Andy Burnham: Why is women's sport treated as a sideshow?
I spent my first 35 years looking at sport from a very male perspective
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
Yesterday got off to a bad start. I woke up and assumed England's women cricketers had lost. That's because I turned on the radio and, for 20 minutes at least, could hear no mention of events in Australia.
I got a pleasant surprise when the headlines finally came round. But the absence of celebratory voices on the airwaves reinforced a point I have been making since Beijing: that coverage of women's sport is woefully absent from our television screens, radios and newspapers.
I feel more strongly than ever that this needs to change – urgently. With 2012 approaching, we have a moment in time when we can change sport for good. Getting more girls and women playing sport would constitute a genuine legacy. But I am worried that we are in danger of missing the moment by conducting business as usual.
Of course, sports governing bodies and the Government have big responsibilities here. But so too does the media. If anyone doubts whether media coverage can drive participation in sport, just think about what Wimbledon fortnight does to the nation's tennis courts.
To be fair, Sky's coverage of the women's World Cup has been good. I have noticed too that netball is now a regular part of its schedule. But subscription sports channels are not available in every home. So we look to our public service broadcasters to redress the balance – and yet, with some exceptions, the fare on offer is very traditional.
I readily acknowledge that, like many others, I am guilty of being slow to acknowledge this issue. As the middle of three brothers, I spent my first 35 years looking at sport from a very male perspective and seeing women's sport as a sideshow. It is only as my two girls have got older that my re-education has gathered pace and I have been able to see just how wide the sporting gap is.
My two daughters just don't have positive images of women's sport put before them in the same way as my son sees male sporting role models. When women's sport is on the TV, I make a point of bringing it to their attention. But it is frustratingly rare. Luckily, our football club, Everton, has a highly successful women's team. Yet it's hard to find any mention of them in national newspapers beyond a mention in a small weekly round-up. Is it stating the obvious to say that side columns on page 85 are less noticeable to young girls than colour photos on the front or back?
I did hope Beijing would bring a turning-point. Stars like Rebecca Romero and Nicole Cooke captured the nation's attention. But sadly, as the excitement of Beijing has tailed off, so has the media's interest in our sportswomen. Rebecca Adlington's first outing at the British Swimming Championships this week wasn't given live coverage. Star cyclist Victoria Pendleton has been reported as saying she now feels like she is living in the shadow of her male counterparts.
One of the arguments that comes back from the media is that the interest in women's sport is simply not there. I don't buy this. It's a self-serving argument. There will be no interest if broadcasters do not work to build it. History shows that the British public have the appetite to become absorbed in any sport if it is promoted in the right way. It wasn't long since we were all fascinated by curling. Activity at the grassroots shows there is real interest out there.
Despite its lack of publicity, women's cricket is thriving. There's been a 50 per cent increase in participation in 2008. The same in women's football. Nearly one million girls play organised football every week.
Perhaps the answer to this problem is to bypass the traditional media altogether. I have asked my department to look at developing a School Leagues website where results and footage could be uploaded by schools and all young people – boys and girls – would have a showcase for their achievements. But this is no real substitute. In the multi-channel era, it doesn't seem to me to be too much to ask to see a start with regular coverage of the Women's Premier League football, at the very least.
I accept it is no good Government handing out lectures on this subject if we haven't got our own house in order. The new funding plans we are soon to sign off with every major sport governing body for the period 2009-13 ask for much greater ambition on girls' and women's participation. With governing bodies under greater pressure, this may change the nature of the conversation they have with broadcasters.
There are signs of hope. This summer, the England and Wales Cricket Board will break new ground by staging women's and men's matches together at World 2020. But progress is way too slow. Half of the population is not being adequately served. We need culture change in sport and broadcasting. And I will only be happy when the High School Musical posters in our house are coming down and the Charlotte Edwards one is going up.
The author is the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Because it is a side show!
Women just aren't as strong or as exciting or as watchable as men - (except for straight men wanting to ogle) - women's spatial awareness is crap, and all that squealing and shrieking is painfully annoying. The fact they hit the ball so lightly and miss the target is hilarious - almost special needs really. The gruff lesbians are scarey too...
There is NO discrimination here sisters - it's just market forces. Just be thankful that the sale of media rights for men's sport pays for substandard girlie sport (as the men at wombledon subsidise the women's prize money in such an unequal way).
A few years back, I was stuck in a hotel and caught game 5 of the women's NCAA basketball finals. It was a very close, tense game. In fact, it was so close and so enthralling that I stayed in the next two nights in order to watch games 6 and 7 as the underdogs fought back to win in the last seconds. The best three games of any sport that I had seen in years. Had they been men, a good number of those players would have gone on to very lucrative careers in the NBA. Unfortunately, such is denied to women.
As for your comment about squealing and shrieking, I can only assume that you are inspired by the cuddling displayed every time a male player manages to score a goal nowadays.
Nothing is 'denied' women - it's just market forces. There is no conspirarcy theory mohammed... Most who watch sport are men and they want to watch the best and most exciting players - MEN.
Actually, I am one of those males who hate sport, (I only watch tennis), but I do live in the real world: sport is a very male thing and men, with superior spatial awareness and risk-taking and strength, are better at it; most women hate sport - playing and watching (despite TV's obsession to have female presenters for football). This PC nonsense is pathetic - as are attempts by PC nations for promote women's sport (New Zealand). Let's see the ratings figures eh? Quotas never work.
If people wanted to watch the substandard spectable that is women's sport then it would be on TV and be more popular. End of. You may as well ask why no men are in most porno mags. Why? Coz men read them and most men are straight. These feminist argumenst really are spurious y'know, all this paranouid grass in greener victim culture.
Sadly, boys at school get crap sports teaching and are now forced to do stupid things like dance -m introduced to keep girls happy in a feminised school system.
My argument is sound ferneyman, so stop your ad hominem rants eh?
Second, if we took a quick tally, I suspect you'd lead the "rant table"!
Third, given your totally illiberal views, why do you bother reading the Indie? It really can't being doing much for your blood pressure, you know.
Fourth, you've obviously never watched a rugby game or professional golf, or you'd know that there is a significant female following of those sports. Part of the reason being that there is no male hostility in the crowd towards them. Unlike, say, soccer, where the threat of violence is ever present. Or cricket, where women are relegated to making the tea.
And your logic is that of a rabid lesbian muffmonster - someone argues that women's sport is boring and crap and men's sport is more exciting and better - and that proves what exactly? That they're gay? So all the men and boys who follow sport are gay are they? Brilliant! You must be very intelligent to come up with such a sound and logical theory.
Good luck with your GCSEs love. You may get a C in Tellytubby if you work hard.
Firstly, my post doesn't mention sport - it's just that my attention is piqued whenever I come across a terribly angry little person going on about how strong and exciting male athletes are. Purely in a platonic way of course.......................
Very interesting how closely you identify sexuality with sporting prowess; you've obviously spent a lot of time thinking this through.
And am I "a rabid lesbian muffmonster"? If I was going under the name of "magnanima" instead of "magnanimo" you might have grounds for suspicion but I have a feeling you don't regard learning foreign languages as a priority.
When the Under 17 women's soccer (oops - football) tournament was held here, there was also quite a bit of TV and newspaper coverage.
Our hockey and swimming women's teams get as much or more coverage as the mens' teams.
When the England netball team last visited our part of the world, I unsuccessfully searched websites for relevant items, and couldn't believe that t decent English vicotry was not reported by many sites.
The UK is well behind the times in its reporting of women's sports.
In comparison, how much would it have cost for the BBC to have one fixed camera, one hand-held camera and a commentator at the British Swimming Championships last week ?
The BBC have umpteen terrestrial and Freeview channels with 24 hours to fill. There are very few films (black and white, subtitled, classics) - so they don't spend their money on movies.
The sports coverage is restricted to Premiership football highlights.
Six-Nations rugby, Wimbledon tennis, World Championship or Olympic athletics - they are all broadcast in a vacuum with no context in terms of grassroots, youth, junior, regional, professional leagues and local and national news reporting.
The BBC has become elitist, restricted and utterly negligent in their coverage of sport in this country. For a national TV broadcaster with no remit to make a profit, it seems to only have it's eye on the most populist events with successful coverage measure purely in terms of ratings.
Nobody at the BBC has a sense of sport as a community activity.
But it's worth thinking about the standard of the sport being played, where would the equivalent level be of a top English women's football match? Conference?- only 1,594 people watched Kidderminster v Woking last week.
if the standard isn't good enough, why should people be expected to be interested?
"History shows that the British public have the appetite to become absorbed in any sport if it is promoted in the right way."- We've only got so much time and money to spend on being fans.
As it is, it seems like every sport going is desperate to be 'professional' and have money poured into it. Beach volleyball anyone??
Indeed,one saw in the trial of Charles Menendez and inquest of Princess Diana that Royals and security services couldnt be tried or found guilty.Both the above groups are male dominated and thier henchmen in the church,royalty and security forces,BBc and media are not going to change it.
we only had one women PM in our history in UK and one may beg the question as an Englishmen that how come so much publcity was given to irish rugby victory in the grandslam by our media ,when the irish are not english and our own womens team hardly got a mention when they won a historic win down under.
Currently three suppressive forces are keeping women down in UK.i.e the catholic church where women and darkies are not allowed to be Pope or poppess,islam doesnt give women rights as Hindus give or as christians give and then there is the secret male freemasonary and cosa nostra cabals who control banking,media etc so women,who are majority in uk sadly are reduced to comfort womens and have to struggle hard to achieve parity as co equal citizens and humans all created equal in the imgae of God and according to Darwin all of us from the Monkey lineage where Monkeys treat women well and as good mothers.will we get civilised in uk and br progressives or become taleban and keep women down is a big question for 21st centuary.food for thought.QED
Let me known when you have day-release from your institution. I'll lock my doors.
There's a very simple answer to his question. Women's sport is a bit like fishing: plenty want to do it, but not many want to watch.
If it was interesting people would watch it (how about the derisory attendances at women's football games?), and the telly would then show it. But it's not so they don't.
Have you ever seen women's cricket? Compared to the men's game it's slow motion, lacks any sense of power, intensity or dynamism and is basically boring. Ditto women's football.
No amount of hand-wringing will change that.
Their World cup success was the pinnacle of their sport and deserving of more than secondary tv coverage on Sky (who watches it now except in the pub!!) and brief (seconds long) news coverage after some minority football scores (it was only Liverpool, not Chelsea, Arsenal or Man U).
No Tafalgar Square homecomng planned I don't suppose?
More importantly, the biggest success by a British sports person this weekend was totally ignored - Mark Cavendish winning Milan-San Remo. This equates to Andy Murray winning a tennis Grand Slam event - not a mention.
I think Andy Burnham's views are really more appropriately targetted towards any sport which is not men-only football, rugby or cricket.
And, wormery, get a life! You live in the real world, huh?? What's that - computer games, reality tv, chips and beer?? Pull back the curtains and let the sunshine into your life.
YOur logic is very odd. I point out the truth about women's sport, and you assume I like beer and chips and computer games and reality TV. Brilliant! So everyone who doesn;t watch or play sport or worship women';s sport likes beer and chips and computer games and reality TV? Where did you get your degree? The university of Tellytubby? You are just a bigoted beer-ist and chip-ist - and those who watch and play sport seem rather partial to both non? Fitness and sport are not the same at all, and not watching sport gives me time to do other stuff - oh like running my business and writing books. Perhaps you should try reading one sometime...
Your attitude is that of a female chauvinist cow and a poor deluded soul who is not living in the real world. Women's sport is a joke - it's sort of like the paraolympics when compared to men's sport. Everyone smiles and claps, and they work very hard y'know bless em - so it doen;t really matter that they can;t kick a ball properly (oh but it does, and people don;t want to watch girlie throws and special needs football from women actually).
Tell me - what proportion of those who play and watch women's sport are lesbians? Do tell.
And a bigot to boot.
I think magnanimo_65 nailed it on the head, period.
Ooh, that hurts don't it w?
ou have the chip on the shoulder love, and blancmange for a brain. But you are funny - a walking talking steroetype made flesh. Found out the precentage of women playiong sport who are lesbo muffmonsters then? Do tell. When you've calmed down that is.
Do try not to cry and blub, there's a good girl. Ask a man to give you a hug and you'll feel much better. Have a nice cup of tea (ask a man to teach you how to use the kettle as you ladies are a bit dim with the old technology eh...)
A lot of British world champs take second place to those in sports that draw the money and that is why I mentioned Mark Cavendish (cycling) winning the big race in Italy last weekend - even Lance Armstrong hasn't won that race - and it was one of the biggest of them all.
Fairness in all sport coverage, regularly and not as an afterthought, would be welcome.
and wormery, very entertaining and sorry you have been barking up the wrong tree. i can just visualise all my mates spilling their beer with laughter. those women, though, are quite good making tea you know.
Harsh but true. I speak as someone who has a great respect for female athletes who no doubt train every bit as hard as male counterparts and often compete against a tide of indifference towards them. In many sports the enjoyment to be had at viewing elite women is often comparable with the men but at the back of your mind you know that they aren't as good as the men.
Also check out the criticism (e.g., the Williams sisters) when female athletes do step up to the plate in developing their physcial strength, which is all speed is about.
Finally, it is interesting to see wormery's comments about lesbians in women's sport in a week where there is discussion of the massive ongoing levels of homosexuality in this country. What proportion of male athletes do you think might be gay? In what possible way could it be relevant??
It is indeed unfair to compare Pendleton and Romero against Hoy and Wiggins but you can make the case the latter are better because in the same discipline they do it faster. Sure it is largely down to an innate natural advantage and it shouldn't in anyway tarnish female competitors own achievements but when people are wanting to watch athletics or sport of any sort at the top level it is the very best they tend to want to see. The interest in what the best female competitors can do is lesser. Not to everyone but the wider public I think are just not as interested.
Personally I'm happy to watch a lot of women's sports, quite often in say the tennis the entertainment at Wimbledon was better than in the men's. More longer rallies and excellent technical ability on show. I think in case of Wimbledon the courts have slowed down some and that is less the case at the moment but just because men have the greater strength and speed doesn't always make it better to watch.
There are huge numbers of lesbians in more male fields - sport, the police etc.
There are probably fewer gay men in sport than in other professions, but a large proportion of gay men in creative fields.
The fact is those at the top level of all sports are freaks. They have exectly the right build and makeup to play like that. Working and training hard would never turn most people into a champion. Look at Usain Bolt. No sport is 'fair' - it's all a lottery of genetics. And they're all on drugs.
I agree however that because men's tennis is too fast and strong the women's game is OK in that - I yearn for a return to wooden rackets.
Why would she follow the premiership over womens football? I guess, because it is the best standard of football. We all aspire to the best and want to see the best. Why is my sunday league football team not featured on the front page of The Sun?
Just some thoughts.. enjoyed the article.
An illustration of the problem can be found here:
http://fromaleftwing.blogspot.com/2
- another kick in the teeth for those of us trying to bring the women's game into the mainstream.
Polly Courtney
Girls in Football.com
The fundamental issue is that more men are interested in sport - not saying no women like sport, that would be idiotic (and implied by lefties) but most men enjoy a sport, most women I know do not care for any, they don't feel left out, they just aren't interested
In some ways it is a shame because plenty of women do want to compete in sports, and few elect to watch
But that said - this argument applies more to the male dominated professional sports ie football, rugby, cricket (in the British case) - you will never elevate a separate league that doesn't have the same quality in the game, due to the fact that men are naturally stronger and faster, to the point of the major sports tournament - the same reason more watch the premier league than the championship, or the conference
Also looking logically - football is the biggest sport in Britain - what happened when we won the rugby world cup in 2003? or the Ashes after that? - a brief interest in those sports from the majority football fans, but then we all returned to footie - that could easily be seen as discrimination just like you claim for women
If you look at Australia and NZ, where they cover pretty much every sport heavily and take great effort to promote women's sport - they are still dominated by the male sports of rugby league and union, and cricket, women barely get a look in - where they do get a look in is the olympic sports - such as swimming, and netball
The BBC had full coverage of the women's world cup in China (I even watched), and a lot of coverage of women's tennis at wimbledon (remember 14 year old Laura) - it is out there, people are not biting and there is nothing you can do to alter that (please don't try though) - surely the principle is that women have every opportunity to get involved from school onwards, not how many people watch or read about them?
Now please head back off to the Gruniad, Andy - before you lose the Indie a lot of readers
Can someone tell me why we have separate women's cricket/football/athletics/golf /tennis/any sport you care to imagine?
In the day of equal rights in the workplace, why is there separate competition for females - if they're that good, and that deserving of not being a "sideshow" why don't we have unisex sides with the best players making up the teams irrespective of sex?
The Wimbledon equal prize money is the perfect example. They should have doubled the men's prize money, and lumped all the men and women into a single tournament - with double prize money awarded at every stage. That would have bene truly fair - however we have the hyproctical and entirely inequitable situation in which females are rewarded more for playing in a competition of undoubted lower quality, and the men are relatively punished for being better at tennis than women.
I have often felt the same about the Oscars, especially as actresses insist on being called actors... And then there's all the sexistr wimmin's prizes for books etc - the orange prize - and all the all-female organisations that ban males (girl guides, women in journalism, WI and thousands more).
Feminism = hypcrisy, sexism and cherry-picking equality when the sisterhood wants it but rejecting it when they don't.
Lots of comic value though. Have you ever seen a girl throw a ball?
It's nonsense.
I'm a university student looking at sport in britain. My next assignment is a piece on why there is a lack of media coverage in womens sport.
i found this article most interesting and totally agree with it personally.
Has it ever occured to anyone that women have actually never been given the chance? along with everything in history... i mean women had to fight so hard just to gain the right to vote!
Maybe womens sport isn't what the public are demanding right now but i am sure that if its given the chance it deserves and has worked so hard for it will stride towards success!
and as for some of the comments on here, its no wonder women don't get enough support... i shall assume you are men!!! i wonder what it would be like the other way round???
Its not because men are better either, there are professional womens players who would wipe the floor with men who only play at a local level so surely that should mean if coverage was based on skill that womens professional footballers should at least get more coverage than local mens football? Yet it doesnt.
One problem i think is that girls arent encouraged to play sports like football, rugby, basketball, cricket when they are in school. Instead they are made to play netball and hockey, sports dominated by women that recieve very little coverage again.
There are some brilliant female athletes out there that deserve to get there 15 minutes for all that they have achieved, but the current culture in the UK denies this. Things need to change and i believe that eventually they well, things like the womens sports foundation are a stepping stone towards a future that will embrace womens sports as well as mens.
I am attempting to do my own part for womens sports with my own site http://www.womenssport.co.uk i hope that anyone who is interested in womens sport will join up and join in on the discussion.