Gender Health Stories: An Anatomy Of Bias
January 20, 2003
The first Special
Report documented widespread gender bias in the American media (1).
How does this bias carry over to coverage of health issues in particular?
This Special Report describes the four types of bias found in media coverage of health stories, placing special emphasis on coverage of health issues by the New York Times (NYT).
1. Lack of Coverage of Men's Health Issues
Journalists often take up the cause of the disadvantaged and the underserved. Knowing that men die 5.5 years sooner than women and lag on almost every indicator of health status, one might expect that gender health stories would give emphasis to men's health. But reality sometimes defies logic.
For example, the New York Times website (www.nytimes.com) provides a search engine that allows analyses of articles published in the NYT. A search of all articles published during the period 1996-2002 reveals the following:
Men's Health: 468 articles
Women's Health: 787 articles
Prostate Cancer: 1,572 articles
Breast Cancer: 2,714 articles
Clearly, the Times considers men's health to be less newsworthy and less important than the health of women.
2. Inaccurate Coverage
Many Americans believe that women were routinely excluded from medical research studies and were subjected to discrimination in obtaining medical care. Columnist Cathy Young provides numerous examples of how these claims were afforded prominent exposure in the mass media (2).
Two newspaper headlines went like this:
"Research on Health Omits, Hurts Women" -- USA Today, June 19, 1990, p. A1
"Studies Say Women Fail to Receive Equal Treatment for Heart Disease" -- New York Times, July 25, 1991, p. A1.
Unfortunately, these claims are controversial or altogether false.
For example, the USA Today headline which claimed that health research "omits" women is simply untrue. Studies have shown that women participated in 96% of NIH clinical trials (3), and numerically represented more than 50% of all research participants (4,5).
And when studies later showed that women had not been discriminated against for heart treatments, the New York Times decided to bury that article on page C6 (6).
The uncritical media acceptance of the claim that women were shortchanged by medicine must count as an amusing example of journalistic naivete.
3. Articles With a Negative Tone
Warren Farrell analyzed coverage of gender health articles in the New York Times. Farrell notes the NYT published its first Women's Health Section in 1997, but did not run a Men's Health Section until two years later (7).
The articles in the 1999 Men's Health Section contained mixed messages. While one article implied that men were healthier than women ("Men have lots of health advantages"), another article assumed a blaming tone to explain men's shorter lifespan: "Why Men Don't Last: Self-Destruction as a Way of Life."
Another article opened with this patronizing headline: "As Patients, Men are Impatient, or Uneasy, or Both. They Need to Get a Grip, Like Women."
One can only wonder why the NYT editors would decide to run articles that were derogatory and condescending to their intended readers.
4. Human Tragedy Stories
Human tragedy stories form the staple of much of media coverage. Clearly, the public wants to hear about misfortune that befalls others. But sadly, media coverage of such events is far from balanced.
One analysis of 1,200 headlines from seven high-circulation newspapers found that women were referred to 35 times more often than male victims (8). And when violence against men was reported, it was presented in an abstract, statistical manner; in contrast, violence against women was personalized.
A more recent example of this curious bias was seen during the conflict between the Taliban and Afghani minorities in late 2001. During this war, reports frequently appeared that detailed ethnic villagers being arbitrarily maimed, tortured, or murdered. A careful reading of these articles consistently revealed that it was men who were subjected to these human rights abuses. But media accounts consistently downplayed gender.
During the same time period, reports also emerged of other Afghanis who were prohibited from leaving their houses or obtaining employment. These Afghanis were female. In these stories, gender was central to the storyline.
So when men were subjected to mass killings, gender was all but irrelevant. But when women were subjected to discrimination, gender counted for everything.
One Boston Globe columnist made this observation about the media coverage of the Afghani war: "concern with the women's tragic plight should not blind us to the suffering of men. And from some of the rhetoric and media coverage, one might conclude that women are the only ones who are victimized." (9).
Not surprisingly, this biased coverage stoked a public outcry about the plight of Afghani women. This near-hysteria culminated in a November 17, 2001 radio address by First Lady Laura Bush in which she claimed, "The fight against terrorism is also a fight for the rights and dignity of women."
Mrs. Bush said not a word about the rights and dignity of men.
Unworthy Victims
This Special Report has shown how media coverage of gender health issues is often biased because of lack of coverage for men's health problems, because of inaccurate coverage of gender health controversies, and because of the demeaning tone of some articles.
Perhaps most disturbing is the biased presentation of human tragedy stories. As a result, the public becomes more concerned with the employment rights of women than the selective brutalization of men.
So how did men become unworthy victims?
-Carey Roberts
References:
1. Men's Health America Special Report: A Double Standard of Media Coverage. Rockville, MD, 2003.
2. Young C. The Myth of Gender Bias in Medicine. Washington, DC: Women's Freedom Network, 1997.
3. Dickersin & Min. NIH clinical trials and publication bias. Online J Current Clin Trials. Doc. 50. April 28, 1993.
4. Ungerleider RS, Friedman MA. Sex, trials, and datatapes. J National Cancer Institute 1991; 83: 16-17.
5. Meinert CL et al. Gender Representation in Trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 2000; 21: 462-475.
6. Studies Split on Sex Gap in Treating Heart Patients. New York Times, April 14, 1992, p. C6. 7. Farrell W. Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say. New York: Tarcher/Putnam, 1999, Chapter 8.
8. Boyce JW. Manufacturing Concern: Headline Coverage of Male and Female Victims of Violence in Canadian Daily Newspapers, 1989 to 1992. MA Thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario.
9. Young C. When Men are Victims, Boston Globe, November 13, 2001.
This Special Report was originally posted at Men's Health America on January 17, 2003.
