Content uploaded by Sara De Vuyst
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sara De Vuyst on Jul 10, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
159
Padovani, Claudia, Raeymaeckers, Karin & De Vuyst, Sara (2019). Transforming the news media: Overcoming old and new
gender Inequalities in Josef Trappel (ed.) Digital media inequalities: Policies against divides, distrust and discrimination
,
pp. 159-
177. Göteborg: Nordicom.
Transforming the news media
Overcoming old and new gender inequalities
Claudia Padovani, Karin Raeymaeckers & Sara De Vuyst
Gender inequalities have been at the core of debates and studies about media and
communication for a long time. e media – as meaning-making institutions, and
as an important economic sector – have been recognized as both a hindrance to
advancements in gender equality across societies, and a possible solution to persist-
ing stereotypes and discrimination. In this chapter we build on a consolidated body
of knowledge and map out current international initiatives aimed at mainstreaming
gender in and through the media; but we also argue that new lenses and approaches
are needed to understand current transformations, mostly due to digital develop-
ments and globalization processes. We do so by addressing questions concerning
the impact and implications of digital technologies in relation to working condi-
tions in the news media, and by discussing the potential for change that may derive
from gender-aware media policies and regulatory mechanisms in a multi-actor and
multi-level environment.
December 2017. Time magazine devotes its cover to a collective “person of the year”:
“the silence breakers”,1 those women, from all walks of life, who have come to speak
publicly of the harassment, abuses, and violence they underwent in their work-
ing environments. What started with individual acts of courage has grown into an
emerging global movement, connected from the US to France and China by hashtags
like #meetoo, #balancetonporc and #WoYeShi having been used millions of times in
more than eighty countries. In a few weeks, a multiplicity of initiatives – from lists of
alleged perpetrators to open letters published on major newspapers and joint declara-
tions2 – have attracted public attention globally. Controversial debates have involved
1. http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2017-silence-breakers-choice/.
2. In India a list of 60 academics from across the country, accused of harassing behaviours, was posted
on Facebook in November 2017, sparking wide debate amongst Indian feminists: https://thediplomat.
com/2017/11/metoo-and-himtoo-come-to-india/. In France a letter published in Le Monde, signed by
around 100 French women writers, performers and academics deplored the wave of “denunciations”
that has followed claims of sexually assaulted women over decades in the US and elsewhere: http://
www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/01/09/nous-defendons-une-liberte-d-importuner-indispensable-
Chapter 10
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
160
well known female media professionals and movie stars, thus receiving even broader
attention in the media.
January 2018. Carrie Gracie, BBC China editor, leaves the company aer discover-
ing she had been, for years, paid much less than male colleagues occupying similar
positions. In an open letter to BBC audience,3 Gracie denounced “not only (the)
unacceptably high pay for top presenters and managers but also an indefensible pay
gap between men and women doing equal work … I simply want the BBC to abide
by the law and value men and women equally”. In consideration of the Equality Act
2010, which states that men and women doing equal work must receive equal pay, two
hundred BBC women have made complaints only to be told repeatedly there is no pay
discrimination in the company. Gracie asks: “Can we all be wrong?”. BBC, a model
public broadcasting assumed as a standard across the world, must face accusations of
illegally perpetrating an unequal system of gender pay gap.
January 2018. e International Women’s Media Foundation launches a new global
campaign: “Make 2018 the year we endthe sexual harassment of women journalists!”,
while Madrid-basedPlatform for the Defence of Free Expression(PDLI) announces
the creation of an observatory to monitor the harassment of female journalists on
social media in Spain, in cooperation with the Spanish Federation of Journalist Unions
(FeSP). Referring to a study conducted by the Oce of the Representative on Freedom
of the Media of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OCSE
2016), the PDLI denounces the harassment of female journalists as a growing threat
to free expression. According to the study, hate speech online, extremely aggressive
verbal tones and violent threats increasingly aect female journalists: A reection of
profoundly misogynous attitudes that social media can easily amplify, too oen end-
ing up threatening and silencing women who occupy positions where from they can
make their voices heard.
e above-mentioned events are but the latest evidence in a long trajectory of
gender inequalities that have involved the media and have been denounced for dec-
ades: the media have been exposed as a system where inequality between women and
men can easily lead to abusive behaviours; the media contribute to framing/silencing
inequality issues on the agenda; and the media, especially digital, are being used to
mobilize against the persistence of patriarchal norms and structures, from Cinecittà
to Hollywood.4 A chain of old and new inequalities that today seems to gain renewed
a-la-liberte-sexuelle_5239134_3232.html#eaS2UVg9T1IXi0cj.99. In Italy a joint statement – entitled
“Dissenso comune” (Common dissent) – was released on February 1, 2018, by 120 women from the
communication and movie industry, denouncing the system of gender inequalities in the country;
and calling on all women to rewrite spaces of work and create a society able to reect new equilibrium
between women and men.
3. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/08/carrie-gracie-letter-in-full.
4. World known presenter and actress Oprah Winfrey, in accepting the Cecil B. DeMille Award at Sunday’s
Golden Globe Awards in Beverly Hills, California, expressed her gratitude to all the women who have
endured years of abuse and assault, and have not been heard or believed if they dared to speak their
truth to the power of those men. e media across the globe has re-launched her call “eir time is
u p .”
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
161
public recognition. As Denis McQuail states in his chapter in this volume, “dierential
representation of women treats women as inferiors to male protagonists or just as
invisible”. He continues that, in relation to gender, the notion “equality” is problematic
since “the reality of most societies has involved discrimination against women”. In the
same vein, Hannu Nieminen in this volume highlights the importance of digitization
as generating new forms and modalities of inequality that are still overlooked.
Gender inequalities and the media
Indeed “inequality” has been a major concern for feminist media scholars for decades,
resulting in a consolidated subeld in media studies that has explored media content,
as well as media operations and structures, working cultures and technological devel-
opments. Studies have been conducted across regions, cultural contexts and media
genres. Issues of representation, working conditions, pay gaps, participation in decision-
making roles have been explored and critically analysed (Byerly, 2012; Carter, Steiner
& McLaughlin, 2014; Gallagher, 2005, 2014; McLaughlin & Carter, 2013; Ross, 2013).
Inequality “through the media” has been investigated in relation to the stereotyped
representation of women, biased portrayal and the use of degrading images and
language in media outlets, formats and genres, since the early ‘70s, from mass media
(Tuchman et al., 1975) to lming characterization (Humm, 1977). Specically focusing
on the news media, data concerning unequal treatment of women and men as sub-
jects in the news have been provided by the world-known Global Media Monitoring
Project since 1995. e latest project Report (GMMP, 2015) once more highlighted
a problematic reality: In 2015, women still made up only 24 per cent of the persons
heard, read about or seen in newspaper, television and radio news, exactly as they did
in 2010. e journalistic gender lens in source selection is not only male centred, but
also skewed towards a certain kind of masculinity when selecting interviewees for all
types of views, from “expert” opinion to “ordinary” person testimonies. Looking for
news practices that may help promoting change, like a focus on issues of concern of
women (as well as other social groups), the GMMP report also highlighted that only 9
per cent of stories overall contained reference to legal rights or policy frameworks and
that only 4 per cent of stories clearly challenged gender stereotypes; a one percentage
point change since 2005.
Inequality “in the media” has been a parallel concern. One of the rst eorts to
document gender inequalities in decision-making was a UNESCO-commissioned
report titled “Women and Media Decision-making: e Invisible Barriers” (Gallagher,
1987). Structural, organizational and behavioural inequalities were again identied
as elements characterizing the sector some ten years later, in a 1995 study across 43
nations, focusing on employment patterns in the media (Gallagher, 1995). In 2005,
women’s experiences of broadcast journalism indicated that despite the numbers
entering the industry, they did not proportionately advance into decision-making
roles (Carter et al., 1998).
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
162
Similar results emerged from a 2012 investigation promoted by the European
Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) across 99 media companies in 28 European
countries. e study showed that women occupy only 16 per cent of the top level
decision-making positions (CEOs or company president) while their participation
in decision-making, at all levels, from CEO to head of unit and board members, is
only 32 per cent on average. e proportion of women in leadership positions tends
to be higher in public media organisations, but signicant dierences are found across
Europe (EIGE, 2013; see also Ross and Padovani, 2017).
Focusing on the world’s regions, the “Global Report on the Status of Women in
the Media” (IWMF 2012) exposed the global dimension of the problem. Examining
more than 500 companies in 59 countries, researchers found that 73 per cent of top
management jobs are occupied by men worldwide. Some regional features and dier-
ences were also highlighted: the highest representation of women in both governance
and top management was found in Eastern Europe (33% and 43%, respectively) and
Nordic Europe (36% and 37%, respectively),5 while in Asia and Oceania women were
barely 13 per cent of those in senior management.
Finally, a study made public by Nordicom in February 2018, titled “e media is
a male business”, reveals that “e leadership of the 100 largest international media
corporations is dominated by men”. Across all major transnational companies – those
that produce content for print, television, lm and online properties, as well as cable
companies that control the distribution of programming and produce content them-
selves – gender inclusiveness in leadership and managerial positions remains a highly
problematic issue: “e male dominance crosses national borders and is visible in all
types of media corporations. On average, 80 per cent of directors are men, 17 per cent
of top management ocers are women and there are only six female CEOs leading
corporations on the top-100 list” (Nordicom, 2018).
ese data show that gender inequalities are a worldwide reality that calls for
renewed eorts in untangling the constellation of factors which systematically “dis-
courage and block women’s entry into the news eld, push those who made it out of
the profession, and keep those who have endured down and siloed in specic roles
away from decision-making and policy-setting positions.” (Melki & Mallat, 2017: 57).
Addressing gender inequalities in and through the media: A global concern
ough loosely dened, “gender equality” has thus become a “master frame” and a “policy
goal” in gender and media scholarship as well as in professional venues. Over the past
twenty-plus years, a growing awareness of the issues at stake is demonstrated by inter-
ventions by federations of public broadcasters, from the European Broadcasting Union’s
“Charter for Equal Opportunities for Women in Broadcasting” adopted in 1995, to the
most recent initiatives launched by the Permanent Conference of Public Broadcasters
5. For an explanation of similar results characterizing very dierent cultural and historical contexts, see
IWMF Report, Chapters 5 and 6.
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
163
in the Mediterranean (COPEAM) and its Gender Equality Commission. International
professional organizations have been created with the specic aim of transforming gen-
dered structures in television, lm, radio and web-based journalism, amongst which the
International Association of Women in Radio & Television (IAWRT), the International
Media Women Foundation (IWMF) and the South African Gender Links.
International unions have also given priority to the need to overcome gender-related
inequalities in the news media, such as the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ),
whose longstanding commitment to gender equality is demonstrated by a number of
publications and toolkits (IFJ 2012; IFJ & UNESCO 2009; IFJ & WACC 2012) and,
most recently, by the appointment of a Gender Council, the work of which has been
ocially included in the IFJ Constitution in 2016.
Regional and international governmental organizations have also been active in
denouncing and contrasting gender inequalities in the media. Alongside a long list
of studies and provisions emanated from European institutions, we can mention the
EIGE’s inclusion of gender and media issues in their follow up to the Beijing Plat-
form for Action and in their Dataset of Good Practices to promote gender equality.6
Furthermore, in the context of the 2030 United Nations Agenda for Sustainable De-
velopment, the UNESCO has developed programs and tools to foster gender equality
in and through the media, including a set of “Gender-sensitive Indicators for Media”
(2012); and UN Women has launched a “Step It Up for Gender Equality Media Com-
pact” 2015, urging major transnational media corporations to disrupt stereotypes and
biases, andincrease the number of women, particularly in leadership and decision-
making functions. Finally, it is worth mentioning the review theme addressed at the
62nd gathering of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW),
in New York in March 2018: “Participation in and access of women to the media, and
information and communications technologies and their impact on and use as an
instrument for the advancement and empowerment of women”.
All these interventions reect a growing awareness of the unequal conditions that
aect women and men, and reproduce gendered relations in the media sector well into
the 21st century. ough some progress has been made over the years, all international
studies (EIGE 2013; GMMP, 2015; IWMF, 2012) highlight the slow pace of change
and the risk of step-backs that prevent the consolidation of equality practices. In this
context, it is to be highlighted that on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of the
Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing in 1995) – where Women and Media
issues were included as one of the priority areas to achieve gender equality in society7
– another international initiative was launched, with the support of UNESCO: a Global
6. See: http://eige.europa.eu/beijing-platform-for-action. Good practices in gender mainstream-
ing in the media sector can be found at: http://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/good-
practices?topic[]=627.
7. Section J of the Beijing Platform for Action addressed the diverse inequality issues aecting women
in the media and included a number of Recommendations for governments, international organiza-
tions, the media themselves and civic organizations. e text can be found at: http://www.un.org/
womenwatch/daw/beijing/pdf/BDPfA%20E.pdf.
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
164
Alliance for Media and Gender (GAMAG) which brings together a plurality of engaged
stakeholders – governmental and non-governmental, professional and academic – and
is conceived as a global movement to promote gender equality in and through media.
One of the outcomes of the GAMAG is an evolving global agenda (IAMCR/
Unesco 2014; IAMCR/GAMAG/Unesco forthcoming 2018). From general concerns
for women’s communication rights to feminist perspectives on communication and
media in digital times, a comprehensive research agenda to tackle ever-changing di-
mensions of inequality is in the making; one that highlights a plurality of issues from
sexualisation and pornography in ICT content, to safety of women journalists oine
and online, gender mainstreaming in broadcasting organisations and women’s political
participation in media, as well as gender-sensitive curricula for media professionals.
Known unknowns about media gender inequalities
Some of these themes have been widely investigated over the past decades, but today
new lenses and approaches are needed to understand current transformations, mostly
due to digital developments and globalization processes. Implications for education
and working conditions in the news-making sector, new skills and abilities needed
in a transformed technological environment, exposure and safety of professionals
through the social media, are all new issues to be explored in their gendered nature.
Other issues, though on the agenda for decades, have attracted limited attention,
both in scholarly circles and in the practice of media companies and institutional
actors. Amongst these are the nexus between media gender inequalities and policy
interventions at dierent levels. Interestingly, these aspects are today widely referred
to in ocial documents and debates. In response to this widespread call for specic
attention on policy aspects, we argue that theoretically sound and comprehensive ana-
lytical frameworks are needed to acquire proper understanding of the “what, why and
how” of regulatory arrangements (Padovani, 2014a, 2018; Padovani & Pavan, 2017).
In the following paragraphs we focus on two aspects, with the aim of fostering
a better understanding of how gender unequal relations are reproduced and trans-
formed in contemporary media: the impact and implications of digital technologies
in relation to working conditions are discussed in the next paragraph, while issues
concerning the adoption of regulatory measures are elaborated upon in the following
one, providing an account of policy-related research, current debates and practices
in a multi-level perspective.
In this way, we address two of the underlying questions addressed in this collec-
tion, with a focus on gendered relations: What role do digital technologies play in
creating and/or reducing inequalities? In what way and to what extent do media and
communication (policies), in dierent countries and regions, contribute to overcom-
ing inequalities?
In elaborating on the two aspects, we aim at contributing to the above-mentioned
research agenda. We also acknowledge some of the many good practices that have
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
165
been elaborated to foster gender equality, specically in the areas of digital news mak-
ing and of policy formulation. In the concluding remarks, we propose an analytical
framework that may help positioning the two aspects discussed in this chapter in the
broader context of media inequalities analysis; a framework that invites addressing
dierent dimensions of inequality at their intersections, while stressing the centrality
of policy interventions in the search for sustainable solutions.
Gender inequalities revised: Participation and working
conditions related to digital skills and data journalism
When studying working conditions and participation in news production from a gen-
der perspective, it is important to take into account transitions in the news industry
(Fenton, 2010; Paulussen & Ugille, 2010; Usher, 2015). ese trends had an impact on
the routines, professional practices and work environment of journalists (Liu, 2006; Mc-
Chesney, 2004; McNair, 1998). It has been repeatedly demonstrated that the intensied
work regime combined with the arrival of digital technologies results in an increased
demand for multi-skilled journalists that can produce content for print, audio-visual,
and online platforms (Quinn & Filak, 2005; Vergeer, Pleijter & Hermans, 2011). Al-
though technological innovation cannot be considered the sole driver of change, its
impact on dierent layers of the journalistic profession cannot be underestimated
(Compton, 2010). is part of the chapter dierentiates between two consequences
related to digitalization and oers insight into their gendered repercussions.
First, technological changes in the production process have inuenced journalists’
routines and working conditions in general. Journalism scholars have focused on the
adoption of technology in newsrooms (Boczkowski, 2004; Garrison, 2001; Maier, 2000).
ese studies have shown that there is a growing demand for digital skills such as basic
or more advanced computer skills, social media skills, audio-visual editing, and mobile
technology skills. Second, in an increasingly digitalized context, technologically driven
forms of journalism have emerged. Data journalism is one of these forms, situated be-
tween journalism and the computer eld (Borges-Rey, 2016; Fink & Anderson, 2015;
Gynnild, 2014; Stavelin, 2013). In data journalism, “traditional journalistic working
methods are mixed with data analysis, programming and visualization techniques”
(Nygren, Appelgren & Huttenrauch, 2012, as cited in Appelgren & Nygren, 2014:
394). Characteristic of data journalism is its multifaceted interactions with the eld of
computer sciences (Weber & Rall, 2012; Lewis & Usher, 2014). is interaction results
in an exchange of cultural values between data journalism and the computer eld.
It is necessary to ask questions about the gender aspects of technological innovation
in the profession. e eld of feminist technology studies has considered the relation-
ship of gender and technology (Bray, 2007; Bury, 2011; Faulkner, 2001; Valgaeren,
2001; Wajcman, 2007; Youngs, 2005); and we build on those studies to gain insight
into the gender dimensions of the consequences related to technological innovation in
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
166
journalism. is part of the chapter is based on a PhD research on the gender dimen-
sions of technological innovation in journalism, based on qualitative interviews with
a cross-national sample of 27 journalists from dierent generations, media sectors,
and positions that had varying levels of digital expertise (De Vuyst, 2016).
Digital skills
Technological innovation oers both challenges and opportunities for female journalists.
First, digital skills are increasingly important in journalism in general. Particularly more
advanced ICT skills related to programming, coding and data visualization, are associ-
ated with high levels of status. Both the evaluation and accumulation of digital skills
appear to be gendered (De Vuyst & Raeymaeckers, 2017). Several female interviewees
had experienced that their digital skills are evaluated based on a gender binary. eir
technological competence was oen doubted and they had the feeling that they had
to prove their digital skills twice as much as their male colleagues. is is in line with
previous research on women in the ICT sector that shows that ICT skills are gendered
based on the stereotype that men are “naturally” more technologically competent than
women (Faulkner, 2001; Henwood, 1998). Also female journalists oen took a subject
position of lower self-condence towards digital skills than their male colleagues.
Furthermore, the study indicated that the accumulation of digital skills is also
gendered (De Vuyst & Raeymaeckers, 2017). e majority of the participants had not
gained their digital expertise through traditional journalism education, but through
self-study, for example, by participating in online courses, hackathons, and evening
classes. Participation demanded an additional time investment aer working hours.
For several female interviewees, the dicult combination of a disproportional share
of the household tasks with a job in journalism prevented them from staying up to
date with all the latest innovations.
Data journalism
e gender perspective in data journalism is double. On the one hand, several inter-
viewed data journalists had the impression that data journalism is a new eld that
was still open to everyone – regardless of gender (De Vuyst, 2018). ey believed that
digital skills were more important than personal network relationships for entering and
building a career in data journalism. is had gendered consequences. First, several
women entered data journalism to avoid barriers that limited their opportunities in
traditional journalism (Melin, 2008), for example, the old boy’s network, the gendered
division of news topics and sexism.
On the other hand, data journalism was not completely free of gender-related
obstacles. Positions and roles in data journalism were considered gendered. As the
participants in the research described: coding and development are still perceived as
“the geeky part” of data journalism, and geeky implies less access for women. is is
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
167
in line with oered explanations for the underrepresentation of women in the com-
puter eld, in the sense that it is associated with a geek mythology, which is not in
accordance with the female gender role (Corneliussen, 2014; Margolis & Fisher, 2002;
Rasmussen & Håpnes, 1991; Turkle, 1984). One could suppose that the traditional
glass ceiling is accompanied by the implications of a coding ceiling (De Vuyst, 2018).
Empowerment through technology
Nevertheless, female interviewees also described strategies in relation to digital skills
that are aimed at improving their status in the profession (De Vuyst, 2018; De Vuyst
& Raeymaeckers, 2017). Some female journalists were expressing their passion for
technology and demonstrating their skills in ways that did not conform to traditional
gender expectations. ey were aiming for empowerment through technology. In
these networks, female journalists collaborated with women in the computer eld to
increase their digital skills and break stereotypes. e experience of similar gender bar-
riers created a sense of solidarity and a spirit of emancipation. e advantages of these
initiatives are not only related to the digital training possibilities, but also to the positive
impact and self-condence building of female journalists towards digital technology.
Media gender inequalities: Searching for policy interventions
Since the Beijing Conference in 1995, developing gender-aware media policies has
been indicated as one of the steps to be taken in order to meet the goals of Section J of
the Beijing Platform for Action (PfA): Namely, promoting equal access to the media
and decision-making (J1), and eliminating gender stereotypes in media content (J2).
e Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA) called upon governments and other actors to
promote “an active policy of mainstreaming of a gender perspective in (media) policies
and programs” (par. 237). Furthermore, it called for media organizations themselves
to “elaborate and strengthen self-regulatory mechanisms and codes of conduct” to
comply with the objectives in Section J (par. 236 and 244.a/b). ose recommenda-
tions have been restated on various international occasions, from the Commission on
the Status of Women8 to the World Summit on Information Society.9
8. At its 47th meeting, in March 2003, the Commission on the Status of Women, highlighted the risk that
gender “dierences (in representation, access and use of media and information technologies) have
important implications for policy development at national, regional and international levels (CSW47
2003_Final, par. 2). In its nal Report, the Commission indicated, as a very rst Recommendation for
action, that of ensuring “women’s early and full participation in the development and implementation of
national policies, legislation, … strategies and regulatory and technical instruments in the eld of informa-
tion and communication technologies (ICT) and media and communications” while creating adequate
“monitoring and accountability mechanisms to ensure implementation of gender-sensitive policies and
regulations as well as to analyse the gender impact of such policies” (CSW47 2003_Final, par. 4a).
9. See the WSIS “Plan of Action” adopted in Geneva in December 2003, par. C6 Enabling Environ-
ments: “Governments, in collaboration with stakeholders, are encouraged to formulate conducive
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
168
In spite of such explicit recognition of the centrality of regulatory arrangements
to promote and sustain gender equality in the media and ICTs, the recommendations
made since Beijing have been widely disregarded by policy and media actors alike
across the world’s regions and policy levels (Padovani & Pavan 2017).
What policies for media gender equality?
A few scholars have adopted a gender lens when focusing on supranational debates
around media and communication, and resulting policy documents (Gallagher, 2005,
2008, 2011, 2014; Jensen, 2008, 2010, 2013). Reecting on events such as the Beijing
Conference, UNESCO-promoted initiatives or the United Nations World Summit
on the Information Society (WSIS), they have highlighted the main areas of concern
expressed on those circles, i.e. how gender issues are framed; persisting stereotyped
depictions of men and women in media and ICT content; increase in online porno-
graphic materials; the need for broad dissemination of information about women’s
rights, and of orienting the media and ICTs towards values such as respect and non-
discrimination; the need to build infrastructure and communications networks that
benet women; and concerns about education, training and career development.
Critical reections have also highlighted gender gaps in the very conduct of inter-
national encounters, as well as their implication for the design of policy interventions.
ey have done so by highlighting the lack of women presence, voices and expertise; a
prevailing rhetorical reference to “women’s issue”, and a limited understanding of the
structural gender inequalities that characterize the media; the lack of sex disaggregated
data upon which informed recommendations should be made, and of gender-sensitive
analysis of the social, cultural and economic situations that aect media access e use;
diculties in acknowledging gender dierences in the ideation, implementation and
evaluation phases of media and ICT policies (Drossou & Jensen 2003-2005; Doria
2015; Gurumurthy & Chami 2010, 2014).
At the level of the European Union, recent studies have highlighted how policy-
making related to the media and audio-visual industries, as well as to digital devel-
opments, has been characterized by a lack of attention to gender (equality) issues
(Padovani, 2016). Furthermore, in spite of the many interventions carried out by
European institutions to tackle issues of stereotypical representation in media and
advertising, and equal access to decision-making positions in the sector, the European
Commission, the European Council and the European Parliament have oen addressed
the problems on the basis of dierent, and sometimes contrasting, priorities (Ross
& Padovani, 2017). Negotiation between conicting values – in particular gender
equality and mainstreaming10 versus freedom of expression – have oen prevented
ICT policies that foster entrepreneurship, innovation and investment, and with particular reference
to the promotion of participation by women”. Accessible at: http://www.itu.int/net/wsis/documents/
doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=1161|1160.
10. Proposed as a transformative approach to gender inequalities since the Beijing Conference, “gender
mainstreaming” has been considered an “organizing principle” to ensure that decision-making takes
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
169
placing gender-related issues at the core of media policy initiatives (Gallagher, 2011),
while “so measures” – essentially recommendations to media organizations to adopt
self-regulatory measures – have been the main result of policy interventions (Sarikakis
& Nguyen, 2009).
Comprehensive and comparative research at the national level is yet to be conducted
in order to assess the extent to which gender mainstreaming has been implemented
in media policies, and how far national strategies for gender equality acknowledge
the centrality of the media and digital technologies. In this respect, only preliminary
ndings of a “Global Survey on Gender and Media” (UNESCO, 2016) are available,
showing that just 35 per cent of world governments have integrated gender in their
national media policies and programs.
An explicit commitment of independent media regulatory authorities would also
be relevant to the politics of media gender equality. Initial attempts to map good
practices,11 including those carried out by regulatory bodies, result in a problematic
picture of the extent to which such entities explicitly assume gender equality as a
core component of their mandate. A meaningful exception in this area is the Réseau
Francophone des Régulateurs des Médias, which conducted a comparative study of
the policies and measures on gender equality promoted by member regulators (RE-
FRAM, 2011), resulting in the adoption of a Declaration for Equality Between Men
and Women in the Audiovisual Media.
Finally, internally adopted policies by media organizations are to be considered:
Voluntary measures such as gender-equality plans, policies for maternal and paternal
leave, policies to contrast sexual harassment, codes of conduct that dene the basic
principles and goals according to which gender-aware media should operate, and
sometimes establish, support mechanisms. ese aspects have been investigated in
recent international studies.
According to the EIGE study on Advancing gender equality in decision-making in
media industries (EIGE, 2013), only 26 per cent of selected ninety-nine media organiza-
tions across Europe (including all public broadcasters and major private companies)
have a gender equality policy or code of conduct in place; 21 per cent have equality of
opportunities or diversity policies (EIGE, 2013: 37; Ostlin & Nenadich 2017).
Similarly, the Global Report on the Status of Women in the Media (IWMF, 2012),
reported that slightly more than half of the 522 surveyed companies across the world
into account men’s and women’s dierent interests and needs (Wiener 2007); and dened as “e
systematic integration of the respective situations, priorities and needs of women and men in all
policies and with a view to promoting equality between women and men and mobilizing all general
policies and measures specically for the purpose of achieving equality by actively and openly tak-
ing into account, at the planning stage, their eects on the respective situations of women and men
in implementation, monitoring and evaluation” (European Commission COM(96)67 nal). For
a discussion on its application in European communication/digital strategies, see Padovani 2016.
11. We refer to an EU-funder project entitled “Advancing Gender Equality in Media Industries” (AGEMI)
the aim of which is to disseminate good practices for gender equality in the media; and to a series of
policy-relevant good practices collected in the context of another EU-funded project called “Med-
Media” aimed at supporting media reforms in the Southern Mediterranean region.
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
170
have an established company-wide policy on gender equity. e average masks very
dierent situations: from 16 per cent policy adoption in Eastern Europe to 69 per cent
in Sub-Saharan Africa and Western Europe. Some regions, including Eastern Europe
and Southern Africa, show quite consistent patterns in the adoption of policy measures
and support mechanisms at the organizational level; while meaningful internal vari-
ability characterizes other regions, like the Americas, the Middle East and North Africa.
Circumstances within each geo-cultural context – such as gender-related cultural
orientation and traditions, the existence of national equity normative frameworks, the
status of women in society, and women’s empowerment (IWMF, 2011: 34) – may play
a role in fostering policy adoption, but are yet to be investigated. e same goes for
the relationship between national laws and workplace policies, as well as the possible
impact of internal measures’ adoption on more gender equal media performance.12
Why gender-responsive media policies?
e existence of legal frameworks at the national level, or of self-regulatory measures
and support mechanisms within media organizations, suggest that institutions and
the media acknowledge gender inequalities and put in place instruments to address
them. On the contrary, the low level of adoption reects either a gender-neutral ap-
proach – where the media intend to operate on the basis of merit and do not feel it
necessary to do anything which advantages women – or, more oen, a gender-blind
approach – where media organizations believe they do not have a problem with dis-
crimination (EIGE, 2013: 38).
Beyond signaling stakeholders’ commitment, the adoption of regulatory measures
can also anticipate and foster change. Within media organizations, formally adopted
equality policies and support mechanisms are core to dene principles and goals, and
also provide a framework to assess progress (Gallagher, 2011, 2014, 2017). National-
level media policies are necessary means to promote the cultural transformation that
would lead to a more equal redistribution of material as well as symbolic resources
(Chaher, 2014). International normative frameworks that articulate gender equality
for both traditional and digital media can be key towards mainstreaming gender in
communication governing arrangements (Padovani, 2014b). Moreover, in a situa-
tion where it is clear that progress is not a linear process and step-backs are always a
possibility (GMMP, 2015), policy measures can contribute to guarantee sustainability
of positive achievements in more equal gender relations over time by establishing
sanctioning elements (Gallagher, 2011, 2017). At the same time, it is to be noted that
policy formulation and adoption may become a challenge to mainstreaming gender
equality: too oen policies and program are adopted, but implementation remains
12. Initial explorations in this directions are being made in the context of a Swedish Council of Research-
funded international projects – Comparing Gender and Media Equality across the Globe (info at:
https://jmg.gu.se) – where datasets from dierent international projects have been consolidated in a
single database, for the rst time allowing investigating possible correlations between dierent vari-
ables concerning gender inequality in the media. Resulting publications are expected by 2019.
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
171
weak. is may be due to limited eort in accompanying formal provisions with sup-
port measures like mentoring or monitoring programs, training of managerial sta,
the establishment of gender councils. Other times, formal measures are the result of
a state’s or organization’s commitment to normative frameworks, but no serious con-
sideration is given to the needed transformation of organizational cultures. Moreover,
when policies are in place a “normalization” eect may intervene, and no further
commitments are made to make gender mainstreaming a reality (EIGE, 2013; IWMF,
2012; Ross & Padovani, 2017).
erefore, persistence of gender inequality patterns and the limited knowledge
acquired to date on the policy dimension, invite a better understanding of the relevance
of policy in meeting the goal of gender equality in and through the media. Aspects that
would require further investigation include: e extent of policy adoption and related
constrains; the roles and interests of dierent stakeholders in fostering regulatory ar-
rangements (see Chaher, 2014; Von Lurzer, 2017); the discursive frames according to
which gender inequalities are addressed in policy documents (Lombardo & Meier,
2009); the tension between conicting principles that guide media operations (Gal-
lagher, 2011); and the actual implementation of those principles and provisions (Engeli
et al., 2015). More research – focused, transnational, and comparative – is needed
to gain a comprehensive understanding of how policies relate to gender equality in
practice, in dierent geo-cultural and socio-economic contexts.
What’s next?
Future research to better understand (digital) media gendered realities and policy
design to counter inequalities, should first acknowledge that both “gender” and
“equality” are highly contested concepts, and the very meaning of “gender equality” is
transformed according to the context of use (Verloo, 2007; Lombardo & Meier, 2009).
Even in the media eld, there is no agreed upon denition of what “gender equality”
means: e problem is raised, the plural dimensions of inequality aecting women in
the sector are highlighted, but the two key concepts are seldom problematized. “Gender
equality” oen ends up being used as a buzzword whose meaning is taken for granted,
while dierent understandings characterize the use of the concept by dierent actors.
is situation, and conceptual gap, may limit the possibility to design and implement
adequate solutions. Eorts should therefore be made to problematize concepts and
policy issues (Bacchi 1999, 2012), and to acknowledge, for instance, the contribution
of intersectional scholarship (Collins, 2015; Crenshaw, 1989; Hancock, 2007) that
invite due consideration for the multiple and intersecting axes of domination that
constitute unequal relations in the media environment.
Secondly, theoretically grounded denitions should be elaborated in support of
both research and policy interventions. Positioning our contribution in a tradition
of “gender policy analysis” that looks at structural dynamics of unequal gendered
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
172
relations in society,13 we hereby propose an operational denition of media gender
equality that may guide future research:
A condition whereby equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities in the media and
communication environment are enjoyed by every person, irrespective of their sex,
and in due consideration of the multiple intersections between gendered relations
and other axes of unequal power relations, based on ethnicity, age, class or sexual
orientation. Gender equality in and through the media and ICT is, therefore, a goal
for policy interventions – including the adoption of codes and standards, formal
and informal governing arrangements – at the level of individual media, national
laws and regulation, supranational agreements and transnational advocacy eorts.
Such interventions should consider the interplay of dierent dimensions of gender
inequality, including content and representation of women and men, participation
and access to infrastructures and managerial positions, work and nancial resources,
information and knowledge, education and violence.14
is denition oers a basis from which to interrogate both research and policy in-
terventions as to their capacity to reect and address the multiplicity of interrelated
gendered practices and meanings (Walby, 2009), thus focusing on processes that
characterize, produce, reproduce or challenge gender disparities in the media domain.
As a contribution to future analyses, we also propose to think of these systems
of practices, meanings, and processes as media gender equality regimes (Padovani,
2018). Bridging International Relation theory (Krasner, 1992; Onuf, 1989) and
Gender Studies (Connell, 2009; Walby, 2004, 2009; Kardam, 2004), the “regime”
concept invites moving beyond considering the statistical and numerical evidence
of unequal experiences of women and men, to also acknowledge and address the
underlying and multiple power relations that can be found in societies and insti-
tutions, including the media sector, and the relevance of policy formulation and
adoption therein. In fact, adopting a media gender equality regimes approach oers
a threefold opportunity.
First, gender inequalities in the media persist in areas of representation and rec-
ognition, access and inclusion, working conditions and decision-making, education
13. Gender analysis understands gender as socially constructed relations, and addresses the challenges of
unequal gender structures and norms, while questioning systemic causes of unequal power relations
between women and men, also incorporating a multidimensional character of gender (Kantola &
Lombardo, 2017).
14. It goes beyond the scope of this chapter to address this denitional issue in depth. Further reections
can be found in Padovani (2018). Suce here to say that the proposed denition includes dierent
elements that are deemed important to deal with a concept that is widely used, value-laden but seldom
problematized in its potential for politicizing inequality issues across the media and related policies.
ese elements are: a broad understanding of ‘media’; a multi-actor perspective to indicate the plurality
of spheres and responsibilities involved in fostering gender equality; a recognition of the dual nature
of the concept, that is/can be used in descriptive as well as prescriptive terms; the multi-dimensional
nature of gender inequalities as they are reproduced across the media; the need to ultimately address
structural unequal power relations, thus adopting a transformative perspective.
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
173
and violence, but they are rarely investigated, nor addressed, in their intersection
(Djerf-Pierre, 2011). A media gender equality regimes approach allows focusing not on
single, specic forms of inequality, but on the interplay and intersection of multiple
forms of privilege and disadvantage (Connell, 2009). In this sense, future investiga-
tions engaging with the potential of digital technologies to overcome or/and reproduce
gender inequalities could consider the impact and implication of the digital on multiple
dimensions of (in)equality.
Second, as regimes are bound together by “implicit or explicit principles, norms,
rules and decision-making procedures around which actors’ expectations converge …”
(Krasner, 1982), the centrality of regulatory elements in media gender equality regimes
becomes evident. In this perspective, the ideation, design, development, adoption and
implementation of governing arrangements for the media – from public policies, to
formal provisions and programs adopted at the level of individual media companies
– should be assessed in terms of their gender-responsiveness; consistently with the
Beijing Plan for Action.
ird, media gender equality regimes should be operationalized and empirically
explored, at any one level of media policy identied above. e practices and pro-
cesses that reproduce gender disparities in the media sector can be investigated at
the supranational as well as at the national level, as well as the principles and norms,
and regulatory arrangements adopted by media organizations, national parliaments,
transnational networks responsible for dening normative frameworks for the media,
traditional and digital.
As we search for new ground to enrich and innovate a long tradition of scholarly
work, media gender equality regimes may provide a useful analytical tool towards a
next generation of policy-aware media gender in-/equality studies.
References
Appelgren, E. & Nygren, G. (2014). Data journalism in Sweden: Introducing new methods and genres of
journalism into ‘old’ organizations’. Digital Journalism, 2(3), 394-405.
Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, policy and politics: e construction of policy problems. London: Sage.
Bacchi, C. (2012). Why Study Problematizations? Making Politics Visible. Open Journal of Political Sci-
ence, 2(1): 1-8.
Boczkowski, P. J. (2004). Digitizing the news: Innovation in online newspapers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Borges-Rey, E. (2016). Unravelling data journalism: A study of data journalism practice in British news-
rooms. Journalism Practice, 10(7), pp. 833-843.
Bray, F. (2007). Gender and technology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 36(1), 37-53.
Bury, R. (2011). She’s geeky: e performance of identity among women working in IT. International Journal
of Gender, Science and Technology, 3(1), 33-53.
Byerly, C. (2012). e geography of women and media scholarship. In K. Ross (ed.), Handbook of gender,
sex and media (pp. 3-19). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
Carter C., Steiner, L. & McLaughling, L. (2014). e Routledge Companion to Media and Gender. Abingdon
and NY: Routledge.
Carter C., Steiner L. & McLaughlin, L. (2014). Introduction. In C. Carter, L. Steiner & L. McLaughlin (eds.),
e Routledge companion to media and gender (pp. 1-20). Abingdon and NY: Routledge.
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
174
Carter C., Branston G. & Stuart, A. (1989). News, gender and power. London and New York: Routledge.
Chaher, S. (ed.) (2014) Public policies on communication and gender in Latin America: e path ahead of us.
Asociación Civil Comunicación para la Igualdad (English text: pp. 98-192). Retrieved from http://
www.defensadelpublico.gob.ar/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Libro-Chaher.pdf?platform=hootsuite.
[accessed 2018, June 20].
Collins, P. H.(2015). Intersectionality’s denitional dilemmas.Annual Review of Sociology.Annual Re-
views.41: 1-20.
Connell, R.W. (2009). Gender. Malden MA: Polity.
Committee for Economic Development (2012). Fullling the promise: How more women on corporate boards
would make America and American companies more competitive. Washington, DC: CED.
Compton, J. R. (2010). Newspapers, labor and the ux of economic uncertainty. In S. Allan (ed.), e
Routledge companion to news and journalism studies (pp. 591-601). New York, NY: Routledge.
Corneliussen, H. G. (2014). Making the invisible become visible: Recognizing women’s relationship with
technology. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 6(2): 209-222.
Crenshaw, K.(1989).Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of anti-
discrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics.University of Chicago Legal Forum,
1989(1), 139-168.
Council of Europe, Steering Committee CDEG (2011). Women and journalist rst: A challenge to media
professionals to realize democracy in practice, quality in journalism and an end to gender stereotyping.
Geneva, Switzerland: CDEG.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (2011). Women on boards. London, UK: BiS.
Djerf-Pierre, M. (2011). e dierence engine. Feminist Media Studies, 11(1), 43-51.
Doria, A. (2015). Rights, gender and internet governance. APC Issue Papers. Retrieved from https://www.apc.
org/en/pubs/women%E2%80%99s-rights-gender-and-internet-governance. [accessed 2018, June 20].
Drossou, O. & Jensen, H. (eds.) (2003 & 2005). Visions in Process II. e World Summit on
the Information Society 2003-2005. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Foundation.
De Vuyst (2016). Hacking gender in journalism: A multi-method study on gender issues in the rapidly chang-
ing and digitalized eld of news production. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ghent University,
Ghent, Belgium.
De Vuyst, S. (2018). Cracking the coding ceiling: Looking at gender construction in data journalism from
a eld theory perspective. Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies, 7(2): 387-405.
De Vuyst, S. & Raeymaeckers, K. (2017). Is journalism gender e-qual?, Digital Journalism, doi: http://doi.
org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1369357.
Engeli, I., Lovenduski, J., Mazur, A.G. & Campbell, R. (2015). Taking policy success seriously: e gendering
equality policy in practice approach. Paper prepared for the European conference on gender politics,
Uppsala Sweden, June 2015.
European Broadcasting Union (1995). Charter for equal opportunities for women in broadcasting. EBU.
Retrieved from http://www.moh.be/TextEBUCharter.jpg. [accessed 2018, June 20].
European Commission (2010). More women in senior positions – key to economic stability and growth.
Luxembourg: European Commission.
European Commission Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men (2010). Opinion
on “Breaking gender stereotypes in the media”. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
European Institute for Gender Equality (2013). Review of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for
Action in the EU member states: Women and the media: advancing gender equality in decision-making
in media organisations. Luxembourg: Publications Oce of the European Union.
Faulkner, W. (2001). e technology question in feminism: A view from feminist technology studies.
Women’s Studies International Forum, 24(1): 79-95.
Fenton, N. (2010). News in the digital age. In S. Allan (ed.), e Routledge companion to news and journal-
ism studies (pp. 557-567). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fink, K. & Anderson, C. W. (2015). Data journalism in the United States: Beyond the usual suspects.
Journalism Studies, 16(4): 467-481.
Gallagher, M. (1987). Introduction. In UNESCO (ed.), Women in media decision-making: e invisible
barriers (pp. 11-15). Paris, France: UNESCO.
Gallagher, M. (1995). An unnished story: Gender patterns in media employment. Paris, France: UNESCO
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
175
Gallagher, M. (2005). Feminist media perspectives. In A. N. Valdivia (ed.), A companion to media studies
(pp. 19-39). Malden, MA: Wyley Blackwell.
Gallagher, M. (2008). Feminist issues in the global media system. In L. Shade & K. Sarikakis (eds.), Feminist
interventions in international communication: Minding the gap (pp. 17-32). Lanham, MD: Rowman
and Littleeld.
Gallagher, M. (2011). Gender and communication policy: Struggling for space. In R. Mansell & M. Raboy
(eds.), e Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy (pp. 451-66). Oxford, UK: Wiley-
Blackwell.
Gallagher, M. (2014). Feminist scholarship and the debates on gender and communication. In A. V. Montiel
(ed.), Media and gender: A scholarly agenda for the global alliance on media and gender (pp. 12-16).
Paris, France: UNESCO.
Garrison, B. (2001). Diusion of online information technologies in newspaper newsrooms. Journalism,
2(2), pp. 221-239.
Gurumurthy, A. & Chami, N. (2014). Gender equality in the information society: IT for change. Retrieved
from https://itforchange.net/sites/default/les/2017-06/nal-policy-brief.pdf [accessed 2018, June
2018].
Gynnild, A. (2014). Journalism innovation leads to innovation journalism: e impact of computational
exploration on changing mindsets. Journalism, 15(6): 713-730.
Hancock, A. (2007). Intersectionality as a normative and empirical paradigm.Politics & Gender.Cambridge
Journals,3(2): 248-254.
Henwood, F. (1998). Engineering dierence: Discourses on gender, sexuality and work in a college of
technology. Gender and Education, 10(1): 35-49.
Humm, M. (1997). Feminism and lm. Edinburgh, Ireland: Edinburgh University Press.
International Federation of Journalists (2009). Getting the balance right: Gender equality in journalism.
Brussels, Belgium: IFJ.
International Federation of Journalists (2012). A handbook of gender equality best practices in the European
Union. Brussels, Belgium: International/ European Federation of Journalists.
International Federation of Journalists and World Association for Christian Communication (2012). Learning
Resource Kit on Gender Ethical Journalism. Accessed on June 20, 2018: Retrieved from http://whomakes-
thenews.org/articles/learning-resource-kit-for-gender-ethical-journalism. [accessed 2018, June 20].
IWMF (2011). Global report on the status of women in the news media, Washington, DC: International
Women’s Media Foundation.
Kantola, J. & Lombardo, E. (2016). Gender and political analysis. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Kardam, N. (2004). e emerging global gender equality regime from neoliberal and constructivist perspec-
tives in international relations. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 6(1): 85-109
Lewis, S. G. & Usher, N (2014). Code, collaboration, and the future of journalism: A case study of the Hacks/
Hackers global network. Digital Journalism, 2(3): 383-393.
Liu, C. (2006). De-skilling eects on journalists: ICTs and the labour process of Taiwanese newspaper
reporters. Canadian Journal of Communication, 31(3): 695-714.
Lombardo, E. & Meier P. (2009). Framing gender equality in the European Union political discourse. Social
Politics 15(1): 101-129.
Maier, S. (2000). Digital diusion in newsrooms: e uneven advance of computer-assisted reporting,
Newspaper Research Journal, 21(2): 95-110.
Margolis, J. & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge, MA: e MIT
Press.
McChesney, R. W. (2004). e problem of the media. New York, NY: Monthly Review Books.
McLaughling, L. & Carter, C. (2013). Current perspectives in feminist media studies. New York, NY:
Routledge.
McNair, B. (1998). e sociology of journalism. London, UK: Arnold.
Melin, M. (2008). Gendered journalism cultures: Strategies and tactics in the eld of journalism in Britain
and Sweden. Gothenburg: JMG, University of Gothenburg.
Melki, J. P. & Mallat, S. E. (2016). Block her entry, keep her down and push her out. Journalism Studies,
17(1): 57-79.
CLAUDIA PADOVANI, KARIN RAEYMAECKERS & SARA DE VUYST
176
Nordicom (2018). e media is a male business. Retrieved from http://www.nordicom.gu.se/en/latest/
news/media-male-business. [accessed 2018, June 20].
OCSE (2016). New challenges to freedom of expression: Countering online abuse of female journalists.
Retrieved from http://www.osce.org/fom/220411?download=true. [accessed 2018, June 20].
Ostling, A. & Nenadich, I. (2017). Public service media in Europe: Gender equality policies and the repre-
sentation of women in decision-making roles’. Comunicazione politica,18(2): 209-232.
Padovani, C. (2014a). Gaps in media and communication governance: Towards a gender-aware research
and advocacy agenda. In A. V. Montiel (ed.), Media and Gender: A scholarly agenda for the Global
Alliance on Media and Gender (pp. 66-73). Paris, France: UNESCO.
Padovani, C. (2014b). Speaking truth to power about gender and communication: International and regional
policy developments towards Beijing+20. Feminist Media Studies, 4(2): 318-337.
Padovani, C. (2016). Gendering the European digital agenda: e challenge of gender mainstreaming twenty
years aer the Beijing World Conference on Women. Journal of Information Policy, pp. 403-435.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.6.issue-2016. [accessed 2018, June 20].
Padovani, C. (2018). Gendering media policy research and communication governance. Javnost – e Public.
Journal of the European Institute for Communication and Culture, 25(1-2): 256-264.
Padovani, C. & Pavan, E. (2017). e politics of media gender equality: Lessons learned and struggles
for change twenty years aer the Beijing Fourth World Conference on Women. Comunicazione
politica,18(2), 177-190.
Paulussen, S. & Ugille, P. (2010). Working conditions in the Flemish press. In S. Paulussen & K. Raeymae-
ckers (eds.), Journalisten: Proel van een beroepsgroep (pp. 53-66). Tielt, Belgium: Uitgeverij Lannoo.
Quinn, S. & Filak, V. (2005). Convergent journalism: An introduction. Amsterdam, e Netherlands: Focal
Press.
Rasmussen, B. & Håpnes, T. (1991). Excluding women from the technologies of the future? A case study
of the culture of computer science. Futures, 23(10): 1107-1119.
Ross, K. (2013). Gender and media: A very short herstory. In P. Simonson, J. Peck, & R. Craig (eds.), e
handbook of communication history (pp 347-360). New York, NY, London, UK: Routledge.
Ross, K. & Padovani, C. (2017). Gender equality and the media: A challenge for Europe. London and New
York: Routledge.
Sarikakis, K. & Nguyen, E. T. (2009). e trouble with gender: Media policy and gender mainstreaming in
the European Union. Journal of European Integration, 31(2): 201-216.
Stavelin, E. (2013). Computational journalism: When journalism meets programming. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Tuchman, G. (1975). e symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. In G. Tuchman, A. K. Daniels
& J. Benét (eds.), Hearth and home: Images of women in the mass media (pp. 3-38). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Turkle, S. (1984). Computational reticence: Why women fear the intimate machine. In C. Kramarae (ed.),
Technology and women’s voices (pp. 41-61). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
UNESCO (2012). Gender Sensitive Indicators for the Media. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/
en/communication-and-information/crosscutting-priorities/gender-and-media/gender-sensitive-
indicators-for-media/. [accessed 2018, June 20].
Usher, N. (2015, February 28). Moving the newsroom: Post-industrial news spaces and places. Retrieved
from http://towcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/80172_Tow-Center-Report-PPG-web-5.
pdf. [accessed 2018, November 16].
Valgaeren, E. (2001). Loopbanen van vrouwen in management en ICT: Literatuurstudie. Diepenbeek,
Belgium: LUC-SEIN.
Vergeer, M., Pleijter, A. & Hermans, L. (2011, September). Journalists’ multiskilling in the digital age. Paper
presented at the Future of Journalism Conference, Cardi, Great-Britain.
Verloo, M. (ed.) (2007). Multiple meanings of gender equality. Budapest & New York: Central European
University Press.
Wajcman, J. (2007). From women and technology to gendered technoscience. Information, Communication
& Society, 10(3): 287-298.
Walby, S. (2009). Globalization and inequalities. London: Sage Publications.
Walby, S. (2004). e European Union and gender equality: Emergent varieties of gender regimes. Social
Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society,11(1): 4-29.
TRANSFORMING THE NEWS MEDIA
177
Weber, W. & Rall, H. (2012, July). Data visualization in online journalism and its implications for the pro-
duction process. Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on Information Visualisation,
Montpellier, France.
World Association for Christian Communication/IFJ (2012). Learning resource kit for gender-ethical jour-
nalism and media house policy. Toronto, Canada: WACC.
World Association for Media and Communication (2015). Global Media Monitoring Project: Global Report.
Toronto, Canada: WACC.
Youngs, G. (2005). Cyberspace: e new feminist frontier? In K. Ross & C. M. Byerly (eds.), Women and
media: International perspectives (pp. 185-208). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
