Media coverage of the Tokyo Paralympics made leaps ahead, academic Toni Bruce has found, but the references to girls and ladies have to go.
Before the Tokyo 2020 Paralympics, I identified 10 things to watch out for during the Games. Here, I reflect on seven ways that gender played out in my analysis of the thumbnail photographs used to promote stories on two major digital news outlets - Stuff and the New Zealand Herald - and during TVNZ Duke’s live coverage. The results suggest things are improving, but we can’t afford to take our eyes off the ball.
1. Growing interest is a win for women’s sport
The media and public interest in the Paralympic Games means sportswomen are increasingly in the public eye. As news coverage has moved from print to digital, media attention has consistently expanded. Tokyo 2020‘s 206 thumbnail photographs in two major online news outlets is a big jump from 11 to 39 photographs in three major newspapers during the print era. The increase in television coverage - from a two-hour highlights package in 2000, to 13 hours of daily, free live broadcasts plus packaged highlights in 2021 - allows audiences to see physically-skilled Kiwi sportswomen in action. The public’s desire to see the Games live became very clear in the rapid and loud criticisms of TVNZ’s failure to provide live coverage of some Kiwi events.
The result is that successful Paralympic athletes like Sophie Pascoe become household names. During Tokyo 2020, when Pascoe became New Zealand’s most successful Paralympian, she even earned a Facebook shout-out from Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who wrote “Sophie, you are an absolute legend! Ten gold medals, so much hard work and training. You have well and truly earned your place as a sporting icon.”
2. Female Paralympians are elite athletes
Sports media increasingly treat the Paralympic Games as an elite sports event, creating further visibility for sportswomen. At Tokyo 2020, ‘our’ sportswomen dominated the medal table, winning 10 of New Zealand’s 12 medals. They also dominated media coverage, featuring in 66 percent of photographs used to promote stories. Men were the focus of less than 30 percent of photographs - the rest highlighted mixed gender groups or images without athletes. This finding reflects the longitudinal growth and increasing acceptance of sportswomen as athletes who are worthy of attention, from 18 percent of images in 2004, to 33 percent in 2008, to 66 percent during Tokyo 2020.
What’s even more important is that media overwhelmingly treated sportswomen as athletes. Commentators focused on tactics, skill and past achievements such as world and Paralympic records, previous medals and highest placings. In the live broadcast we heard descriptions such as: “She’s such an exceptional swimmer. She knows her strengths, textbook strokes”, “She’s not going to get caught here. She’s too powerful”, “Her legend is safe”, and “She’s one of the greatest of them all”.
Commentators also integrated each athlete’s disability smoothly, along with reasonably regular explanations of different categories - “for competitors who have the most severe visual impairment” or “a T11 athlete, which is complete visual impairment”. In seated volleyball, the commentator explained, “She’s a back row player so her buttocks have to be behind the two metre line if she’s attacking.”
3. The effects of nationalism
While coverage of female athletes’ achievements continues to grow, there are still some areas of concern. One is a previously identified impact of nationalism - the overarching focus on New Zealand athletes. This pattern continued at Tokyo 2020, with New Zealanders being the main focus of 86 percent of Paralympic photographs. Yet, even though nationalism strongly influences which athletes attract attention, the intensity of that focus is greater for sportswomen. During Tokyo 2020, 96 percent of female photographs focused on Kiwi sportswomen compared with 72 percent highlighting Kiwi sportsmen. The message for women’s sport is that the media’s primary interest is ‘our’ women, but men from many countries deserve coverage.
4. The pressure to win
Nationalistic effects are further intensified by the media focus on female athletes who win. Unlike male athletes, sportswomen need to win to gain media attention. This finding is broadly true for women’s sport but seems especially relevant for Paralympians. For example, in 2004, when Kiwi sportswomen won no Paralympic medals, they received no photographs and their results were buried at the bottom of other news articles. By 2008, when they dominated the medal count, the focus on female medallists was 80 percent.
The spotlight was even narrower in Tokyo 2020, with 81 percent of Kiwi female photographs featuring medallists. In stark contrast, a medal emphasis was only evident in 26 percent of images of Kiwi men and 28 percent of men from other countries. Although this low percentage may reflect the low number of medals won by Kiwi men, the long-term trend sends a message that sportswomen’s main value is as successful national citizens rather than as athletes.
5. Tunnel vision
The narrow emphasis on one or two athletes, previously identified in Paralympics and Olympics coverage, continued. Just as in 2016, Sophie Pascoe was the most visible athlete, female or male. She featured in 36 percent images of sportswomen and almost a quarter of all photographs. Her 49 images, including a cartoon, were far higher than the second most-photographed athlete, Lisa Adams, with 16. The good news is that five other Kiwi sportswomen - four medallists - featured in more than five photographs.
6. Just stop with the ladies and girls
Based on the live coverage I watched, male commentators really struggled with the word woman; many couldn’t say it except for the official name of a women’s event. They appeared comfortable using man to describe male athletes, but the generic use of woman proved a step too far. One male commentator frequently introduced male swimmers as “the man who”, “the man who swims in lane four“, “the man who is a gold medallist” or “the man who went fastest”. Yet, in an entire swimming session filled with introductions to men, not a single woman was introduced. Instead, across different sports, we heard a lot about ladies, whether it was “the lady in the middle has won the gold”, “that lady’s among them again” or “the lady on the right”.
One male commentator, who paused as he realised he needed to feminise statesman, still couldn’t say woman. His solution: “one of the elder states... statespeople of these Games.” The use of lady was widespread enough that I was surprised he didn’t default to 'states-lady'. I heard commentators of both genders occasionally refer to girls (but not boys). I only heard woman used once, during the women’s marathon when the female commentator explained “she knows this woman is trying to close the gap”, shortly followed by the male commentator stating “and there’s the lady who is in the gold medal position.”
7. Smiles and tears
Images and live commentary reinforced gender differences in expressing emotion. In news coverage, 96 percent of photographs of smiling athletes featured females, and almost all were Kiwi women. This focus may partly reflect their overwhelming success – 46 percent of smiling images were on the podium, or immediately following the realisation they had won a medal. Overall, almost half (47 percent) of female images showed them smiling. Live commentary was similar: “She’s just got a massive smile on her face” or “Always has a smile on her face”. The result is that media reinforce gender expectations, in which non-threatening smiles signify niceness.
Tears were almost expected of winning sportswomen: “and the tears tell a story”, “Sophie Pascoe breaks down in tears” or “I am sure there will be a few tears.” In contrast, male tears needed to be justified, like the male commentator who explained “the tears are flowing - quite rightly so - a bronze medal and a lifetime best”. Images of men smiling were rare, and live commentary instead highlighted celebratory actions or language more aligned with masculinity. A good example came from tennis, where the commentators described a female winner as “really emotional”, while a male winner who yelled, screamed and punched the air was “pumped up” and “pretty excited”. As his clearly upset opponent covered his face with his shirt, rather than describe him as emotional, a commentator explained “this will be a tough defeat to take.”
Overall, like the Olympic Games, the Tokyo 2020 Paralympics get a tick of approval. But there are still some areas where gender infuses media coverage in inequitable ways. I look forward to a time when sportswomen are valued and visible whether they win or not, and no matter where they come from.
