The Distorted Mirror: Press Coverage of Women Candidates for Statewide Office
Abstract
Voters see the political landscape largely through the eyes of the news media. In races for statewide office, where direct contact with politicians is rare, citizens receive most of their news about the campaign from state newspapers. Voters' dependence on the press for political information may be problematic for women running for office. A content analysis of newspaper coverage in 47 statewide campaigns between 1982 and 1988 shows that the press differentiate between male and female candidates in their campaign coverage. These differences are more dramatic in U.S. Senate races, but the differences are still evident in gubernatorial contests. In senatorial races, women receive less campaign coverage than their male counterparts and the coverage they receive is more negative--emphasizing their unlikely chances of victory. In both senatorial and gubernatorial races, women receive consistently less issue attention than their male counterparts. Furthermore, the news media seem more responsive to the messages sent by male candidates. The media's agenda more closely resembles the agenda issued by male candidates in their televised political advertisements. These systematic differences in press treatment of male and female candidates may hinder women as they strive for statewide elective office.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Findings from the United Kingdom and elsewhere indicate a consistent gender gap in politicians' visibility both during and between elections.
“Findings from the United Kingdom and elsewhere indicate a consistent gender gap in politicians’ visibility both during and between elections (Adcock 2010;Banwart et al. 2003;Braden 1996;Campbell and Childs 2010;Gidengil and Everitt 2003;Heldman et al. 2005;Kahn 1994; Kahn and Goldenberg 1991;O’Neill et al. 2016;Ross 2002).”
From Intersectionality and Press Coverage of Political Campaigns (2017) · cites this paper as Kahn 1994
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Banwart, M. C., Bystrom, D. G., & Robertson, T. (2003) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764202238491 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Intersectionality and Press Coverage of Political Campaigns
Ward, O. (2017) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161216673195 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kahn, K. F.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kahn, Kim Fridkin
- Venue
- The Journal of Politics
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1994-02
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 154-173
- ISSN
- 0022-3816 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2508
- OpenAlex
- W2115979755
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 5.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Politics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Politics and Representation
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Keywords
- women candidates, state elections, campaign coverage, U.S. Senate elections, gubernatorial elections, issue attention, political advertising, media agenda, gender gap in politics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review