New York Times To Women Bloggers -- Get Thee to "Fashion and Style!"

Apparently I can push political agendas, but I'll always be seen as an Oprah-watching, bon-bon eating, Katie Couric-esque, shoe-shopping, GIRL.

Even the New York Times will write about how powerful I am, and how I'm not getting my props -- yet they will publish the article in the 'Fashion and Style' section.

Sure they will write about about heart attacks and blogging and place it in "Technology." But WOMEN bloggers? Oh, they belong next to "It's Botox for You, Dear Bridesmaids" and "The BreakUps That Got Under My Skin."

Perhaps, with all the talk of us being "...a corporate-sponsored Oprah-inflected version of a '60s consciousness-raising group" they missed the part about 36 million of us taking over as power-users of the web while raising our children and supporting our families.

Perhaps, I need to remind or at the very least provide some additional information that may or may not affect the future placement of a piece on women bloggers.

Women are outnumbering men on the web.

Women control .83 cents of every household dollar spent. That means from buying a lawnmower to buying laundry detergent, women hold the purse strings.

Women have been turning off daytime television and canceling their subscriptions to 'female' based magazines in favor of going online.

Yet when we get together yearly to learn from one another on the business and practices of blogging, the NYT sees fit to discuss us in the same breath as "what women are wearing on their feet this summer."

Maybe they missed the part where we discussed open source with 2008 Google-O'Reilly Open Source Award Winner Angela Byron? Or where we met to create a position paper to be submitted to the Democratic National Committee for inclusion in the party platform? Or what about the BlogHer/NBC Universal deal worth 5 million?

I am thrilled the New York Times sees fit to cover a women's blogging conference. I look at it as a step in the right direction.

But you surely don't see stories about men bloggers in the Sports section or an article on the latest strategic partnership laced with phrases like "And though women and men are creating blogs in roughly equal numbers, many women at the conference were becoming very Katie Couric about their belief that they are not taken as seriously as their male counterparts..."

Is Michael Arrington of TechCrunch very Rupert Murdoch? Is Jason Calacanis of Mahalo very Matt Lauer?

Are the men in tech and blogging consistently being compared to their male, traditional media counterparts?

Not so much.

For every article on women and tech and blogging, you will see the words "Oprah" and "Couric" and "Fashion."

New York Times...thanks for coming out to BlogHer '08. Thanks for taking some photos. Thanks for raising awareness.

Next time I'm hoping you're over our lactation station and daycare and "nurturing messages," because if that is all you see...you're missing out on a tour de force, online and off.

Erin Kotecki Vest is the Political Director at BlogHer.com and writes a !gasp! MommyBlog at Queen of Spain blog.

Comments

[y2vonne]

Well, the NY Times belongs to the "Good old boys club." We ladies should just toss it. I'm not surprised the Blogher event showed up in the fashion section. Check out the Google ads attached to this post ... dieting, etc.

Maybe they'lll cover the Blogher Business conference and "get it."

I am still wondering where we women stand in an issue against another huge, male-dominated brand: BMW. We (those of us who wrote about their soft-core kiddie porn Greek ad) stirred the pot a bit, but...where is everyone else in the blogosphere?

Some may brush the BMW ad off...that's your choice. But, I believe most of us, especially Moms and Aunts, will be appalled...and demand an accounting from BMW. Don't have a clue what I'm talking about? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-learned/bmw-blows-it-with-ad-camp_b_114553.html

Those who sit idly by because it's "just advertising" after all... I ask, Would YOU approve of your daughter posing for that ad? For those who say it's just advertising, BMW's market is all that matters, I ask, So, we should just accept that kids are sold into prostitution in other parts of the world, that girls under 18 are preyed upon every day, that by posting this ad BMW is encouraging such behavior and that's okay, it's Greece, after all?

Just wondering....

[nowickedwitch]

They should have put it under business or technology. They didn't do their research. What they probably did is look at the first page or two of BlogHer saw all the posts about fashion, horoscopes and television shows and made a judgment call.

[Cathexis]

That's a typical tactic to try to marginalize/disempower women: Try to reduce their focus to superficial foci such as "fashion."

Just goes to show that Feminism is *still* a needed social force, in this country.

[RobinSeattle]

Yet another reason to not read the NY Times.

Now this may seem like a non sequitor, but who is buying all that celebrity "journalism" crap? Is it men, women, both equally? I think part of the stereotype is that women love that stuff and, because of their economic power, that is why you see such a proliferation of it now. So that women bloggers then get shunted off to the typical newsprint ghettos of showbiz and fashion, ad nauseum, well, is it a surprise? In other words, are female geeks or wonks or whatever you want to call them being betrayed by their less intellectual sisters' predilections who are fascinated by Paris Hilton and Britney Spears?

Moreover, there may be an idea that women don't read tech-oriented stuff and to at least have a chance of getting it in front of them you put it where the female eyeballs really are?

What do studies say about this? I don't care about what theorists want the truth to be. I want to see some numbers on this stuff. The smart will always be burdened by the stupid. And the above phenomenon may just be another manifestation of it.

[nowickedwitch]

I'm a 23 year old women.I sometimes read blogher, belong to the website.

I do find it pretty lightweight.. The articles are fluffy and do seem rather morning talk T.V. "The View -ish".

Not sure "fashion" was the way to go, given it was a technology conference of sorts, but at any given time if you log into blogHer you will see fashion, make-up, horoscope, some what's on t.v. talk, and clothing advice as the first posts on the page. That is probably what they based their decision on.

I wish it seemed less lightweight over there but I'm sure one look at the front page and they made their decision.

[WorkingClass]

"Women control .83 cents of every household dollar spent".

Why is this never mentioned when the feminists are whining about earning 77% of a "white mans dollar"?

And why is anybody still reading the New York Times? Its just another corporate propaganda tool. Its job is to tell you what you think.

I never read the Times Erin. But I always read your stuff. Keep up the good work.

[PollyTics]

I smell a second coming in the land of new age "Feminism" and it is about time!
.

[OrganicGeorge]

I stumbled on the BlogHer story and had to wonder just how bad the story really was. I don't read any MommyBlogs but I do follow Jane, Emptywheel, RedHead, Digby even I Blame the Patriarchy so I know there are some powerful women on the blogs.

You will need to learn how the parse the narrative of the story you want the press to tell, that's how the Big Boy,er,um Girls do it.

[mothergoosemouse]

I was bothered less by the placement of the piece than by its content. Affirmations and makeovers weren't the focus of the conference - why should they be the focus of the coverage?

[ToThinkIsToCreate]

Great post Erin. This whole thing gets so tiring.

[GeekMommy]

Just one more reason that print media is slowly but surely losing the battle to online media - because they still haven't figured out their audience.

Applause on the wake-up call Erin.

[CItyMama]

Thanks for writing about this, Erin. I am shocked that an article about blogging women would find itself in the Fashion & Style section of the NYT. I really would like to see your post submitted as a Letter to the Editor. Please tell me you've already done it.

[melsil]

Way to go Queen of Spain. I've seen article about women in business and women in politics relegated to the Style section for some time now. It seems that even though that section is highly read and trafficked it is viewed as "lighter" and that seems to be the place that the NY Times puts its women. Why don't they just rename the fashion and style section the women's section like back in the old days when there were separate sections where only women could be seen and work. Wonder where the article on the netroots conference wound up? Seems like we are going backwards.

[punditmom]

As long as major news media outlets are owned, run and edited by men, we will continue to be relegated to the Style section. This is just another reason why we should support the Women's Media Center -- to get our voices AND our newsworthiness out there.

[clevelandchick]

Hopefully in 10 years the NYT will handle women bloggers as equal to male but the same old caucasian patriarchal class still runs it and most of the major newspapers and publications. That's why they are sucking wind so hard. They don't relate to the true social landscape of America. They are still trying to shove women and minorities in the corner regardless of their power in our society and it's hurting their business. Which is why they are getting exactly what they deserve....losing money and their reputation.