Only Women are Jumping Hurdles in the Race for 2020

(TFC) – Has the mainstream media not noticed their gender biased approach to reporting female candidates running for the 2020 nomination? Or in the age of Trump’s America, is this just the new norm?

MSM definitely seems to have a significant issue with gender bias. Female candidates are neither unexpected nor unique in 2019. However, mainstream media has offered an inappreciable amount of coverage of the six female candidates. Women seeking America’s highest seat have fallen victim to sexism perpetuated by the media.

Males Have Been Given The Easier Road

Male candidates have been painted in a powerful light, full of hope for future policies. When major networks pose the question, “Do you have what it takes to beat Donald Trump?”,  the discussion immediately transitions to their campaign fundraising, or how strong their base is. Yet when the same question is asked of the women, they’re forced to jump hurdles just to maintain stride.

Female candidates asked the same question, are met with interviewers who don’t display a sense of belief. They instead begin questioning the candidates mental and emotional fortitude and downplaying their strengths. More often than not the final question is whether or not their pasts will hurt them in the long run. Overall coverage of these women has been littered with harsher criticisms than the men. They’ve been hard pressed to get beyond not discussing but defending their choices. For female candidates, discussing policy has proven difficult. Men, however, have had an open opportunity, by comparison.

Don’t Question The Backbone Of A Strong Woman

Any commentator doubting the boldness of these women is vacuous. It’s clear that none of these women are fool to Trump’s tactics, nor will their voices shake while he stalks them during final debates. If Clinton prepared these women for nothing else, they’re ready for he who lurks in the shadows.

Of the six women who have announced their bid to run, we’ve only heard much about three. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and of course, Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), Marianne Williamson (D-CA), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who only recently announced her run, have all received very little televised face time.

Data Doesn’t Lie, Even When It Surprises You

Statistical data of press content alone shows the distinct difference when comparing the coverage of the 2020 Democratic hopefuls. While it’s frustrating that this still occurs in 2019, it isn’t shocking.
After all, mainstream media outlets have been more consistently disparaging to women than the country’s king misogynist. The MSM once condemned the behavior that has now become the basis of how they cover female nominees.

After tracking the press time afforded to every candidate on four major television outlets (CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and ABC), I was surprised to see so many segments on Harris, Warren, Klobuchar and Gabbard. It’s so infrequent that we see them on the news, that I admittedly expected far less time than they’ve had. What I did notice though, was an interesting trend.

Male Vs. Female Presentation And Numbers

Male candidates had a steady amount of initial press time which varied between thirty and sixty minutes. This time was recorded in the week following their initial announcement of candidacy. Time was divided between their initial announcements and interviews. All fundamentally positive in presentation, and all leaving viewers with the impression that each has the potential to win the nomination.

Women, on the other hand, were predominantly featured in brief clips. These clips have been of their official bid announcements and perfunctory interviews.
Females were given between thirty to ninety minutes of airtime during the first week after their announcement. This time was divided by interviews and segments clipped from their initial pronouncements. Most of their interview time was presented in a negative light. Kamala Harris being the only one exempt from this very specific current, as her first Town Hall was included in her on-air time.

Amy Gillibrand and Beto O’Rourke obviously had less airtime due to their more recent announcements. Yet despite this, a stark difference in the way the media has covered them can already be seen.

The Pressure Is Mounting To Make The Right Choice

The numbers and content speak for themselves. If you have a few free hours they can easily be found and calculated. There is a colossal amount of pressure on U.S citizens to elect the right candidate for the Democratic nomination, and it is our responsibility to research and learn who is best suited to uphold the constitution. It is our duty to choose a nominee that will serve the people of the United States of America, and it is becoming exceedingly clear that we cannot rely on mainstream media to provide us with the information that we need to do so.

The MSM Influences Gender Biased Voting

If by 2019 America is not yet ready for a female president, then we need to ask ourselves two questions. They are; What role is the MSM playing in our skepticism? And, how does the media’s influence impact our faith in the ability of a woman to hold the highest seat in America?