Comments on: Be it resolved that http://www.prowomanprolife.org/2009/07/06/be-it-resolved-that/ Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:48:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Charles Windsor http://www.prowomanprolife.org/2009/07/06/be-it-resolved-that/comment-page-1/#comment-3745 Charles Windsor Mon, 06 Jul 2009 13:38:02 +0000 http://www.prowomanprolife.org/?p=6144#comment-3745 Women did create that genre, & introduced it to newspapers. I'm old enough to remember when they did. There's a short history, going back only to the 1960s, & there's a long history, going back to the reign of Queen Anne (1707-1714), when the first "tabloid personal narrative" articles were introduced into papers like the Spectator of Addison & Steele, expressly in order to appeal to woman readers. But the short history is one of women attaining equality in the modern newsroom. There were always women on staff before, but they were a minority & they had to accommodate themselves to a fairly hardbitten masculine environment which embraced drinking & smoking & profanity, & in which merely suggesting a story like that would get a woman very seriously mocked. The taste was for hard news, not only about politics, business, sports, but even on the woman's page: "stuff that happened just before we went to press." E.g. fashion news was fashion news: it was from fashion reporters. Food was just seasonal recipes; even "dieting" would have been too silly. The whole narcissistic idea of "lifestyle" had yet to be invented. In particular, the use of the first person was very heavily discouraged, even on the editorial page. Note: I'm not saying that the "woman's point of view" cannot contribute to a broadening of journalism; or that there isn't an important use for the first person; or that newspapers used to be perfect. I'm only saying that it hasn't in fact contributed, except to the degeneration of newspapers -- in combination with other factors. Women did create that genre, & introduced it to newspapers. I’m old enough to remember when they did. There’s a short history, going back only to the 1960s, & there’s a long history, going back to the reign of Queen Anne (1707-1714), when the first “tabloid personal narrative” articles were introduced into papers like the Spectator of Addison & Steele, expressly in order to appeal to woman readers.

But the short history is one of women attaining equality in the modern newsroom. There were always women on staff before, but they were a minority & they had to accommodate themselves to a fairly hardbitten masculine environment which embraced drinking & smoking & profanity, & in which merely suggesting a story like that would get a woman very seriously mocked. The taste was for hard news, not only about politics, business, sports, but even on the woman’s page: “stuff that happened just before we went to press.” E.g. fashion news was fashion news: it was from fashion reporters. Food was just seasonal recipes; even “dieting” would have been too silly. The whole narcissistic idea of “lifestyle” had yet to be invented. In particular, the use of the first person was very heavily discouraged, even on the editorial page.

Note: I’m not saying that the “woman’s point of view” cannot contribute to a broadening of journalism; or that there isn’t an important use for the first person; or that newspapers used to be perfect. I’m only saying that it hasn’t in fact contributed, except to the degeneration of newspapers — in combination with other factors.

]]>