A “Girlie Show” Saga on the Campaign Trail
Two weeks ago, we at Citizen Jane Politics blogged about an affair involving Emily’s List, the “Washington Times” and an article about a girlie show. Even though the matter has been settled for now, we couldn’t help passing it on for posterity…
We were alerted recently that Emily’s List, the group established to elect pro-choice Democratic women to public office, launched a petition to “demand fair, credible coverage” of women in “The Washington Times.”
What gives? You ask. Well….In an article about an event featuring Michelle Obama and the governor of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, a Washington Times writer described it this way:
“The tone of the event was as much estrogenfest as it was campaign rally, as Michelle Obama hit the stump in Michigan Wednesday as part of two-day Midwest swing and a revamped strategy designed to soften her image and attract more female voters, a bloc much needed for her husband to win the White House.
“Even Michigan Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm got in on the girlie show as they campaigned together in struggling Pontiac, Mich. Yes, Mrs. Granholm told Mrs. Obama, her state was bleeding jobs and desperate. But the economic bantering did not begin until after the two-term Democratic governor offered a gal-pal fashion compliment, telling the cheering crowd of mainly black women that while she and Mrs. Obama had something in common as Harvard Law School graduates, she would not bare her arms in public.”
The article, which is written by a woman, was titled, “Girl Talk Wins Fans for Mrs. Obama.”
We at Citizen Jane Politics asked our readers if they found that depiction of two Harvard-trained lawyers was more tongue-in-cheek or foot-in-mouth. (The winner: Foot-in-mouth, by a mile.) We also asked the “Washington Times” what their response was to the story about the story.
The next day, we received a call from David Jones, the managing editor of “The Washington Times,” who gave us the following comment:
“We think the story about Michelle Obama’s efforts to campaign for women’s votes was an important one and was fairly told, but some of the language that slipped through the editing process was too breezy and could be misconstrued as stereotyping.
“We have taken steps to make sure such language does not slip through in the future.”
One small step for Harvard lawyers, one big step for those of us who get to read about them…
