Katie Couric: Sexist Media Hurt Hillary Clinton's Chances

Adding to her comments last night in Washington — "that Sen. Clinton received some of the most unfair, hostile coverage I've ever seen" — Katie Couric has filmed a Keith Olbermann-style special commentary (called ner "Notebook") slamming the media for its sexist coverage of Hillary Clinton and claiming that the sexist coverage hurt her chances at becoming the Democratic party nominee. The Notebook will air tonight on CBS affiliates and on CBS radio, and will live on CBSNews.com.

"One of the great lessons of [Hillary Clinton's] campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life, particularly in the media....It isn't just Hillary Clinton who needs to learn a lesson from this primary season — it's all the people who crossed the line, and all the women and men who let them get away with it."

Watch the video below:

Couric's reference in the video to "mainstream pundits saying they instinctively cross their legs at the mention of her name" is specifically about Tucker Carlson, who often made such a claim while still on MSNBC during the campaign.

Last night, without naming names, Couric seemed to excoriate both MSNBC's Chris Matthews — who has come under fire for sexist remarks against Hillary Clinton — and NBC's Lee Cowan — who reportedly said he found it "hard to stay objective" covering Obama — saying, "That's your job...find another line of work." Matthews notoriously announced that he "felt [a] thrill going up [his] leg" while listening to Obama speak, and was forced to apologize for sexist remarks against Clinton in January.

Comments

[Oomingmak]

What a joke. The "iron my shirt" stunt was a hoax staged by the Clinton campaign to whip up female sentiment against this supposed (but actually almost non-existent) "sexism".

There are myriad other women who would do well as lead network news anchor, but Couric is an utter failure, a punchline.

[Ndw]

That it was a hoax - is this just your opinion, or is there real evidence to support this?

[Oomingmak]

The evidence is there if you care to see it, and no, it is not just my opinion, as any Google search of "Hillary iron my shirt stunt" will reveal. Or to save you time: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/05/14/tarantella/index1.html.

I will clarify my comment: it was not necessarily staged by the Clinton campaign, but it is pretty obvious that they knew those jerks were going to do it, and it was exploited by Hillary for maximum effect.

[amantell]

While sexism does exist in this country, , to say that Hillary's campaign suffered from unfair media coverage is inaccurate. She was given far more positive exposure than many male candidates during the campaign cycle despite their stronger credentials. Senators Joe Biden and Chris Dodd were virtually ignored by the media, unlike Hillary who has served only eight years in an elected position to date.
Hillary was outfoxed by a more natural politician with a better campaign team. Barack did not start out with Hillary's name recognition, powerful allies, years of political favors, or money. Whereas she assembled a disorganized, disfunctional staff, Barack's team was a model of efficiency. Sexism did not cause Hillary's campaign debt, send out a poor campaign message to voters, or provoke her to tell lies so transparent that she looked foolish.
The reality is that Hillary is not a natural politician. When she ran for the Senate in 2000, her primary qualification was not a previous elected position in Congress or the New York State government, but name recognition as First Lady. Her opposition was a joke candidate unready for the big stage. As a result, she was not exposed for what she is, more of a wonk than a leader. Had Hillary faced a stronger opponent, her limitations might have been revealed earlier.
While sexism should be exposed wherever it exists, it shouldn't be used as an excuse to avoid fair criticisms of a female candidate.

[mannemalon]

Nice post amantell. Pretty spot on.

[TommyMcCarthy]

Good for Ms. Couric!!

I'm a committed Democrat, and I remember early in primary process declaiming how pleased and proud I was of the fine slate of Democratic presidential contenders, (any one of whom would be a quantum improvement over Bush, though that may be faint praise at this point)

I was particularly pleased that we Dems had not made Sen. Obama's campaign all about race, nor Sen. Clinton's about gender, and expressed the naieve hope that that would continue.

Well I guess we all know how that worked out. I guess I'd give us collectively a C+ for effort, and a C- for execution.­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­.....TM

[siciliabel]

Somewhere today-maybe many somewheres today-there is a woman struggling with unfair treatment because of sexism. The assertion that Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic nomination because of sexism undermines women everywhere who are actually experiencing it. If anything, her many campaign errors, any combination of which would have cost her the nomination, are an indication that sexism played a small part in her presidential demise. These are mistakes that know no gender boundary--they were just bad judgement.

[Oomingmak]

Well-put. The women-are-­always-vic­tims argument does women no favors.

[Ndw]

Except doesn't Couric have a point when she says the racial equivilant of 'iron my shirt' would have caused a huge uproar? As it was, it WAS accepted.

I wildly favor Obama, true, and I also think a different woman would have been received very differently. (Though not on 'my' side, I think Rice would be lauded & respected - which is why I personally hope McCain DOESN'T choose her for VP.) But the comments made by those 'shock-tv-jock' types were disconcerting. Then again, anything said by those people is disconcerting, whether it's Fox's push for an Obama assassination, or the MSNBC 'guy talk' blather.

It seems obvious Couric is speaking from her own experience, yet even I get the impression of a woman who has built some of her success on cuteness, who is trying very hard to look serious. The problem is, if you've used cuteness in ANY way - and other than Barbara Starr, most of them have - then you're stuck with it when you try to speak authentically, and seriously.

But I also think being the spouse or relative of a President has its own baggage, (and how I wish it had hurt this Bush!) I think Hillary would have done a LOT better had she taken more time to separate herself from her husband's career, a few more years in the Senate, or a Governorship - not for experience, but just to stand out more. Bush LOOKED more apart for his years in Texas.

[debrouillard]

It really puzzles me to listen to people comparing racial discrimination to gender descrimination in America.

You get shot by the police in USA for your only crime being Black.
How many women have been attacked by the Police just because they are women,let alone WHITE WOMEN.

You have more White women as Governors and Senators than you have Blacks(both male and female combined).­In fact Sen Obama is the only BLACK in the US Senate. You have less than 5 governors who are Black in total.

Hillary did not lose because she is a woman,she had all the previledges u get in America as
1)being a woman
2)Being white
3)Being the wife of a former president

She lost because Obama is just EXTRA-ORDINARY. Before the first vote was ever cast James Carville,one of Hillary's most adamant supporters said "Obama is an extra-ordinary talent,they had to do all they can to make sure he doesnt win IOWA,otherwise they might not be able to stop him"

[Ndw]

I don't really get that, either. While I do think there's sexism, even for a privileged white woman, I don't think it compares to racism, and I don't think that was Hillary's problem at all.

[RTIII]

I agree with all your points, but, as I'm a scientist, I feel compelled to point out your data set is misleading.

I don't know what the percentage of AA is across the entire united states population, but I do recall reading bits of the census of 2000 and being very surprised just how low it is - like 18% or something like that. (I'm sure I could easily look it up but I'm tired.) The point here is that your statistics aren't helpful if we don't know the proportion of the groups in the populace in general. We know, for example, that women slightly outnumber men, over all.

There's also research that has been studying the numbers of women in engineering fields, and recent results show that capable women who could be very successful in engineering usually choose a field in health care - doctor, medical research, etc - and few choose engineering sciences. Why is anyone's guess - perhaps women are more interested in life than in objects? We don't know - research hasn't answered that one yet...

Point being; just throwing up numbers like one black senator versus how many women just isn't a good indicator of discrimination. Women should have about half the jobs that they are _interested_ in taking. Blacks? Much less than "equal" because they are a very much smaller group.

Therefore, blacks are very likely not nearly as discriminated against as the _numbers_ you put forward seem to suggest.

[debrouillard]

Is this woman mad,People were selling Tshirts of a monkey eating banana ,writen on it Obama.

Hillary herself made comments to suggest "A Black man can not win"

Thats hillary and Bill not some jerk around like those of "Iron my Shirt"

Obama operatives were getting abused,His office in IN got burnt down.

[mothugs81]

4. AND MOST IMPORTANT. Both of these candidates faced scrutiny. They both trailblazed to become FIRSTs. And in the face of questions about race, Rev. Wright and everything in between ONE candidate chose to embrace the discussion and give a speech adressing the obvious pink elephant in the room. Now I must admit I didnt perceive the sexism that alot of other commentators have seen. But I must ask, where were YOU (HRC, Katie Couric, etc...) when you saw it? Where were the questions, where were the comments where were the angry reaction? Where was HRC embracing and discussing the sexism that she faced. And i refuse the excuse of the mysoginist media. Cable news shows have women commentators, much of the same commentators that claim there was sexism after HRC has lost. WHERE WERE THEIR CRITICISMs before, where were they.

5. UNFORTUNATELY HRC found her voice with women to late. I think people are unfortunatley taking her loss as a referendum on WOMEN's RIGHTS and SEXISM in AMERICA. IT IS NOT. Just like OBAMA's campaign isnt the referendum on RACE that the media wants it to be. It is possible to be gracious in defeat, without the US v. THEM mentality that I see on these posts.

LETS PLEASE GET TO THE REAL ISSUES IN THIS CAMPAIGN..­. THE REST OF THIS STUFF IS JUST that... "STUFF"

[mothugs81]

3. This idea that if commentators had made the same sort of racist remarks they would have been fired, I must say is ridiculous. Did anyone watch the coverage of exit polls. Every single primary and caucus... WHY CANT OBAMA WIN THE WHIT VOTE... OBAMA CAN'T GET THE WHITE MALE VOTE... OBAMA CANT GET WORK CLASS WHITE VOTERS. I admit that there was comparable coverage about HRC's inability to get certain demographics too, BUT after the Rev. Wright story and HRC's "hard-working Americans, White Americans" comments the cable media ran wild. The worst part was THEY ASKED OBAMA TO EXPLAIN WHY VOTERS WEREN'T VOTING FOR HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK... last time i checked no one asked HRC why any demographic wasnt voting for her because she was a woman.

[mothugs81]

Ahhhh everyone's got an opinion...­. well here is mine.

Its not a new reality that there is sexism. Neither is it that ther is racism. I have read alot of these comments claiming "the media being in the bag for Obama" and citing valid disagreements with certain individuals (Tucker Carlson, Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman..­.etc) that many feel were unfair to HRC, and most attribute it to sexism.

A couple of points.

1. The media was not "in the bag for Obama." Did any one miss the coverage of this race from 2007 up until the Iowa caucus. The front runner was HRC. She wasnt questioned. There was no sexism then.

2. Although I did find the remarks and the slants of Matthews and Olberman to be over the top and sexist to a degree... It doesnt change the fact that they dislike HRC for a HOST OF OTHER REASONS (poor campaign, Bill Clinton, race-baiting comments, lies about Bosnia, vote for the war in Iraq, claiming experience from Bill Clinton's campaign, horribly mentioning "assassination" in a political campaign..­.etc). You may not like it but they had other reasons not to like HRC other than she was a woman and that they were sexist. You can hang your hat on sexism... but don't turn a blind eye to HRC's faults.

[Chavez08]

NOW has turned into AIPAC.

I guess power corrupts..­.

[08politicaljunkie]

Because MSM was more fascinated with Obama's story than Hillary's, with Obama's oratory than Hillary's, does that mean they're sexist?

[08politicaljunkie]

I would hate to believe that I'm oblivious to sexism and overly sensitive to racism because I never saw Hillary as the victim; I saw her as the perpetrator. Yes, I heard her cry it. But did I dismiss her cries after I learned she lies?

Honestly, during the primary campaign, I viewed Hillary as the Pit Bull, and Obama as the Lab.

In Philadelphia, I saw hand made racist signs hung around the city. I saw faux bullet holes in Obama lawn signs and posters. I read and heard the "Kool Aid," "N word," and "monkey" jokes.

As a matter of fact, Obama (and Michelle) are still the targets of mainstream media racist attacks.

Am I really missing something here?

[kassandrasduplex]

Funny, how after Clinton is out of the race, the media are all changing their tune on her. She has received more positive stories in the past week, it seems, than at any time in the entire primary cycle. Coincidence?

[Ndw]

I think they just want her as the VP choice for the 'ratings angle.' A good, solid candidate who doesn't rile people up would defeat their real purpose - ratings.

Depressing, but undoubtedly true.

[Sparklez]

People keep blaming the media

When most of them were in the bag for her in the beginning

She had the support base including us guaranteed Dems--The African Americans

She messed her own self up. It all began with Iowa....

[America08]

As an African-American female I sympathize with Hillary and Katie mainly because I know how it feels to see things one way and other people be dismissive of how they feel. It happens to Blacks all the time. I would like for them to point to specifics, give examples of how the media was bias. As a woman, I was very disappointed with the way Hillary was running her campaign. I wanted her to invoke some common sense into her campaign, be more compassionate and straightforward. Instead I felt like she had taken lessons from Husband on how she had to be. I wanted someone to stop all of the pettiness, and macho bickering. Instead she appeared fake, bull-headed, and downright mean (and I have examples to back that up). This has been said before, but I do think we are ready for a female President.­...but just not Hillary.