feminine or masculine traits in campaign messages. We measure gendered electoral contexts through rigorous analyses of public opinion data and news media content of the top issues during an election, and we complement these data with an analysis of the gendered traits candidates emphasize in campaign messages during U.S. congressional election cycles from 2000 through 2018. Our results suggest that feminine electoral contexts do not necessarily lead female candidates, or male candidates, to rely on feminine traits. We find that masculine electoral contexts lead female candidates to rely more heavily on feminine traits. Our results have important implications for understanding the forces that shape the way candidates develop strategic campaign messages, and the factors that ultimately influence women’s under-representation in politics.