The Year of the Woman

Reporters portray female and male candidates differently when covering campaigns for political office. In order to counteract the biased coverage in the papers the women of the 1992 Senate race used 30-second advertising spots to assert their key issue stances and strengths. Though this was not the sole purpose of their ads, they were very much geared toward compensating for the lack of fair coverage they were receiving in the news. Ultimately they persevered. Through verbal and nonverbal content, as defined by Lynda Lee Kaid, women designed their ads to portray a high level of competence. 1992 is widely known as 'The Year of the Woman,' when 5 women won Senate seats and 24 new women were elected to the House. "All male Senate races received more press coverage than races which included female candidates,' but despite male biased journalistic media coverage, 'women of the 1992 election succeeded with strong campaign spots," that helped them redefine themselves to the public and win constituent votes.

Though women and men receive an equal amount of coverage by newspapers, "the content of the coverage that women receive as opposed to men, during an election is extremely different and male biased." Newspaper readers are more likely to read about a female candidate's personal life, appearance, or personality while reading about a male's stance on governmental issues. This gives the man more credibility as a candidate. Compared to coverage of male candidates, coverage of a female candidate is, "more personal, less issue based, and less likely to include evidence or reasoning to support quoted remarks". Ultimately women are portrayed as less informed on issues and instead as icons rather than educated citizens with a plan to better the national government. "Compared to male Candidates, female candidates received considerably less issue coverage and significantly more personal coverage." Also, Pieper-Aiken found that radio and newspaper coverage of Secretary of State Madeline Albright recounted her style of clothing while generally avoiding similar descriptions of her male counterparts. Personal frames written by journalists in the 1992 campaign were analyzed by John Devit and supported the claim that the coverage of female candidates was biased. The sources in his analysis were more likely to use personal frames in describing female candidates than in describing male candidates (Appendix 1).

Newspapers cover women inadequately and personally. In an Arizona Republic news article about Governor Jane Hull the journalist describes her as, "A grandmotherly red head dressed in a sensible suit climbs out of the back seat and strolls to the hotel…if anyone in the lobby recognizes Gov. Jane Hull…they don't let on." The Rocky Mountain News is another example of journalists guilty of the bias. In a news article covering another gubernatorial race the writer describes one candidate, Gail Schoeletter, as "showing up at glitzy campaign to-dos in a dusty 1993 Toyota with cans of apricot nectar and granola bars sliding around on the floor boards." These two newspapers are only a sample of the type of coverage women are subjected to during their political campaigns. Their issues are rarely covered and instead their personal habits and clothing style are commented on as the topic of choice and most importance.
1992 is known as The Year of the Woman because despite the advantage men had in regard to journalistic coverage during this Senate campaign, many women prevailed. Their campaign ads were powerful including countless legislative achievement mentions, images depicting power and leadership, prominent endorsements and highlighted values. These verbal and nonverbal messages portray the women as strong, informed and accomplished rather than pretty things on the television set.

There are many ways in which the women's ads contribute to the strength of their campaign. These include verbal and nonverbal content as defined by Lynda Lee Kaid. Kaid says that, "The verbal content element of video style focuses on the semantic characteristics of the candidates message." Male voiceovers were used frequently in the 1992 campaign to ad strength to the women's ads. The significance of a male voiceover, a masculine voice that plays over the images of the ad, is that it, "enables women to present a masculine image of strength, competence, and qualification. Also, the candidate is not exclusively a voice for women." The following are definitions of the tactics, such as the tactic of a male voiceover, that were used in the ads of six women running for political office in the 1992 campaign.
Legislative achievement was coded as the frequency a candidate was said to have passed an important bill, a position of party leadership, ratings, and references to legislation by supportive organizations. Also achievement was coded if the candidate was cited to have won a political race or earned distinguished awards.

During the 1992 campaign, in the face of male biased journalism, women used their 30-second campaign advertising spots to assert themselves as powerful and leaderly. Power and leadership was coded in the ads as those times it was said or shown that a female candidate had changed or fought to do something for her state. Non-verbal power and leadership was coded as the candidates engaging with their constituents on film, standing behind podiums, pictured at a graduation or photographed with people of importance. As stated in the Ad Watchers Toolkit, spots that demonstrate power usually have a candidate behind a podium, shaking people's hands, in front of a plane or dressed in a suit. Through these symbols, "women strive to reduce potentially damaging stereotypes by stressing their competence in their ads. Women candidates focus almost exclusively on their leadership, experience, and ability, talking about their competence much more often then their male counterparts."
The style of dress in which a candidate appeared was also coded. Suit jackets were prevalent in each ad and were coded as formal dress. The suit jacket was coded as a long sleeved, dress coat in which one would expect to see in a professional arena.

Prominent issue highlights were coded in an ad when a promise was made by the candidate to make a change or specifically carry out a legal action to benefit the citizens. These were used both verbally and non verbally. If a newspaper super flashed across the screen demonstrating a candidates' support of an issue such as the death penalty or the environment, it was also coded as an issue highlight.

Women not only highlighted issues in their campaign ads, but they highlighted feminine issues (Appendix 2). Feminine issues in the ads of 1992 included day care, welfare, education, health care, abortion, and the environment. Each issue was coded both verbally and visually. When scenes such as dump sights, sewage plants or natural environments were visible on the television the environment was coded as a focus issue. Education, health care, and abortion were coded both verbally and non verbally. If children in a classroom are flashed across the screen or a bill concerning education is superimposed across the screen, education was coded. Healthcare was generally a verbal mention as well as and welfare. The issue of abortion was present both verbally and non-verbally. Signs advocating a woman's right to choose as well as pictures of the candidates at a right to choose rally were both coded as visual proponents of the abortion issue. Each of these issues are family value mentions and are coded as such. The candidates all made family values a key focus of their ads.
Endorsements were used to support and give credibility to the candidates on issues such as these. Coding endorsements was mainly based on visual mentions by newspaper of PACs or Interest Groups supporting a candidate. Also, large billboards paid for by a group outside of the campaign were coded as endorsements as well. By citing outside support in an ad, a candidate is able to show that she has credible backing from the citizenry.

Female candidates developed advertising strategies that tried to balance the contradictory demands made by journalistic media coverage. One way that the candidates did so was through asserting family values. The frequency that a candidate used family values in her ad was coded when there was an image or verbal mention of her parents, children or the phrase 'family values.' Also, if legislation was passed concerning a specific family issue such as education, it also was counted as an assertion of support for family values.
Many of the women in 'The Year of the Woman' campaign made conscious efforts to use the word 'fight' in the political ads. Fight was coded verbally and never visually. To fight is "to participate in combat or battle, to participate in boxing or wrestling, or to quarrel and argue" Also, to fight is "to stand up against something or assert oneself" (Webster's Dictionary). The true definitions illustrate the strength the women were attempting to achieve in this choice of words in their ads.

When women highlighted a specific plan it was also coded. The word plan or agenda were both used to code this aspect of the women's ads. If they were cited to have made strides to put through a specific bill on numerous occasions it was also cited as a future plan for the government. By asserting a plan the women present themselves as organized, capable and qualified.

The following table illustrates the frequency of which each of these variables appeared in some of the female candidates' campaign ads in the 1992 elections. One can conclude from the table that the most important factors of a woman's campaign in that year were the need to assert power and leadership, fight for change, demonstrate family values, and cite endorsements. In doing so, the women of the 1992 political races were able to counter balance the male biased media coverage received outside of the campaign in a majority of cases win the positions they were running to achieve.

VERBAL Barbara Boxer Anne Richards Carol Mosley Braun Clare Sergeant
Male Voiceover Yes No Yes Yes
Suit jacket 0 0 0 0
LegislativeAchievement 4 2 8 3
Power&Leadership 3 1 10 4
Issue Highlights 0 5 7 1
Endorsements 0 1 3 0
Fight Variable 5 1 2 3

Outlined Plan 0 1 0 2
Family Values 0 4 5 0

NON VERBAL
Suit jacket 5 0 8 2
LegislativeAchievement 4 2 6 2

Power&Leadership 7 0 7 8
Issue Highlights 4 2 7 2
Endorsements 1 1 4 5
Family Values 0 4 10 0
VERBAL Diane Fienstein Geraldine Ferraro
Male Voiceover Yes Yes
Power/Leadership 8 7
Family Values 1 4
Prominent Issue 2 5
Endorsements 2 3
Fight 1 5
NON VERBAL
LegislativeAchievements 4 3
Issue Highlights 3 7
Power /Leadership 8 15
Endorsements 5 2
Family Values 0 6

Legislative Achievements of each candidate were highlighted both verbally and nonverbally in all of the ads. Usually this was presented verbally, but in some cases the legislative achievements were flashed across the screen in supers or newspaper flashes. In the Carol Mosley Braun ads as well as Dianne Feinstein and Geraldine Ferraro legislative achievements were highlighted and consequently these women were asserted their value and strength as legitimate candidates. "With regard to traits we expect that women will seek to revise damaging stereotypes by demonstrating their knowledge and experience in their campaigns." A study done by James Benze and Eugene Declercq analyzed the advertising spots in 1992 and concluded that, "female candidates stress their strengths rather than counteract their weaknesses." The legislative achievements were a way in which they did this.
From the table one is able to tell that 'Power and Leadership,' was a key to many of the candidates campaign messages. "Women running for office often faced a situation where they had to be professional and assertive, yet if they appeared to be too professional or assertive, they would be seen by voters as stiff and aggressive, in short, as unfeminine." It was necessary for each woman to use illustrations of power and leadership to carry out this appearance of professionalism and assertiveness. Gerry Ferraro used highlighted power and leadership more than 20 times in her ad campaign while many of the other women including Barbara Boxer and Carol Mosley Braun highlighted it more than 10 times. As a result one is able to conclude that verbal and non-verbal testaments to power and leadership are very important in a strong ad campaign.

Every candidate, aside form Anne Richards, wore a suit jacket at least once in her ad. Geraldine Ferraro was coded more than ten times wearing such professional clothing. The female candidates wore suit jackets frequently. Through such dress they asserted their strength as a candidates equal to men. "The most significant difference comes with the approach to dress taken by male and female candidates…. women were far more likely than men to appear in their ads in formal dress." The female candidates in the 1992 campaign downplayed stereotypically 'feminine' attributes.

Prominent issue highlights were used frequently to give the candidate credibility. "We expect women candidates to stress issues more than traits as a way of demonstrating their competence". Issue highlights were used heavily because many times the issues that women represented, such as a woman's right to choose or the environment, were not highlighted by journalists. Specifically, Dianne Fienstein, Barbara Boxer, Carol Mosley Braun and Clare Sergeant all highlighted the fact that they were supportive of a woman's right to choose. Sergeant and Boxer also highlighted concern for the environment numerous times in their ads. "When campaign managers were asked to identify the main themes of their campaign, the managers of women's campaigns were significantly more likely than managers of male candidates to mention issues. For women's campaigns 78% of the themes mentioned were concerned with policy matters, while 22% focused on personal traits." Ultimately, women were more likely to make issues a major focus of their ad campaigns because the news media was unresponsive to the female candidate's issue agenda.

Women not only focused on specific issues in their campaign ads, but they highlighted more feminine issues. Though this may seem contradictory to what the women of the 1992 campaign were trying to achieve, it in fact is not. In rallying constituents around a female candidate, campaign managers wanted to portray her as woman and not a masculinized version of a woman. In accentuating 'female issues' women were rallying for a change. It made their ads unique and gave citizens what they wanted, a compassionate campaign. Bella Abzug, who once complained that news coverage of her made it seem as if, "I had just come out of the kitchen," now suggests that the ideal campaign is one like that which these women were trying to achieve, one that "accepts women as women," who are daughters, wives, mothers and serious people. By concentrating on certain feminine issues the women were able to be strong while remaining the women they were. Female candidates created strong campaigns and made sure that they remained respected as women. Both Carol Mosley Braun and Gerry Ferrarro highlighted welfare in their ads, while Anne Richards and Clare Sergeant focused on family values and health care as well as a woman's right to choose. "Campaign managers for women candidates saw the press as focusing on "female," issues only 40 percent of the time, while the managers said they focused on these issues 61 percent of the time." Again it is illustrated how women were forced to combat the minimal and biased coverage they received from journalists and the press.

Fight mentions were also visibly popular throughout the ad campaigns of 1992. With a total of 5 fight mentions. Barbara Boxer and Geraldine Ferraro equally used this word in their ad. Clare Sergeant used 3 fight mentions and Dianne Feinstein and Anne Richards only used one. The point however, is that the word fight was used in every female campaign. Though this may be seen as masculinizing their ads in order to receive votes, it is more of an appeal to the new female strength and ability to battle for what is right rather than merely succumbing to the male dominated idea of what is necessary to be a viable political candidate.

Many of the women also highlighted a plan for the future and mentioned a specific agenda in their ad. For example, Anne Richards based her entire ad specifically on one message, the message that she had a plan for social security. Though the other ads that contained a 'plan' message may have been broader, they all cited a plan to show organization and competence. By setting out a governmental plan, women were encouraging their audience to have trust. Female candidates set out a plan because it gives them a sense of control. They "feel the need to appear business-like, tough, and in control" and do so through advertising a governmental plan.

While Anne Richards carried off a very different ad campaign than Carol Mosley Braun or Dianne Fienstein, it remained an appeal to the people to recognize her qualities as female and as a competent candidate focused on one message, senior citizens. Anne Richards won this race for Texas governor as many of the other women in this study won representation of their state. Each woman focused her ad on something different. It is clear that Braun's ad is heavily laden with endorsements, legislative achievements and highlights of power and leadership while at the same time concentrating a huge portion of the ad on family values. Boxer's theme was to fight for change and Dianne Fienstein highlighted her achievements in the face of undue hardship. Seargant and Ferraro took their ads and focused on highlighting power and leadership. Ultimately all of the women had feminine ad campaigns that were positive outlooks on women rather than weak, negative and superficially concerned. Though men started out with an unfair advantage of positive journalistic media coverage in 1992, women created ad campaigns that overcame the unbalance and won more seats in the House and Senate than ever before.