By Judah Martin
When the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board met with adult film stars to decide on potential regulations for the industry in February 2016, The New York Times sent a white male reporter to cover the hearing. This decision was a mistake.
Marveling at the fact that the “colorfully dressed” women were indeed fully clothed for the hearing, Reporter Thomas Fuller stopped just short of ranking each woman’s hotness on a scale of 1-10.
He did, however, violate many an Associated Press principle about referring to women in order to creatively differentiate between the appearance and demeanor of the adult film actresses and those of the rest of the courtroom. For instance, the actresses did not merely walk away from the witness stand in Fuller’s article, they “sashayed.” They did not wear mere dresses or suits; they wore “form-fitting” ones. Meanwhile, a male adult film star who testified was described simply as wearing a three-piece suit.
Instead of giving due attention to the hearing’s purpose of engaging the actors about how they would be affected by stricter regulations, he instead reinforced negative stereotypes about women and sexuality. Specifically, Fuller’s article irresponsibly treated the actresses as objects whose existence outside of their jobs as sex workers was some sort of a marvel worthy of being analyzed and commented upon. As a result, the reader could be left wondering why these over-sexed women were so upset that lawmakers might ask them to protect themselves.
Conversely, The Daily News Reporter Susan Abram also reported on the hearing and, interestingly enough, she neglected to even mention the women’s clothing. The reader learned early on in her story that the women were actually concerned that new regulations would force them to work outside of California, where industry regulations are more lax.
In the era of social media, readers are increasingly conscious of the ways that women and minorities are represented across media platforms. Thus, publications such as The Times could likely avoid backlash by ensuring it maintains a diverse staff of writers educated about the complex socio-political dynamics that may influence their reporting.
Some observers decry diversity as an unnecessary goal that deprives qualified whites of jobs, but it is clear nonetheless that experience and identity can greatly impact how a reporter covers a specific issue.
As noted by Jay Black and Chris Roberts in Doing Ethics in Media: Theories and Practical Applications, the media plays a significant role in creating and reinforcing stereotypes about the most marginal members of society.
With that in mind, though, it is difficult to quantify just how much Fuller’s gender influenced his reporting. Certainly, there are likely plenty of female and non-binary journalists who might have written about the hearing with the same objectifying perspective.
Thus, newsrooms cannot achieve sincere diversity simply by hiring token women and minority representatives. Rather, newsrooms must hire workers who represent a range of experiences and viewpoints and are capable of working together in order to provide valuable perspective for the issues that they cover.
SOURCES:
Susan Abram, “Porn Industry Wins Battle Against California Regulators Over Condoms, Eyewear on Film Shoots”
Thomas Fuller, “Actors in Pornographic Films Fight Proposal to Enforce Regulations”
Textbook: Black, J., & Roberts, C. (2011). Doing Ethics In Media: Theories and Practical Applications. New York: Routledge.