The journalist, the housewife, the citizen and the press

Abstract

The use of sources in news narratives is an extremely important part of not only the story's construction but also of its orientation and, ultimately, the point of view being supported in a given story. The sly deceit concealed within journalists' use of sources as apparently independent and authoritative commentators enables the journalist to masquerade as a mere conveyance of others' perspectives while actually peddling a particular viewpoint by the choice of speaker and the choice of quote. This study interrogates the content of three English regional newspapers over a 10-week period, up to, during and after the British general election in 2005, in order to identify gender differences in the sources used. It argues that, as with the national press, men are more than twice as likely as women to be quoted as sources and that women journalists are no more likely to source women than male colleagues. It concludes that a newsroom culture which privileges elite and other (white) male voices appears to exert a greater influence and conformity over who `counts' as an authoritative voice than any individual newsworker's proclivities to more accurately reflect their views of the diverse local community.