WOMEN SPORTS REPORTERS: HAVE THEY CAUGHT UP?

Abstract

A sports reporter's perceived competence and actual persuasiveness were examined as a function of reporter's gender, audience member's gender, athletes' gender, and communication medium. Two different sports commentaries were created, concerning men's basketball and women's gymnastics. One of the two commentaries was presented to each respondent, either in the form of a sports magazine column or as a radio sportscast. In the commentary, either a male or a female sports reporter promoted an unlikely winner in NCAA competition. The reporter's perceived competence was significantly influenced by his or her gender: The female reporter was rated less competent than the male. This effect was consistent across male and female respondents, across men's basketball and women's gymnastics, and across print and broadcast media. No differences were observed in the respondents' acceptance of the reporter's projections of a long-shot winner. However, when the commentaries challenging the “consensus” winner (e.g., Duke in basketball) were attributed to a female reporter, compared to a male reporter, respondents adhered more strongly to the consensus team in their own choices of expected winners. Respondents thus resisted the reporter's arguments against the consensus team significantly more if the reporter was female. This effect also was consistent across respondent gender, athlete gender, and medium.