No Offense, It's Just Business

Support women's sports and SHARE this story with your friends!

Marie Hardin recently posted a WTS blog in response to Eric Deggens' column regarding a study confirming that while participation in women's sports has increased with Title IX, media coverage itself is stagnant, if not decreasing (see "Why the Apathy of Women's Sports Coverage?" posted June 8, 2010).  I concur with Marie...the results are no big shocker.  And I don't think it's much of a shocker that as Deggens points out, the study has largely been greeted with apathy.  Although Marie agrees with Deggens that the media is complicit, she disagrees as to the extent.  In her opinion, "lack of women's sports coverage is a cultural problem -- not one that can be blamed solely on media organizations."  Id.  I.e., "the values ([of] masculinity) that we've placed on spectator sports as a culture." Id.

I agree that both are factors.  I admit, when I ran a Google search on "NCAA women's basketball tournament and TV ratings," the entire first page showed links to articles about men's basketball ratings, even offering a link to the NIT (*gasp*).  Finally, the last link on the page..."TV Ratings Up Big for Women's NCAA Final" appeared on Rivals.com.  So what the "article" was 6 lines long and included no ratings numbers whatsoever?  Score one for Hardin and one for Deggens.

(Their theories probably have more traction in the context of professional sports, although the WNBA is owned, operated and funded by the NBA, so the below theory could still apply.)

The cultural problem may better explain the reason for apathy towards the study, rather than the underlying issue itself.  After all, Google isn't gender biased, is it?  So I would like to add my dime addressing a another theory...the no offense, it's just business.  This theory goes beyond the cop-out "it's what the audience wants" -- a non-sensical argument when for the most part, watching women's collegiate sports is not an option.  (Side note: women's NCAA basketball tournament ratings have steadily increaed over the past decade.  It's my guess that the women's tourney is likely #1 or close to it among collegiate women's sporting events with respect to media time/coverage.) 

The "No offense it's just business" theory considers the business and financial structure of college athletic departments.  As it stands, men's football and basketall programs are the primary donors to the department, funding amongst other things, salaries and athletic scholarships across all sports (not to mention the NCAA).  As Michael Granof, professor at the Univ. of Texas b-school, explains in his article, "Accounting Holds Sports Accountable," athletic departments are self-sufficient entities mostly independent of the universities financially.  It's the reason schools claim they are "losing money" in college athletics.  They are losing money, just not in men's football and basketball.  If they were, then like any other business, they'd hold a going out of business sale.

Consequently, instead of diversifying revenue streams, schools pump all of their money, time, attention and marketing into these two programs.  For one, it's a "sure" bet - the model for success is in place, and secondly, let's face it; it's much easier to receive than to give.  Let's also be clear, when we're talking about the coverage of wome's sports, we're usually speaking as against men's football and basketball.  It's not like men's water polo gets significantly more attention than women's field hockey or men's track & field more than women's.  If, however, there were limits on where/how schools could spend revenues generated by men's football and basketball programs (say for instance, investing in education), universities and conferences would be forced to seek alternative revenue sources for women's programs, such as more comprehensive media/broadcast deals (or how about any deal?) in addition to finding ways to increase interest in and attendance at their sporting events.  By association, it would also mean increased marketing and fundraising efforts for women's athletic programs.  Thus, restructuring the flow of revenues would force universities to invest in finding ways to increase interest in and attendance of women's sporting events, which in turn would produce greater media coverage and more lucrative broadcast deals.  

As it stands, there is no incentive.  In essence, it's cheaper to keep her dependent on men's football and basketball than to divorce her and have to write a bigger check than you would otherwise allow her to spend, even if it means her eventual independence.  Therefore, until the underlying business structure is revisited, the disparity will remain. 

Support women's sports and SHARE this story with your friends!

• Field Hockey
• Track & Field
• Water Polo
• Sports
• SportsPLUS
• Entertainment
• College
• OpEd
• Discrimination/Title IX
• Career
• Student-Athlete
• Media/Marketing
• Television
• Events
• Fans
• Sponsorship
• W College Hoops

This post is related to an ongoing story:

• Lack of Women`s Sports Coverage

This article was written by a WomenTalkSports.com contributor. Sign up here to start publishing your own women's sports content.

View amber2jewel's Full Profile