At an unknown time in the last year, ESPN sports reporter Erin Andrews was secretly and illegally filmed nude in her hotel room on hidden camera by a voyeur and the resulting video was posted on the internet. Without linking to or naming any publications disseminating this horrible breach of her rights, let's take a long view of Andrews's struggle with sexism in a male-dominated sports and media culture. While this voyeurism may or may not be an isolated incident, sadly, it is simply an escalation of the barrage of sexism and objectification that constantly surrounds her as she attempts to construct a career in a "man's sphere."
Erin Andrews is a sideline reporter for ESPN, a job that has always been linked to sexism. It is one of the few positions available to women in major sports broadcasts, but the women who fill the role are selected as much for their physical appearance as their broadcast skills. They are, in short, exploited for their sex appeal to straight male audiences and rarely, if ever, asked to provide opinions or analysis (presumably because the networks are not interested in the sports opinions of women, and certainly not these women). Female sideline reporters generally do not graduate to the broadcast booth or other high level on-camera positions. More often, they are phased out as they age and replaced by younger women.
Andrews, a former University of Florida basketball dance team member, has worked at ESPN since 2004, and while her popularity has always been unbelievably high among the majority-male audience, it has never been separated from her constant objectification. Her popularity has spawned dozens of devoted blogs, which often reduce her to her body, her breasts and the novelty of a woman with such a body talking about sports. She routinely is a top Google search, a popularity that sports and gossip blogs quickly learned to exploit to generate traffic. Sports blogs, from the reputable to the disgusting, have devoted columns to such non-newsworthy topics as analyzing her wardrobe and documenting her eating habits among all kinds of more appalling innuendo not worth mentioning here. Otherwise innocent camera angles and photographs that emphasize her breasts or show her eating are accompanied by innuendo and make up the bulk of her fan-created online presence. Meanwhile, Playboy.com voted her "America's Sexist Sportscaster" twice. To boot, last year, an internet hoax was created, alleging a sex-tape between her and a famous athlete she interviewed, and though the credibility of this hoax was easily disproved, it was largely embraced in gossip-media as news, or still exploited for traffic as news about fake news.
Inside the sports world, male athletes have been recorded treating her terribly unprofessionally--from ogling and hooting to a USC football player slapping her rear end at this January's Rose Bowl. ESPN, for its part, has "accidentally" included close-up clips of her behind during broadcasts, included segments devoted entirely to fan responses to her physical appearance, and even had male commentators talk about her sex appeal on air. This is hardly a professional way to treat a journalist, and does not even resemble the treatment of her male coworkers.
So, although this may be the first time many outside the sports world have heard of Andrews, this is not at all the first time she has been the victim of notable, appalling and unambiguous sexism. The whole of sports media--not to mention the gazing male audience--bears some responsibility for creating an atmosphere of demand for this kind of exploitation and subsequently feeding it. While many of these media outlets--including FOX News--feign outrage, they continue to cash in by posting partial clips or photographs of the video.
So don't hold your breath waiting for sports media outlets to apologize for the ghosts of sexist Erin Andrews coverage-past that made this terrifying, dehumanizing breach of her rights and privacy sadly inevitable.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Long History of Objectifying Erin Andrews.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15082
typo correction: the playboy list, as some of you may have guessed, is "Sexiest Sportscasters."
This comments has been deleted.
Don't click on this...this exact same "comment" has been posted on sports blogs/articles about this item and is obviously spam or something more malevolent.
That you would try to participate in this voyeurism on a feminist blog is upsetting. This is abuse.
Karena, you're at the wrong blog. Try again.
This is slightly off topic, but this whole thing has got me thinking - what about cases where a couple films a sex tape while together, and then after they breakup one partner releases it to the media? This has happened to a number of celebrities. I even know non-celebrities this has happened to.
Do we view this in the same light, or is that scenario different because they consented to actual taping, just not to the distribution?
Yet another parallel are all the photos that were published of Britney Spears (maybe others too?) with out panties and her you-know-what showing. There are lots of pics on the web of celebrities with nipple slips and other wardrobe malfunctions at public events. Are these viewed in the same light or different because they were in public when the pics were taken? (I personally think since they were in public it is different and valid for these pics to be taken, but a good argument might convince me to change that view)
I'm going to take an unpopular view for some, but the fact that the public even cares about a nipple slip or someone's underwear is a symptom, not the problem.
And with all of the free, high-res nudity done by consenting people it really baffles the mind that people would go through such lengths to invade folk's privacy to acquire poor quality footage: I read for example, that in the video of Ms Andrews she was barely recognizable.
I was reading on a Newsweek blog and the author had a quote that had me thinking: she wrote, "Privacy is the new nudity".
I'm thinking about this and letting it sink in.
In addition to leaked celebrity videos, etc, there have been plenty of other articles about civilian invasions of privacy, such as upskirting, women taking their computer in for service only to find that someone has tampered with their camera to record them. And who can forget the young female high school athlete who had her photos taken without her permission and was sexualized and splashed all over "fan" websites?
All of these things are being done without the person's consent and with intent to distribute. This is about business and a culture that seems resistant to the idea of a woman's self-determination and an individual's right to dignity.
I know the nay-sayers want to keep on talking about how sexual objectification is harmless and even positive, but here is yet another example where it's totally out of control. This is a bigger cultural problem than just a few assholes. I think it's cause for concern whether it's Spears caught out without underwear or a man or woman being filmed in private.
This doesn't surprise me in the least. The environment at ESPN has always been "locker room pig" based. The boys club network there was, and I'm sure still is, horrifying. Worst of all the guys there didn't even notice
I adore college football and my husband and I watch ESPN gameday pretty much every saturday from August to January.
Erin Andrews is smart, beautiful and a great sportscaster. She never dresses provactively and is all business, no flirting with coaches, players etc. Yet there is a hype around her that is just insane...because she's young, pretty and has a nice figure.
In talking about this topic with my husband yesterday we sort of came to the conclusion that we honestly and sincerely hope that ESPN provides her with very good security. I fear that this invasion into her privacy is the tip of the iceberg. It is a matter of time before she is seriously assaulted by a drunk or obsessed "fan." And ESPN is definitely responsible for the 'hype' that surrounds her as they encourage it!
Thanks for this posting - I thought that this disgusting act was an isolated incident of objectification of Ms. Andrews.
dangerfield, I am also appalled at the fact that there are not more female lead announcers for male-dominated sports like football and auto racing like Pam Ward. Hopefully, Wendy Venturini will become the lead lap-by-lap announcer for NASCAR on Fox before too long because I believe that Mike Joy will retire before Fox's contract with the Sprint Cup Series is up for renewal in 2014.
As a person who watches a lot of espn I never got the impression of it given here. Yeah there are some dicks on there but that's not the sum of the whole from what I see. But I'd like to know how folks that actually watch feel.
ESPN is actually pretty good about emphasizing women's capabilities rather than promoting them almost entirely based on looks. They have a lot of female broadcasters (many of whom are not totally hot, and all of whom earn their places), they offer up a good base of knowledge on female athletes, etc. The Erin Andrews thing is almost purely an internet phenomenon and has remained so, rather than being used by the network to improve short-term ratings or some such.
If you ever want something sports-based to complain about, go to SI's website. I read it often because they have a number of good writers, but the difference in how they give women attention between them and ESPN or Yahoo is honestly fascinating. It feels like their decision-makers are lodged in the '70s. And the mere existence of the swimsuit issue is not even the majority of the reason.
I'm in agreement with you.
The Chicago Tribune is reporting that writers from the NY Post are being banned as contributers to ESPN because they published photos from the video.
Is that woman in the video really Erin Andrews? The quality was pretty grainy (yes I looked!). Am I wrong in thinking that by taking such a heavy handed approach, the ESPN lawyers have actually given this story some legs? For example, if they had come out with a blanket denial would people be talking about the video?
Of course the above does in no way imply that violating someone's privacy is in any way condonable.
"The whole of sports media--not to mention the gazing male audience--bears some responsibility for creating an atmosphere of demand for this kind of exploitation and subsequently feeding it"
Please...
Not to detract from the humiliation caused to Andrews, or understate the horrific crime of the filming, but the sports media and gazing male audience are a drop in the bucket of what really is at fault here.
This video was up for months, with few views or fanfare.
Then insert the mainstream media, who has average 1500 articles per day across every media outlet in the world, condemning viewers, condemning everybody, all the while, increasing interest and the widespread proliferation of this 100-fold.
Every writer who simply "must" acknowledge the story, berate the masses, or express their shock is doing nothing more than making sure every reader in the world knows who this is, what has happened, and increased it's spread, all while making sure they condemn everyone but their genre.
The infotainment industry, and their fascination with all things celebrity, makes real news seem boring, and convince people that these are the issues of our days, all the while, making sure not a soul in the connected world can avoid become invested in this story, like it or not.
Um, demand spiked when the video was google indexed and more people could see it (the beginning of the spike) which led someone conneted to Andrews to become aware of it, which in turn led lawyers to make a statement, which was then picked up by Deadspin and other sports blogs that routinely covered Andrews which increased attention. Only then did the mainstream media get involved.
Which in turn further spiked video searches 10 fold, plastered this across every paper, internet site in the country, spread the humiliating video from the original porn-seeking school boys types onto a larger group of almost anyone who came across the story, and spawned thousands of articles whose only seeming intent was to condemn the very actions they furthered by calling this "news."
3 out of every 4 articles have little to say about the lawsuit, about the invasion of privacy issues, or much of anything to say at all, other than "shame on you" for being interested, all the while plastering it all over the front page of their sites/papers to make sure they catch their share of the celebrity-fascinated public, which does nothing more than spark the very interest they are condemning.
It dawns on me that perhaps you see my condemnation of the non-sports media, and articles they have proliferated as reflecting on your piece, which was not the intent.
I simply objected to the specifying of "sports media" as a source to blame, when in fact, as I see it, the more "traditional" media, in their endeavor to chastise the general public in many articles that hold little else of value beyond scolding, are in fact a large part of why this story is so widespread, and why these images that were basically stolen from Andrews will now be viewed by so many more people. The are, in effect, helping create the monster they speak out so loudly against.
The NY Post felt it necessary to post stills when commenting on the story? AP and other services need to dig up the most alluring photos of Andrews they can find to post next to the story about a violation?
The mainstream media, which I have little respect for to begin with, simply turned this into a circus, and furthered the damage caused in my humble opinion.
ESPN had refused to even comment initially, leading me to feel at least that sports media was a fraction of what started this ball rolling.
"Um, demand spiked when the video was google indexed ..."
The video was indexed by google many many moons before "demand spiked".
http://donchavez.com/blog/2009/07/17/what-you-dont-know-yet-about-the-naked-erin-andrews-hotel-videos/
Google trends for "Erin Andrews" over the past year
http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22erin+andrews%22&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0
The spike on Jan 2009 was becasue of the Rey Maualuga grinding Andrews incident.
So as you can see the search for "erin andrews" spiked concurrently with news reaching the mainstream media about the existence of the video, which was due to the PR statement by Andrews and the ESPN lawyers responding to NSFW POA.
If the PR statement was not issued I don't think the video would ever have been conclusively linked to her.
That said as I mentioned above this is no way condones the obvious violation of her privacy and if the perp is caught he/she must be made to account for it.
I would like to start an Erin Andrews Legal Offense fund to aid in her lawsuit. This way, those of us who support her can actually do something about it rather than just bitch about it on blogs.