Global Media Monitoring Project 2010 Foreword by Margaret Gallagher GMMP REPORT September 2010 | Global Media Monitoring Project 2010 Research compiled by Sarah Macharia, Dermot O’Connor and Lilian Ndangam Foreword: Margaret Gallagher Special commentaries: Amie Joof-Cole, Mindy Ran and Nidya Pesántez-Calle. See Annex 6 for biographies Data collection: Teams of volunteer media monitors – grassroots communication groups, university researchers, students and media professionals – in 108 countries worldwide See Annex 4. Database development, data collation, data management and tables: Media Monitoring Africa Fourth GMMP research methodology refinement: Gender Links and an international virtual working group. See Annex 5. Acknowledgements Joanne Sandler, Deputy Executive Director (UNIFEM) and Jennifer Cooper, Programme Communications Specialist (UNIFEM) WACC Director of Programmes Lavinia Mohr and staff including Gisèle Langendries, Chloe Shantz-Hilkes and Laura Knox WACC regional associations, members and partners GMMP coordinators and volunteer monitors in 108 countries worldwide Financial support United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), Women’s World Day of Prayer (WWDP) - German Committee, Stichting Rotterdam (The Netherlands), Anonymous donor (The Netherlands) and Bread for All (Switzerland). The Global Media Monitoring Project is coordinated by the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC), a global network of communicators that promotes communication for social change. WACC has offices in London, U.K. and Toronto, Canada. www.waccglobal.org www.whomakesthenews.org Published by the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC). September, 2010. Cover photo by Chiapas Media Project, Mexico Design by Brad Collicott 2.5 deed. Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No derivative works. You may not alter, transform or build upon this work. For any use or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above. i GMMP Monitors, Trinidad and Tobago GMMP Monitor, Jordan Table of Contents Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Synopsis of findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii In other news: gender and progress at the margins. . . . vii Delivering the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii News content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Who makes the news in cyberspace? . . . . . . . . . . . x Towards ethical reporting and gender balance: A trade union perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi A road map to accelerate progress in the portrayal and representation of women in the news . . . . . . . . . . . xi 1. A Day In The World’s News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 10 November 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Participating Countries GMMP 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Topics in the news on monitoring day. . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. In Other News: gender and progress at the margins. . . . 7 Occupation of news subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Age of news subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Victims and survivors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Identity and family. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Photographs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Summary of findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3. Delivering The News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Presenting the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Reporting the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Special commentary by Amie Joof. . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Summary of findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4. News Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Women’s centrality in the news . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Gender (in)equality in the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Gender stereotyping in the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Gender, media and women’s human rights . . . . . . . 34 News and the formation of thinking. . . . . . . . . . . 37 Special commentary by Nidya Pesántez C. . . . . . . . 37 Summary of findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace?. . . . . . . . . . 39 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Internet News Monitoring Methodology . . . . . . . . . 40 The internet news agenda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 News subjects in photographs and multimedia . . . . . 41 Reporters in online news. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Stereotypes and marginality in online news. . . . . . . . 41 Planning ahead. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Summary of findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 ii Table of Contents, continued GMMP Monitors, India - New Delhi GMMP Monitors, Dominican Republic GMMP Monitors, Belgium 6. Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 1. Blatant stereotyping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2. Subtle stereotyping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3. Gender-Blind Stories and Missed opportunities . . . . 52 4. Gender-aware Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 7. Towards Ethical Reporting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 “Sticky floors” and worse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Initiatives: Old and new. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Revisiting the GMMP 2005 Action Plan. . . . . . . . . 56 8. A Roadmap to Accelerate Progress in the Portrayal and Representation of Women in the News. . . . . . . . . 57 Annex 1. Methodological Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Annex 2. Index of Tables and Charts. . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Annex 3. National Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 1. Sex of presenters, reporters and news subjects . . . . 66 2. News subjects in television, radio and newspapers. . 68 3. News subjects in major topic areas . . . . . . . . . . 71 4. News subjects in major occupational groups . . . . . 74 5. Function of news subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 6. News subjects who are victims. . . . . . . . . . . . 84 7. News subjects mentioned by family status. . . . . . . 86 8. News subjects quoted in newspapers. . . . . . . . . 88 9. News subjects appearing in newspaper photographs. 90 10. Presenters and reporters in television, radio and newspapers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 11. Reporters in major topic areas. . . . . . . . . . . . 96 12. Topics in stories where women are central to the news. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 13. Sex of reporter in stories with female and male news subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 14. Stories that clearly challenge or reinforce stereotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 15. Stories that highlight gender equality or inequality . 106 Annex 4. Participating Countries, Regional and National Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Annex 5. Virtual working group members . . . . . . . . . 110 Annex 6. Special Commentaries: Contributors’ Biographies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 iii Foreword ‘If, through an unequal distribution of narrative resources, the materials from which some people must build their account of themselves are not theirs to adapt or control, then this represents a deep denial of voice, a deep form of oppression’1 . Since 1995 the Global Media Monitoring Project has been documenting the deep denial of women’s voices in the world’s news media. The project has its roots in one of the central and enduring preoccupations of the women’s movement world-wide: the politics of representation. For decades, feminist scholars and activists have focused attention on the cultural dimensions of power, and the media’s role in reproducing particular patterns of gender inequality. However, until the advent of the GMMP there was no comprehensive global overview capable of charting the systematic nature of women’s exclusion in the news media. Perhaps one of the most startling results to emerge from the first study in 1995 was the homogeneity of the findings, not just across the three media (newspapers, television, radio), but across the 71 countries included. In no medium, region or news topic did the female-male ratio approach parity. Women’s visibility in the news was extremely and uniformly low. Every five years since then this overall pattern has been replicated in successive studies. Despite a very substantial expansion in the number of participating countries (reaching 108 in 2010), and the inclusion of a pilot sample of national and international internet news sites, the fourth Global Media Monitoring Project confirms the general picture found 15 years earlier. This is not to say that the situation has been static. The headline figure for women’s presence in the news reached 24% in 2010, up from 17% in 1995. But while the increase is heartening, the figure itself is a reminder that in the ‘mirror of the world’ depicted by the news media, the faces seen and the voices heard remain overwhelmingly those of men. The reasons behind this exclusion of women’s voices are many and complex. When challenged, journalists frequently offer simple explanations: there was no time to find a woman, no woman could be persuaded to speak, no suitable female expert could be found, a story highlighting the gender dimensions of a particular news topic was deemed unnewsworthy by the editor, and so on. Responses like these cannot be dismissed as mere rationalisations. They are part of the reality of day-to-day news production. However, as often as not they are simply a surface expression of much more tangled gender-based evaluations and priorities. By implicitly defining ‘people’ or ‘the public’ as male, these fail to acknowledge the distinct economic and social positions of women and men, the gender relations that both determine and result from such positions, and the gender-specific priorities that arise from these positions and relations. In the news, the tendency to ignore women or – at best – to talk about, rather than to or through women, is thus deeply embedded in normative cultural practices, and therefore in newsgathering and general production routines. These practices and routines are extremely difficult, but not impossible, to change. The purpose of the GMMP, since its inception, has been to contribute to that change. The GMMP is much more than a data collection exercise. By putting straightforward monitoring tools in the hands of activists as well as researchers, and developing media literacy and advocacy skills through the monitoring process, it aims to be genuinely transformational. A powerful symbolic statement is made when hundreds of groups around the world come together to monitor their media on the same day every five years. More than that, the GMMP is centrally concerned with media accountability. The regularity of the monitoring exercise gives advocates a formidable rationale for reminding media professionals and decision makers of policy commitments, obligations to their audiences, or statements of support for gender equality. However, it is immensely difficult to change either policy or practice. Just as journalists often argue that attempts to redress gender imbalance in media content would amount to an abdication of their professional ‘objectivity’, decision makers commonly interpret advocacy for gender-sensitive policy as an assault on ‘freedom’ – of expression, the press, the media in general. Yet neither rights nor freedoms are genderneutral. Women’s right to freedom of expression and information is severely limited by layers of structural, economic and cultural constraints. This is recognised in a 2010 declaration by the special rapporteurs on freedom of expression appointed by the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Organization of American States (OAS) and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). Among the key challenges they identify is ‘discrimination in the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression’. Women and other historically marginalized groups ‘struggle to have their voices heard and to access information of relevance to them’. Under-representation, insufficient media coverage, and the prevalence of stereotypical information are all cited as obstacles to the equal enjoyment of freedom of expression2 . Despite such signs of a shift in the traditional ‘freedom of expression’ discourse towards acknowledgement of rights-based conceptions of communication freedoms, the struggle for women’s media and communication rights is still a formidable one. The debate it generates remains marginal to the platforms of many leading political and social movements. The Global Media Monitoring Project has played an inestimable part in keeping these issues alive on international, regional and local agendas. As the 2010 results demonstrate, it will be needed for many years to come. Margaret Gallagher 1 Nick Couldry (2010). Why Voice Matters: Culture and Politics After Neoliberalism. London: Sage Publications, p. 9. 2 F. LaRue, M. Haraszti, C. Botero & F.P. Tlakula (2010). Tenth Anniversary Joint Declaration: Ten Key Challenges to Freedom of Expression in the Next Decade. http://www.article19.org/pdfs/ standards/tenth-anniversary-joint-declaration-ten-key-challenges-to-freedom-of-express.pdf iv Preface The Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) is the world’s most extensive and significant global research on gender in news media. Fifteen years ago, the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (PFA) was unanimously adopted at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women. The Platform for Action provided a framework to “remov[e] all the obstacles to women’s active participation in all spheres of public and private life through a full and equal share in economic, social, cultural and political decision-making.”1 The PFA underlined the importance of media to the advancement of women and in Section J called for increased participation, and access of women to expression and decision-making in and through the media; and new technologies of communication; and promotion of a balanced and nonstereotyped portrayal of women in the media. NGOs and media professional associations were encouraged to establish ‘media watch groups that can monitor the media and consult with the media to ensure that women’s needs and concerns are properly reflected.’2 The first GMMP was coordinated by the Canadian NGO Media Watch, a pioneer in ‘media watching’ with support from WACC and others. Erin Research Inc. Canada developed the methodology and designed the monitoring tools. The first monitoring day 18 January 1995 of radio, TV and newspapers in 71 countries led to the report Global Media Monitoring: Women’s Participation in the News. The report was launched at the Women’s NGO Forum in Beijing in September 1995. Five years on, WACC’s Women’s Programme coordinated the second GMMP with the participation of 70 countries and data analysis by Media Monitoring Project in South Africa. The third GMMP in 2005, also coordinated by WACC with data analysis by Media Monitoring Project, saw the participation of 76 countries. For the fourth GMMP, 108 countries successfully took part in the monitoring day. Few participants in the first GMMP could have foreseen that it would go on to become the world’s largest and longest longitudinal study on gender and media. This achievement is due in no small part to the enthusiastic and committed voluntary participation of national and regional coordinators and thousands of monitors around the world over the last 15 years who have organized and carried out the monitoring. GMMP volunteers come from many backgrounds including grassroots groups, gender and communication civil society groups, journalist unions, media professional associations and universities. Why the concern with news media? What motivates so many people to do the unpaid monitoring of radio, television and newspapers? Why does it matter? Despite the recent proliferation of social media in some regions, news media remain the major and most influential source of information, ideas and opinion for most people around the world. It is a key element of the public and private space in which people, nations and societies live. A nation or society that does not fully know itself cannot respond to its citizens’ aspirations. Who and what appears in the news and how people and events are portrayed matters. Who is left out and what is not covered are equally important. The first GMMP, and as will be seen, the fourth GMMP reveal that the world reported in the news is mostly male. In many countries, the cultural underpinnings of gender inequality and discrimination against women are reinforced through the media. Journalism and the media face many challenges in a rapidly changing world where new and traditional media are converging with unpredictable consequences. High ethical and professional standards and editorial policies founded on enlightened self-interest will certainly be among the factors that determine the future of the journalistic profession and the traditional news media. The future of professional journalism is also linked to the search for quality journalism. Jim Boumelha, the President of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has stated, “The act of journalism as a public good will not survive on any platform without commitment to ethics and values.”3 Media decision makers and media owners have much to gain by reaching out to potential new audiences that, in many parts of the world, are composed of women who are presently underserved. “Fair gender portrayal is a professional and ethical aspiration, similar to respect for accuracy, fairness and honesty.” Aidan White, General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists in Getting the Balance right: Gender Equality in Journalism. IFJ. 2009 Bringing media accountability into the struggle for gender equality was the original impetus for the GMMP. The project is also guided by the commitment to ensure comparable and accurate results from data collected by many researchers in different contexts. A tool for change The abysmal rate of change revealed through the third GMMP provided the impetus for more and better advocacy for gender-fair news media. The GMMP then helped to build the capacity of civil society groups to interface with their news media as well as lobby for gender-fair media and communication policies.4 The ensuing years witnessed a groundswell of interest in and concern for the gender dimensions of news media. The GMMP methodology became a template for gender-focussed media monitoring across the world, and was also adapted in monitoring reportage on topical themes from a gender perspective. Some training for media practitioners has incorporated the GMMP results, underscoring the urgent need to shift towards more gender-balanced and genderjust journalism. Over the past five years, the GMMP has generated momentum and energy for change. Civil society organisations stepped up efforts in media literacy training from a gender perspective. For example, Grupo de Apoyo al Movimiento de Mujeres del Azuay (GAMMA) has institutionalised citizen media monitoring with the participation of the local government in Cuenca, Ecuador. On the other side of the v Preface world, Asmita Women’s Publishing House, Media and Resource Organisation has consistently trained grassroots women in several districts in Nepal to actively engage with local media on gender-biased or imbalanced reporting. Previous GMMP reports have found many diverse users. These include multi-lateral agencies such as the United Nations Development Program, whose 2005 Arab Human Development Report underscored the importance of media for women’s rights, critical for human development in Arab countries, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in their 2008 publication Media Development Indicators: a framework for assessing media development (now available in six languages). Many media development agencies, media training centres, media professional associations, international and local women’s human rights and equality organizations, and even broadcasting regulatory authorities have used the 2005 GMMP Who Makes the News report. “We hope that what we are going to say about the representation of gender in the media will be taken seriously by media managers”. – Abebech Wolde, Ethiopian Media Women’s Association and GMMP Coordinator for Ethiopia Media practitioners are contributing to change. In 2008, the IFJ launched The Ethical Journalism Initiative, a global campaign of programmes and activities to support and strengthen quality in journalism.5 In the past decade, the IFJ has proactively encouraged unions of journalists and media organisations to take gender equality seriously within newsrooms, journalists unions and journalistic practice.6 In 2009 the Inter Press Service (IPS) Support Group Meeting in Rome analysed the role of media in covering issues related to the Millennium Development Goal 3 to ‘Promote gender equality and empower women’. Gender equality through media is a priority in IPS’ current programme through which the agency aims to increase the independent coverage of stories related to gender equality.7 The 2010 GMMP The decision to carry out a fourth GMMP was made in response to the urging of groups from around the world. Some had taken part in earlier GMMPs and stated the need for updated evidence to bring about change. Others were from groups in countries that had not previously participated in the GMMP and who needed reliable evidence specific to their country. These calls to carry out a fourth GMMP were complemented by the wide interest demonstrated by the extensive use of the GMMP findings by international, national and local organizations and agencies beyond the GMMP network, including some who requested updated evidence to support their work. The fourth GMMP has seen an explosion in participation. This report includes 43 countries that did not take part in the previous GMMP. Participation has significantly expanded in Africa – especially French speaking countries. Participation also increased in Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and the Pacific. The expansion of the GMMP in Arab speaking countries is particularly noteworthy. In the preface to the 2005 GMMP report, Anna Turley, past coordinator of WACC’s Women’s Programme, wrote, “If [small] gains spring from an awareness that current representation of gender in the news is something to be questioned, rather than taken for granted, they have the potential to be transformative. . . While this will not happen overnight, GMMP brings us one step closer to such a transformation.” The 2010 GMMP results show that there is still a long way to go. Change is occurring and even gaining speed in some important areas, while in others progress remains slow or has even been eroded. Yet in each dimension of news measured by the GMMP, instances of exemplary journalism do exist. These instances, often isolated though they may be, show how genderbalanced, gender-aware journalism is not only compatible with but is also intrinsic to high quality journalism. From 2000 to 2010, we have seen an increase of 6 percentage points in women’s presence as subjects in the news. At the current rate of change, it will take more than 40 years to reach parity. What is needed is concerted dialogue and action by advocates for women’s advancement, civil society groups concerned with human development, media users, media professionals, media decision makers and owners, media training institutions, media development agencies, and where appropriate and relevant, public decision makers. Acknowledgements Extensive planning and preparations precede each GMMP monitoring phase. We are grateful to the international virtual working group (Annex 5) that refined the process, monitoring tools and methodology. We thank Colleen Lowe Morna and Gender Links in South Africa who offered a framework for the qualitative analysis, provided advice on the methodology and assisted with training GMMP coordinators. We are indebted to William Bird and Media Monitoring Africa (MMA), also based in South Africa, whose primary responsibility was to develop and manage the monitoring results database, including production of the data tables used in this report. MMA assisted in refining the monitoring research tools as well as training coordinators to apply the tools correctly. Thanks are also due to WACC’s Board members and Regional Executive Committees for supporting the GMMP in various ways, including coordinating the research in their respective regions. We are grateful to WACC members and staff, past and present who contributed to the success of this phase of the GMMP. We are happy to recognize the enormous contribution made over the years by Margaret Gallagher, author of two previous GMMP reports (2000 and 2005), who continues to offer her sage advice. “The GMMP is democracy in action … it highlights how people all over the world are passionate about the media, about gender equality and critically, they are passionate about being agents of change.” William Bird, Media Monitoring Africa, South Africa vi Preface We are profoundly grateful for the support of our donors Bread for All, Women’s World Day of Prayer – German Committee, Stichting Rotterdam, and a Dutch donor who wishes to remain anonymous, and the United Nations Development Fund for Women UNIFEM. The 2010 GMMP would not have been possible without them. We are especially appreciative of the invaluable trust that UNIFEM has shown in the flexibility given to WACC to guide the project as required by changing circumstances. Great thanks are owed to every volunteer in 108 countries around the world who provided regional and national coordination and monitored their local news media for the fourth GMMP. Their passionate engagement has brought forth a body of evidence that will sustain those working for change now and over the coming years. Lavinia Mohr Director of Programmes, WACC Sarah Macharia Media & Gender Justice Programme Manager, WACC 1 The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, 1995. Para 1 2 Ibid. Para. 242 a. 3 To Tell You the Truth: The Ethical Journalism Initiative: by Aidan White, International Federation of Journalists, 2008 4 See the resource Mission Possible: A gender and media advocacy training toolkit. WACC. 2007 5 See the initative’s website www.ethicaljournalisminitiative.org. The initiative was adopted by the World Congress of the IFJ in Moscow in 2007 and was formally launched in 2008 6 White, Aidan. 2008. The Ethical Journalism Initiative. International Federation of Journalists, and 2009 Getting the Balance Right: Gender Equality in Journalism. International Federation of Journalist. 7 See www.ips.org/mdg3 vii Executive Summary Sixteen years ago visionaries at the Women Empowering Communication conference1 posed a deceptively simple question. What does a snapshot of gender2 in one ‘ordinary’ news day look like? Behind this question was a need to discover the measure to which news media could be said to be democratic, inclusive and participatory from a gender perspective. The question became the cornerstone of the Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP), the world’s largest and longest running longitudinal research and advocacy initiative on gender in the news media. The first GMMP on 18 January 1995 captured a picture of gender in the news media of 71 countries. Later that year in September, media monitoring was officially recognized in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted in 1995 at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women as a tool for change towards gender equality. Every five years since 1995, the GMMP has documented trends in the portrayal and representation of women and men in news media discourse and imagery. The qualitative and quantitative evidence gathered has revealed that women are grossly underrepresented in news coverage in contrast to men. The outcome of underrepresentation is an imbalanced picture of the world, one in which women are largely absent. Further, the studies have shown a paucity of women’s voices in news media content in contrast to men’s perspectives, resulting in news that presents a male-centred view of the world. The imperative to focus on news media becomes clear when we consider two facts. The first is that the news is the foremost source of information about issues and events, knowledge that in turn informs communities’ understanding of and responses to their world. The second is that the news has the ability to influence policy agendas as issues attain centre-stage in public debate, starkly evident in changes to local and foreign policies during times of humanitarian disasters. For the fourth GMMP, 1281 newspapers, television and radio stations were monitored in 108 countries on 10 November 2009. The research covered 16,734 news items, 20,769 news personnel (announcers, presenters and reporters), and 35,543 total news subjects, that is people interviewed in the news and those who the news is about. Internet news monitoring was introduced on a pilot basis for the first time in the GMMP. 76 national news websites in 16 countries and 8 international news websites containing 1061 news items, 1044 news personnel and 2710 news subjects were studied. The internet news monitoring results are presented in an exclusive chapter of this report, separate from the analyses of findings from print, television and radio news. Synopsis of findings The GMMP classification system categorizes news stories under 7 major topic areas and 52 sub-topics. (Annex 1) The major topics are: Politics and Government; Economy; Science and Health; Social and Legal news; Crime and Violence; Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports; and, the Girl-Child. The research has found relatively little change over the past 5 years in the hierarchy of priorities of the news media agenda. Stories on politics/government (29%), crime/violence (19%) and the economy (18%) dominate the news agenda. Social/ legal, celebrity/arts/sports and science/health stories lag behind with an average of 13%, 11% and 9% respectively of the total number of stories combined across the three mediums. In other news: gender and progress at the margins ❚❚ Only 24% of the people heard or read about in print, radio and television news are female. In contrast, 76% - more than 3 out of 4 – of the people in the news are male. This is a significant improvement from 1995 when only 17% of the people in the news were women. However, despite a slow but overall steady increase in women’s presence in the news over the past 10 years, the world depicted in the news remains predominantly male. This picture is incongruent with a reality in which at least one half of the world’s population is female. On the one hand the pace of increase in women’s visibility in the news has been maintained over the past decade. In 2005 women’s presence in the news had risen to 21% - a change of 3 percentage points from the research carried out in 2000. From 2005 to 2010 there is a second change of 3 percentage points, evidencing a persistently slow but constant pace of progress over the last ten years. On the other hand, the rise in women’s visibility in stories on ‘science & health’ (from 22% of news subjects in 2005 to 32% in 2010) to a large measure accounts for women’s increased presence in the news. This topic in reality occupies the least space on the news agenda when compared to the other major topics. The percentage increase in female news subjects is less pronounced in topics of high priority on the news agenda: Women’s presence in stories on politics and government increased from 14% to 19% during the period while in stories on the economy there was no change, remaining at 20%. viii Executive Summary ❚❚ Women’s presence in foreign news has increased to match their presence in local news. Between 1995 and 2005 women were most visible in local stories in comparison to those of a national or foreign scope. This trend is disrupted in the fourth GMMP where women’s visibility in foreign stories has increased to match their visibility in local stories. Further, the rate of increase of women’s presence in foreign stories during the past 5 years corresponds to the rate noted in the preceding period 2000 to 2005. This trend may be in synchrony with women’s increasing prominence at the global level although the extent to which increases in media portrayal accurately reflect real world changes is questionable, if we are to apply lessons from GMMP findings on the underrepresentation of women in several fronts. ❚❚ News continue to portray a world in which men outnumber women in almost all occupational categories, the highest disparity being in the professions. The proportion of female news subjects identified, represented or portrayed as workers or professionals over the past 10 years has risen in some occupational categories. Notwithstanding this, the sex gap remains high especially in the professions as depicted in the news. 69% of news subjects portrayed as educators are male, 69% of health professionals, 83% of legal professionals and 90% of scientists. Out of 25 occupational categories, women outnumber men in only 2: news subjects presented as homemakers (72%) and those presented as students (54%). The picture seen through the news becomes one of a world where women are virtually invisible as active participants in work outside the home. ❚❚ As persons interviewed or heard in the news, women remain lodged in the ‘ordinary’ people categories, in contrast to men who continue to predominate in the ‘expert’ categories. Women are inching closer to parity as people providing popular opinion in the news, at 44% of persons interviewed in the news in this capacity compared to 34% in 2005. Women’s presence as persons speaking based on personal experience, as spokespersons (people representing or speaking on behalf of others) and as experts (those providing comment based on specialist knowledge), has improved appreciably. Despite the gains, only 19% of spokespersons and 20% of experts are women. In contrast, 81% of spokespersons and 80% of experts in the news are male. ❚❚ Journalists are almost twice as likely to mention the ages of their female news subjects as they are to mention the ages of their male news subjects. Age is mentioned for 22% of female news subjects and 12% of male news subjects in newspapers. ❚❚ 18% of female news subjects are portrayed as victims in comparison to 8% of male subjects. In contrast, women are now twice as likely to be portrayed as survivors than men. While the gap between the percentage of women and the percentage of men depicted as victims remains large, it has been narrowing gradually since 1995. Remarkably, in 2010, 6% of females in contrast to 3% of males are portrayed as survivors. This is a reversal of the situation in 2005 when 4% of females compared to 8% of males were portrayed as survivors. ❚❚ Female news subjects are identified by their family status 4 times more than male news subjects. This finding taken in contrast to the statistics on representation of news subjects in their various occupations as well as their functions in the news is revealing. Identifying women by their family status and at the same time playing down their roles in their communities masks women’s other identities as independent, autonomous beings, active participants in the wider society beyond the home. Subjects in stories by female reporters are equally as likely as subjects in stories by male reporters to be identified by their family status. In the case of both female and male reporters the propensity to identify female news subjects by family status is between 3 to 4 times higher than for male news subjects. ❚❚ 52% of women in the news are quoted, a rise from 50% in 2005. Women are slightly more likely to be quoted (52%) than men (50%). This is a shift from five years ago when men were more likely to be quoted (53%) than women (50%). However, given that the absolute number of female news subjects in contrast to male news subjects is far less (only 24%), women’s direct voice in the news in effect remains quite minimal. ❚❚ 26% of female subjects in newspapers appear in photographs, in contrast to only 17% of males. A qualitative analysis of photographs in newspapers published on the global monitoring day found that while men are usually pictured either from the head up or fully clothed, the comparative frequency with which women’s bodies are pictured in various states of undress is much higher. Delivering the news ❚❚ For stories reported on television, radio and newspapers, the percentage of those by female reporters is exactly similar to that registered in 2005, that is 37%. The percentage of stories by female reporters across all three mediums combined rose until 2005. The statistics for radio are noteworthy for the sharp rise between 2000 and 2005 (from 27% to 45% of stories reported by women), followed by a dramatic 8 percentage point drop 5 years later. The negative change on radio between 2005 and 2010 accounts for the stagnation in the overall average statistic found in 2010. ❚❚ 52% of stories on television and 45% of those on radio are presented by women. The average total of stories on television and radio presented by women is 49%, less than half of the total number of stories on both mediums combined, a 4 percentage point drop since 2005 and lower than in 1995 when the statistic was 51%. ❚❚ More stories on television are presented by older women now than 5 years ago Five years ago, only 7% of stories by presenters between 50 and 64 years old had female newscasters. Currently, 51% of stories by presenters in this age bracket are presented by women, suggesting a possible achievement of numerical parity with male presenters of the same age. Supplementary research ix Executive Summary is necessary in order to confirm whether this is indeed the case. As well, the percentage of stories by female reporters in the older age brackets has increased. Five years ago 34% of stories by reporters between 35 and 49 years old were filed by women. The statistic has risen to 42% in 2010. The proportion of stories by women in the cluster of reporters between 50-64 years old has also risen remarkably, from 17% in 2005 to 40% currently. Again, supplementary research is essential to conclusively confirm this possible trend. ❚❚ Since the year 2000 the percentage of stories reported by women compared to those reported by men has increased in all major topics except ‘science/health’. Nonetheless, stories by male reporters continue to exceed those by female reporters in all topics. The changes range from 3 to 11 percentage points, the highest increase being in stories on ‘celebrity/arts’. Men report 67% of stories on politics/ government, 65% of stories on crime/ violence and 60% of stories on the economy. The percentage of stories on science/health reported by women declined sharply between 2000 and 2005 from 46% to 38%, a decline that was followed by an increase to 44% in 2010 that nevertheless has not been sufficient to bring the proportion back up to the level noted a decade ago. The statistics strongly suggest that stories accorded high news value by newsroom decision makers are least likely to be assigned to female reporters, while those accorded lowest priority will most likely be assigned to female reporters. ❚❚ Foreign and national stories are now reported by women almost to the same extent as local stories. This situation is different from the period 1995 to 2005 when local stories were more likely to be reported by women than those of a broader scope. 40% of local stories are reported by women, 38% of national stories and 37% of foreign stories. Thus, while the divides between local, national and foreign stories are becoming blurred in terms of the percentage of stories assigned to female reporters, the high reporter sex-gap continues across stories of all scopes. ❚❚ Stories by female reporters contain more female news subjects than stories by male reporters. This trend has persisted over the past 10 years. In 2000, 24% of news subjects in stories by female reporters were female, in contrast to only 18% in stories by male reporters. Currently, the statistics stand at 28% and 22% respectively. Reflecting on the statistics, Amie Joof (Chapter 3) discusses tendencies in newsroom practices and news production processes that contribute to the lacklustre progress. She underscores the need for gender-responsive media in-house policies and reporting guidelines backed by effective monitoring and evaluation. At the same time, she identifies an imperative for training and sensitisation of editors, reporters and journalists, if the newsroom cultures that obstruct a faster pace of change are to be ruptured. News content ❚❚ 13% of all stories focus specifically on women. This is a statistically significant change from the 10% found in the 2005 research. In 3 of the major topics there is no improvement since 2005 in how likely stories are to focus centrally on women. The exceptions are ‘politics/government’ where women are now central in 13% of stories compared to 8% in 2005; in ‘science/health’ from 6% in 2005 to 16% in 2010, and in stories on ‘economy’, from 3% to 11%. ❚❚ Only 6% of stories highlight issues of gender equality or inequality. However this is a slight positive change from 2005 when 4% of stories were found to contain discussion or evoke issues of gender (in)equality. The results show impressive change in Latin America where such stories have tripled since 2005. In Africa, Europe and Latin America, the incidence of stories that raise (in)equality issues is higher for female than for male reporters. By contrast, stories by male reporters in the Caribbean are twice as likely to highlight (in)equality as those by female reporters. Scrutiny of the list of stories reveals that the major topics ‘science/health’ and ‘social/legal’ contain higher proportions of stories that highlight (in)equality issues, than topics in which women have historically been marginalized, namely those on politics and the economy. The latter are topics that dominate the news agenda. The low incidence of discussions or mentions of gender (in)equality issues in stories that dominate the news agenda implies enormous missed opportunities in the news to contribute to raising public awareness and stirring debate on inequality. ❚❚ 46% of stories reinforce gender stereotypes, almost eight times higher than stories that challenge such stereotypes (6%). Over 50% of stories on ‘crime’ reinforce stereotypes, followed closely by celebrity and political stories. That two of these topics occupy significant space on the news agenda implies that their impact on reinforcing stereotypes is monumental. Of all the topics, ‘social/legal’ stories most often challenge stereotypes than stories on any other topic. The low priority of this topic on the news agenda minimizes its overall impact on increasing non-stereotypical news content. ❚❚ Stories by female reporters are visibly more likely to challenge stereotypes than those filed by male reporters and are also less likely to reinforce stereotypes than those reported by men. 7% of stories reported by women challenge stereotypes, in contrast to 4% of stories by male reporters. 35% of stories by female reporters reinforce stereotypes compared to 42% of stories reported by men. These statistics evidence sex disparity in reporting patterns on this indicator. News media in all regions generally have made progress in outputting stories that challenge stereotypes. The most impressive change is in Latin America where such stories have more than quadrupled in the past 5 years. Latin America now has the highest percentage of stories that challenge stereotypes (13%) while the Middle East has the highest percentage (81%) of those that reinforce stereotypes. In all regions, stories by female reporters challenge stereotypes between 1.2 to 7 times more than those by male reporters. The Middle East is remarkable; the output of female reporters challenges stereotypes 7 times more than that by male reporters. The narrowest gap is in North America where stories by female reporters challenge stereotypes 1.2 times more than those by their male colleagues. x Executive Summary ❚❚ High proportions of stories on peace (64%), development (59%), war (56%), and gender-based violence (56%) reinforce gender stereotypes. The greater proportion of news items on important topics such as education (63% of stories) and family law (63%) appear to be neutral, neither challenging nor reinforcing stereotypes. Neutrality however veils and serves to perpetuate subtle or unquestioned gender bias, compounding the overall effect stereotypical reportage has in cementing discrimination. ❚❚ Out of 5 selected Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), reportage on HIV and AIDS was found to be the most gender-responsive. A close look at reportage on issues related to five MDGs, namely, poverty, education, HIV and AIDS, environment and global partnerships (MDGs 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 respectively) shows that news on HIV and AIDS is the most genderresponsive in the context of the GMMP research world average. A comparison of findings on 3 indicators – women’s centrality in the news, stories that highlight gender equality and stories that challenge gender stereotypes – across the five topics shows exceptional positive results in news on HIV and AIDS. It is highly probable that the emphasis put on the gender dimensions of HIV and AIDS including work done to encourage gender-aware HIV and AIDS media reportage are to be credited for the encouraging results. At the same time, it is possible that media have as well been proactive in highlighting gender issues in HIV and AIDS reportage as a result of the general increased public awareness. What this suggests then are openings for both media and civil society in general to address inadequacies in understanding the MDGs from a gender perspective, to bring gender concerns about the MDGs to the forefront of public debate. ❚❚ Only 10% of stories quote or refer to relevant local, national, regional or international legal instruments on gender equality and/or human rights. This finding suggests that numerous stories miss the opportunity to create awareness on instruments enacted to protect human rights, women’s rights or gender equality, supporting an observation by gender and communication groups on the relative invisibility of human/women’s rights in mainstream news content. Reflecting on the evidence of gender bias, discrimination and stereotyping in news media content, Nidya Pesàntez-Calle (Chapter 4) argues that the media’s power lies in its ability to influence the ‘social imaginary’ – the mass common sense governing behaviour, actions and attitudes of a community and society. Gender power relations portrayed through lenses that discriminate against women, that stereotype ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ in a given cultural context and that present gender inequalities as ‘normal’, serve to reinforce, justify and perpetuate social imaginaries that support a similarly skewed view of the world. To the extent that media are a conduit and shaper of culture, media also hold the power to construct alternative social imaginaries in which women in particular thrive free of discrimination and the stereotypes that limit their abilities and restrain the possibilities available to them. Media portrayal of gender then should be of concern to anyone intent to see the emergence of less discriminatory, more inclusive and equitable societies, including journalists, reporters, editors and the broader range of media professionals who care about the impact of their practice on the lived realities of their audiences. Who makes the news in cyberspace? ❚❚ Women comprised only 23% of the news subjects in stories from the 84 news websites monitored. This finding suggests that the underrepresentation of women in traditional news media has been carried over into the virtual news world. ❚❚ 16% of female online news subjects were depicted as victims in contrast to 5% of the male news subjects. In other words, women are more than 3 times as likely as men to be portrayed as victims in Internet news. ❚❚ 26% of female news subjects compared to 21% of males were featured in the photographs and visual multimedia accompanying the stories. ❚❚ Only 36% of the news stories in the sample were reported by women, compared to 64% of stories by men. First, a comparison of the findings with those from the print, television and radio news in the same countries reveals a statistically significant difference. 41% of stories in traditional mainstream media in the countries participating in the internet pilot were by female reporters, in sharp contrast to the 36% of online news stories. Second, the dominance of male reporters in traditional mainstream news media is replicated in online news and is even more prominent in economic, crime/ violence and celebrity news. 64% of stories on the economy are reported by men, 69% of stories on crime/violence and 75% of those of celebrity/arts/media/ sports news. However, 42% of political stories on the internet are by women, compared to 33% of the same in traditional print and broadcast media. This is good news for female reporters given the historical trends of gross reporter sex imbalance in political stories in traditional media – a topic that is of prime importance on the news media agenda. ❚❚ 42% of the online news stories were found to reinforce gender stereotypes, only 4% challenged them, and the majority 54% neither reinforced nor challenged stereotypes. ❚❚ Women are central in 11% of the online news items, comparable to the situation in traditional media where the statistic is 13%. Overall, the differences, some of which are statistically significant3 , point to a conclusion that Internet news is a format in which gender biases become not only more visible but even more concentrated than in the traditional news media. xi Executive Summary Towards ethical reporting and gender balance: A trade union perspective ‘Ethical journalism is about taking responsibility for the choices made with an awareness of the impact of those choices; decisions on who to interview, in what capacity, how to visually portray them, as well as who has access to training, who is hired, who is promoted, who presents the news, and its content. Inherent in this responsibility is the concept that fair, balanced reporting is ethical reporting, which in turn, can only be achieved by equity, both in the news content, and within the newsroom’. (Mindy Ran, Chapter 7) Ran revisits the action plan developed after GMMP 2005 to propose a way forward, one that is informed by debates in journalists’ trade unions. The revised plan confirms the continuing relevance of the 2005 actions: Advocacy and lobbying; media policies and accountability; organisational targets and in-house monitoring; sensitization and training of journalists and editors; and, the development of media monitoring. Ran recommends an additional action; improving gender balance in the media industry to achieve a more gender-sensitive and balanced work floor. � A road map to accelerate progress in the portrayal and representation of women in the news If the rate of change observed since 2000 in women’s presence in the news is maintained, it will take at least 40 more years to reach parity. The plan of action (Chapter 8) is intended to not only accelerate the pace of change but also re-direct progress to areas of media policy and practice that constrain advancement towards more gender-just news media. 1. Key findings: 1995-2010 1995 2000 2005 2010 % Women % Men % Women % Men % Women % Men % Women % Men News subjects All media Television Radio Newspapers 17 21 15 16 83 79 85 84 18 22 13 17 82 78 87 83 21 22 17 21 79 78 83 79 24 24 22 24 76 76 78 76 Scope of Story: Local National International Foreign 22 14 17 17 78 86 83 83 23 17 15 14 77 83 85 86 27 19 18 20 73 81 82 80 26 23 20 26 74 77 80 74 Main Story Topics: Celebrity, Arts & Sport Social & Legal Crime & Violence Science & Health Economy Politics & Government 24 19 21 27 10 7 76 81 79 73 90 93 23 21 18 21 18 12 77 79 82 79 82 88 28 28 22 22 20 14 72 72 78 78 80 86 26 30 24 32 20 19 74 70 76 68 80 81 Function in Story: Popular Opinion Personal Experience Eye Witness Subject Expert Spokesperson N/A N/A N/A N/A 34 31 30 23 17 14 66 69 70 77 83 86 44 36 29 23 20 19 56 64 71 77 80 81 Occupation: No stated occupation Celebrity Education, health Activist, NGO Government employee Sports Business/law Politician N/A N/A 44 45 24 24 12 9 11 10 56 55 76 76 88 91 89 90 42 42 27 23 17 16 14 12 58 58 73 77 83 84 86 88 41 41 31 34 17 11 16 17 59 59 69 66 83 89 84 83 % Portrayed as Victim 29 10 19 7 19 8 18 8 % Identified by Family Status N/A N/A 21 4 17 5 18 5 % In Newspaper Photographs N/A N/A 25 11 23 16 26 17 xii Executive Summary xii 1995 2000 2005 2010 % Women % Men % Women % Men % Women % Men % Women % Men Reporting and Presenting the News % Stories presented on TV and Radio 51 49 49 51 53 47 49 51 Television 56 44 57 43 52 48 Radio 41 59 49 51 45 55 % Stories reported 28 72 31 69 37 63 37 63 Television N/A N/A 36 64 42 58 44 56 Radio N/A N/A 28 72 45 55 37 63 Newspapers N/A N/A 26 74 29 71 33 67 % Stories of each scope reported, by sex of reporter: Local National International Foreign 33 24 28 28 67 76 72 72 34 30 33 29 66 70 67 71 44 34 32 36 56 66 68 64 40 38 32 37 60 62 68 63 % Stories reported - Main Story Topic: Celebrity, Arts & Sport Social & Legal Crime & Violence Science & Health Economy Politics & Government N/A N/A 27 39 29 46 35 26 73 61 71 54 65 74 35 40 33 38 43 32 65 60 67 62 57 68 38 43 35 44 40 33 62 57 65 56 60 67 % of Female News Subjects by sex of reporter N/A N/A 24 18 25 20 28 22 News Content % Stories with Women as a Central Focus Celebrity, Arts & Sport Social & Legal Crime & Violence Politics & Government Science & Health Economy N/A 10 16 19 10 7 11 4 10 17 17 16 8 6 3 13 16 17 16 13 16 11 % Stories that Challenge Gender Stereotypes N/A N/A 3 6 % Stories that Reinforce Gender Stereotypes N/A N/A 6 46* % Stories that Highlight Gender (In)Equality N/A N/A 4 6 % Stories that mention gender equality policies or human and women’s rights legal instruments N/A N/A N/A 10 *The marked difference between the 2005 and 2010 finding is the result of increased precision and clarity on this question in the 2010 methodology GMMP Monitoring, India - Bangalore GMMP Monitoring, Germany xiii Executive Summary xiii Results on selected Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). % Stories with Women as a Central Focus MDG 1. Poverty 8 MDG 2. Education 9 MDG 6. HIV and AIDS 39 MDG 7. Environment 4 MDG 8. Global partnerships 19 % Stories that Highlight Gender (In) Equality MDG 1. Poverty 3 MDG 2. Education 2 MDG 6.HIV and AIDS 25 MDG 7.Environment 3 MDG 8. Global partnerships 1 % Stories that Challenge Gender Stereotypes MDG 1. Poverty 5 MDG 2. Education 5 MDG 6.HIV and AIDS 16 MDG 7.Environment 3 MDG 8. Global partnerships 1 Who makes the news in cyberspace? % Females in Main Story Topics: 23 Celebrity, Arts & Sport 27 Social & Legal 32 Crime & Violence 22 Science & Health 33 Economy 24 Politics & Government 17 % Portrayed as Victim Females 16 Males 5 % Stories that: Reinforce stereotypes 42 Challenge stereotypes 4 Neither reinforce nor challenge stereotypes 54 % Stories Reported by Women 36 Celebrity, Arts & Sport 25 Social & Legal 47 Crime & Violence 31 Science & Health 45 Economy 36 Politics & Government 42 % In Photographs and Visual Multimedia Females 26 Males 21 % Stories in which Women are Central 11 1 Organised by the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC), Isis InternationalManila and International Women’s Tribune Centre (IWTC) 2 The concept ‘gender’ here refers to the hierarchical power relations between women and men, including understandings of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ in a given cultural context. Unlike ‘gender’ which is relational, ‘sex’ is biological and where employed here refers to females and males independent of each other. 3 Where stated, differences are statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval meaning that the possibility they occurred purely by chance is only 1 in 20. 1 1. A Day In The World’s News 10 November 2009 ‘Police winning war against armed robbery’ (Ghana Chronicle). ‘Budget for economic growth (The Times of Malta). ‘Atormentado por la pobreza’ (Tormented by Poverty) (Primera Hora, Puerto Rico) ‘Bomb blast in Peshawar within 24 hours. 4 died, 3 injured’ (Jang newspaper, Pakistan). ‘Bloody disgrace: Storage-bag shortage causes clot at collection centres…’(The Gleaner, Jamaica). The news agenda on 10 November 2009 was ‘business as usual’: politics, crime, the economy and everyday topics regularly featured in the news. In keeping with the usual reportage practices, the headlines directed attention to stories of high interest. In India, Romania, Denmark, Lebanon and the Philippines for instance, the headlines highlighted impending, ongoing or just-ended elections. Floods in Phu Yen Province made the front pages in Vietnam, armed conflict between Georgians and Ossetians in Georgian national news and, stories on fraud and hijacking in South African news. In Estonia and Hungary some attention was paid to issues surrounding the spread of the H1N1 influenza. Special events received more attention than others in some regions. “November 10th was hectic but fun and a great learning experience for our students. … They said the exercise helped them look critically at the many holes and journalistic shortcomings in reporting practices in our mainstream media. They have come away with new insights into gender stereotyping and the imbalance in covering voices from women and men in daily reportage.” Dipti Kotian, Indian Institute of Journalism and New Media For instance, the gunfight between South and North Korea in the Japanese sea was covered in Asian and international news. Remnants of stories on the 20-year anniversary celebrations of the fall of the Berlin Wall received air time in European news particularly. Overall, 10 November was an ordinary news day during which regularly featured topical issues received their usual coverage in the news. No single topic dominated the agenda in most countries. Unlike any ordinary news day however, volunteer media monitors in over 100 countries across the world were poring over their national newspapers, listening intently to radio newscasts, closely watching local television news and methodically studying their national news websites. Armed with pencils, media monitoring guides and coding grids, their purpose was to observe, analyze and record their findings on selected indicators of gender in the news for the fourth Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP). The volunteers from grassroots groups, gender and communication civil society groups, journalist unions, media practitioner associations and universities are united by a shared commitment to gender-fair news media. They are part of a global network, the outcome of 15 years of the GMMP, the world’s largest and longest-running longitudinal research and action initiative on gender in the news media. The various components of the GMMP converge in the central purpose to contribute to the transformation of news media towards more gender-ethical, fair and balanced coverage. The first GMMP on 18 January 1995, coordinated by the Canadian National Watch on Images of Women in the Media (MediaWatch Inc.), generated a snapshot of gender in the news media based on data from 71 countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, North America, the Caribbean, Latin America and the Pacific Region. The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) coordinated the second and subsequent GMMPs up until the present. The second GMMP on 1 February 2000 generated data from 70 countries while the third GMMP on 16 February 2005 covered 76 countries. The cumulative work accomplished since 1995 through and beyond the GMMP has contributed to a remarkable experience in the fourth GMMP. The number and profile of participants has expanded, as has the number of participating countries. This report contains a snapshot of gender in the news media from a record 1081 countries, equivalent to a 44% increase in the number of countries that took part in the 2005 research. Methodology The GMMP monitoring methodology was refined and updated to improve on the clarity of questions, incorporate new thematic concerns and reflect changes in the news media environment. A virtual working group of academic researchers and representatives of gender and communication groups was responsible for the methodology revision process. The coding parameters however remained relatively unchanged to ensure comparability of findings across the 1995, 2000, 2005 and 2010 studies. Internet news was included for the first time in the GMMP, on a pilot basis, in response to the increasing importance of the World Wide Web as a news source. Monitoring teams in selected countries with high per capita internet access were invited to code their national internet news websites chosen following set criteria. Further, an innovation for GMMP 2010 was the provision of a database to monitors to allow in-country data capture, a feature that helped shorten the time needed to transfer data from the coding sheets into the central database. Country databases were subjected to a series of quality control checks before the data could be integrated into the global database. 2 1. A Day In The World’s News Uruguay Argentina Paraguay Bolivia Brazil Peru Ecuador Costa Rica Nicaragua El Salvador Guatemala Chile Jamaica Haiti Dominican Republic Puerto Rico Mexico United States Canada Belize St Lucia St. Vincent and The Grenadines Grenada Trinidad & Tobago Suriname Guyana Participating Countries GMMP 2010 3 1. A Day In The World’s News Guinaée Conakry Namibia Botswana South Africa Lesotho Senegal Mauritania Liberia Burkina Faso Ghana Togo Benin Niger Nigeria Cameroon Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) Congo, Dem Rep Madagascar Zambia Zimbabwe Ethiopia Sudan (south) Kenya Uganda Tanzania Burundi Mauritius United Arab Emirates Jordan Lebanon Israel Egypt Tunisia Australia Papua New Guinea Fiji Tonga New Zealand Kyrgyzstan China Japan South Korea Pakistan India Nepal Bangladesh Taiwan Vietnam Thailand Philippines Malaysia Iceland Netherlands Denmark Norway Sweden Finland Austria Czech Republic Poland Estonia Belarus Hungary Romania Croatia Bosnia & Herzegovina Kosovo Bulgaria Montenegro Turkey Cyprus Georgia Ireland, Republic of Belgium Germany Switzerland France Spain Portugal Italy Greece Malta United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 4 1. A Day In The World’s News Monitoring packs and detailed monitoring methodology guides containing forms, instructions and blank coding sheets were provided. The guides specified criteria for media selection, the number of media to code, the bulletins and programmes to select and how to code. Monitors coded basic information about the medium, details on the story contents, the people in the news -journalists/reporters and news subjects, and a gender analysis of the story in respect to women’s centrality, highlighting (in)equality issues and challenging/reinforcing stereotypes. Instructions included illustrative examples of news items as well as samples of completed coding sheets. A multi-prong strategy to ensure an accurate and uniform understanding of the methodology was adopted. The strategy included face-to-face training workshops at global, regional and local levels, videoconferencing, E-mail, and, through the GMMP website www.whomakesthenews. org, resources for trainers and selfadministered tutorials for monitors. Annex 1 provides further details on the GMMP 2010 monitoring methodology. Scope Monitors were instructed to select media representative of their country media’s diversity and density with respect to audience, ownership and language. Mainstream public and private media were retained for the monitoring, excluding those at the fringes of opinion or reach. 1281 newspapers, television and radio stations were monitored in 108 countries in Africa (26), Asia (13), the Caribbean (11), Europe (32), the Middle East (6), the Pacific region (5), Latin America (13) and 2 countries in North America. The number of participating countries has doubled or tripled in some regions since 2005, evidencing a heightened interest in genderfocussed media research by civil society groups, including journalists’ unions and associations. The data contains 16,734 news items, 20,769 news personnel (announcers, presenters and reporters), and 35,543 total news subjects. ‘News subjects’ refers to people interviewed as experts, spokespersons, those giving popular opinion or eye witness accounts of events, as well as those who the news is about. (See Table 2. Media monitored for GMMP: 2010.) Invitations to participate in an Internet news monitoring pilot research were extended to GMMP monitoring teams in countries noted in the 2009 United Nations Human Development Indicators report as having exceptionally high per capita internet access. The pilot research covered 8 international and 76 national news websites to make a total of 84 news websites. The international news sites encompassed all regions across the world while the national news sites were coded in 16 GMMP participating countries in all regions except Africa and Latin America. The online sources yielded 1061 news items containing 2710 news subjects and reported by 1044 news personnel. Gender trends in internet news are analysed separately in Chapter 5 of this report. Some comparisons are made in this chapter in an attempt to draw conclusions on important similarities with and/or differences from radio, print and television news. (See Annex 4 for the list of participating countries) Topics in the news on monitoring day The GMMP classification system categorizes news stories under 7 major topic areas and 52 sub-topics. The major topics are: Politics and Government; Economy; Science and Health; Social and Legal news; Crime and Violence; Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports; and, the Girl-Child. Relatively little has changed since 2005 in the hierarchy of priorities on the news media agenda. On the global day of monitoring for the fourth GMMP, stories on politics/government (28%), crime/violence (20%) and the economy (17%) dominated the news agenda. Social/ legal, celebrity/ arts/sports and science/health stories lagged behind with an average of 13%, 11% and 9% respectively of the total number of stories across the three mediums. (See Table 3. Topics in the news: 2005- 2010 on page 5) Highest on the hierarchy of news agenda priorities across the regions are two major news topics: politics/government and crime/violence. Politics/government registered the highest percentage of stories in African, Asian, European, Latin American and Middle Eastern news. In contrast, the major topic crime/violence had the highest percentage of stories in North America, the Caribbean and the Pacific regions. The North American profile may be explained in part in two ways. First, the persistent prominence of the ‘fight against terror’ in American political discourse and second, that monitoring day fell just before Remembrance Day (Canada) and Veteran’s Day (USA), national days to commemorate military veterans. 2. Media monitored for GMMP: 2010. Print Radio Television Internet** Total Africa 77 57 41 -  175 Asia 96 64 69 19 248 Caribbean 28 35 24 3 90 Europe 186 157 132 34 509 Latin America 65 40 41 -  146 Middle East 26 34 21 -  81 North America 21 5** 7 6 39 Pacific 20 21 14 14 69 International -  -  -  8 8 TOTAL 519 413 349 84 1365 * Internet news was monitored on a pilot basis in 16 countries. International news websites covered all regions and included CNN International, Africa News, Africa 24, Euronews, Al Jazeera, Deutsche Welle World, Telesur and BBC World. The online news monitoring results are analyzed separately in Chapter 5; these are not included in the analysis contained in the rest of the report. ** Statistics are from Canada only. No radio newscasts were monitored in the U.S.A 5 1. A Day In The World’s News The Caribbean picture is characteristic, generalizing from an explanation by the GMMP coordinator in Jamaica that the high prevalence of stories on violent crime is typical for the country.2 Further scrutiny of the Caribbean regional results shows a large number of stories classified as ‘violent crime, murder, abduction, kidnapping, assault, drug-related violence …’, a subtopic under ‘Crime/Violence’ during the global monitoring day. The large number of stories from the Pacific region news coded under the same major topic were in fact classified as ‘disaster, accident, famine, earthquake, flood, hurricane, plane crash, car crash …’, with a smaller though relatively significant number categorized under both violent and non-violent (political) crime. 3. Topics in the news: 2005-2010   2005 2010  N** Topic Print Radio Television Total Print Radio Television Total Politics and Government 27% 23% 23% 25% 32% 28% 26% 28% 4685 Crime and Violence 20% 17% 22% 20% 19% 18% 22% 20% 3329 Economy 19% 27% 18% 21% 16% 21% 17% 17% 2949 Social and Legal 14% 11% 10% 12% 15% 12% 10% 13% 2146 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 9% 8% 14% 10% 7% 10% 14% 11% 1773 Science and Health 11% 11% 9% 10% 10% 9% 9% 9% 1539 Other 0 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 274 The Girl-child new topic new topic new topic - * * * * 39 * indicates less than 1% in all tables; ** Total N for 2010 weighted (see methodological notes in annex) *** Column Total may be slightly more or less than 100% due to rounding 100%*** 100%*** 16734 Topics in the news across all media – print, radio and television : 2005-2010 Politics and Government Crime and Violence Economy Social and Legal Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports Science and Health 6 1. A Day In The World’s News 4. Topics in the news. Regional comparisons: 2010   Africa Asia Caribbean Europe Latin America Middle East North America Pacific Total                   % N** Politics and Government 29% 30% 22% 31% 25% 48% 24% 16% 28% 4685 Crime and Violence 17% 18% 27% 18% 22% 12% 30% 22% 20% 3329 Economy 18% 20% 15% 15% 17% 11% 11% 15% 17% 2949 Social and Legal 18% 14% 17% 11% 15% 11% 9% 18% 13% 2146 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 7% 8% 9% 13% 9% 7% 7% 19% 11% 1773 Science and Health 9% 9% 9% 10% 11% 9% 15% 6% 9% 1539 Other 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 3% 2% 274 The Girl-child * * * * * * 2% * * 39                 100%*** 16734 1 The number of countries from which expressions of interest to participate were received was higher. Some eventually did not take part, others submitted data that was excluded from the analysis due to inconsistencies or other issues. The final count of countries in this report is 108. 2 GMMP 2009/2010 contextual information form, Jamaica. GMMP Monitors, United Arab Emirates 7 2. In Other News: gender and progress at the margins Only 24% of the people heard or read about in print, radio and television news are female. In contrast, 76% of the people in the news are male. Despite a slow but overall steady increase in women’s presence in the news over the past 10 years, the world depicted in the news remains predominantly male. This picture is incongruent with a reality in which at least one half of the world’s population is female. The regional breakdown shows progress in some regions and stagnation in others during the past 5 years. Most notable is Latin America where women’s presence in the news increased by 6 percentage points, followed closely by Europe with a 5 percentage point rise. All other regions either stagnated or gained minimally. Latin America currently has the highest percentage of female news subjects (29%) while the Middle East has the lowest, at 16%. In the past 15 year period, Europe and Latin America have achieved the most dramatic increases, between 10 and 13 percentage point rises. The apparent regression in Africa from 22% of female news subjects in 1995 to 19% in 2010 may in fact be explained by the fact that the number of participating countries from the continent has more than doubled in the past 15 years, from only 12 in 1995 to 26 in 2010. The 2010 finding for Africa is similar to the 2005 finding, hence a confirmation of the accuracy of the 19% statistic. 5. Female news subjects by medium: 1995-2010   1995 2000 2005 2010 Print 16% 17% 21% 24% Television 21% 22% 22% 24% Radio 15% 13% 17% 22% Overall 17% 18% 21% 24% 6. Female news subjects by region: 1995-2010   1995 2000 2005 2010 Africa 22 11 19 19 Asia 14 17 19 20 Caribbean 22 24 25 25 Europe 16 19 21 26 Latin America 16 20 23 29 Middle East 14 15 15 16 North America 27 25 26 28 Pacific 20 25 26 25 Overall 17 18 21 24 A closer look at the distribution across the three mediums reveals a steady cumulative increase in women as news subjects on print and radio, as well as a negligible rise in television news over the past 15 years. In general, the percentage of female to male news subjects has increased between 2 to 5 points across the three mediums. Nevertheless, girls and women remain grossly underrepresented in the total population of persons heard, seen or read about in the news. The change is unevenly distributed across major news topics. It is most notable in the major topic science/health, with smaller but statistically significant1 increases in the topics politics/government, social/legal, and, crime/violence. Women’s presence increased in stories on ‘science & health’ from 22% of news subjects in 2005 to 32% in 2010. In stories on politics the change was from 14% to 19% during the period while in stories on the economy there was no change, remaining at 20%. Out of all the topics women are most present in science/health news (32% of news subjects are female) and social/ legal news (30%). Considering the news agenda on the global day of monitoring and the observation that both these topics are far less important on the hierarchy of priorities, it becomes evident that the seemingly higher presence of women is in fact numerically negligible in the overall picture. At the same time, the hierarchy of priorities evokes questions on the criteria applied in according worth to news topics, evident through their share of space in the news media agenda. Both practical and strategic gender interests are found across the entire range of stories studied in the GMMP. However, issues relevant to women’s practical gender interests are concentrated in the topics ‘science/ health’ and ‘social /legal’, yet these topics overall are accorded least attention. To clarify, gender interests emerge from gender relations and are distinct for women and for men. Practical interests stem from practical needs that are a function of gender-differentiated roles, for instance, women’s traditional care work for children, the sick and the elderly. In this case, news about health or children’s welfare is perceived as being relevant to women’s practical gender interests. Focus on practical interests in the news should by no means mask the need for attention to Only 24% of News Subjects* are Women * Defined as ‘people who are interviewed or whom the news is about’. 8 2. In Other News strategic interests, that is, those pertaining to transforming gender relations in ways that correct inequitable power positions. News that is attentive to women’s strategic gender interests will, for instance, explicitly recognize instances in which women are breaking traditional barriers to occupy positions of power and authority previously held by men, or, explicitly shed light on women’s historical marginalisation in a given issue. In the period 1995 to 2005 women were most visible in local stories in comparison to those of a national or foreign scope. This trend is disrupted in the fourth GMMP where women’s presence in foreign stories has increased to match their presence in local stories. Currently, 26% of news subjects in local news and 26% of those in foreign news are women. The rate of increase of women’s presence in foreign stories during the past 5 years matches the rate noted in the preceding period 2000 to 2005. This trend may be in synchrony with women’s increasing prominence at the global level although the extent to which increases in media portrayal accurately reflect real world changes is questionable, if we are to apply lessons from GMMP findings on underrepresentation of women in several areas. Women also have greater visibility in national stories as well as those that involve their own and other countries (‘national and other’). 14% of news subjects in national stories in 1995 were female. Now, 23% are female, a rise of almost 10 percentage points over 15 years. In both ‘types’ of stories, it is possible that women’s increased visibility reflects to some measure their higher prominence in public life at all levels, during the past five years. Women outnumber men in 4 out of the 52 GMMP story sub-topics. Two out of the 4 sub-topics are not surprising, pertaining in fact to girls and women: The girl child, and women’s participation in economic processes. What is surprising is the lack of a preponderance of women as news subjects in topics where this would be expected. For instance, only 37% of news subjects in stories on the women’s movement are female and 30% of those in stories regarding women electoral candidates. Women are underrepresented in all other story sub-topics, disturbingly so in those that impact women more disproportionately than men. For instance, on stories regarding HIV and AIDS, only 42% of news subjects are women and on gender-based violence (40%). Equally disconcerting is the imbalance in fundamental topics of import to gender equality: in stories on human rights, only 34% of news subjects are female, on education (34%), on health (33%), on poverty (29%) and on development (25%). 7. Overall presence of women in the news: 1995-2010   1995 2000 2005 2010 Total N (all news subjects) Science and Health 27% 21% 22% 32% 2828 Social and Legal 19% 21% 28% 30% 4194 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 24% 23% 28% 26% 3234 Crime and Violence 21% 18% 22% 24% 6761 Economy 10% 18% 20% 20% 4579 Politics and Government 7% 12% 14% 19% 10615 The Girl-child* - - - 69% 87 Other topics* - - - 38% 399 Total 17% 18% 21% 24% **32697 * (-)=New topic in 2010 or statistics not available. Stories on ‘the girl-child and ‘other topics’ less than 1% of the overall total. ** Excludes news subjects whose sex was unknown. Any difference between overall number of people in the news and this chart is due to the number of people in the news who were not coded for gender. 8. Female news subjects in local, national and international stories: 1995-2010.   Female % Scope 1995 2000 2005 2010 Local 22% 23% 27% 26% National 14% 17% 19% 23% National and other* 17% 15% 18% 20% Foreign, International 17% 14% 20% 26%  Total 17% 18% 21% 24% * Involving other countries in addition to that in which story is coded 9 2. In Other News 9. Sex of news subjects in different story topics: 2010. Rural economy, agriculture, farming practices, agricultural policy, land rights … 12% 88% Global partnerships (international trade and finance systems, e.g. WTO, IMF, World Bank, debt) … 13% 87% Sports, events, players, facilities, training, policies, funding … 13% 87% National defence, military spending, military training, military parades, internal security … 13% 87% Economic indicators, statistics, business, trade, stock markets … 14% 86% Other domestic politics/government (local, regional, national), elections, speeches, the political process … 16% 84% Non-violent crime, bribery, theft, drug-dealing, corruption, (including political corruption/malpractice) … 17% 83% Economic policies, strategies, models (national, international) … 17% 83% Transport, traffic, roads …… 17% 83% Foreign/international politics, relations with other countries, negotiations, treaties, UN peacekeeping … 17% 83% Economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers … 18% 82% War, civil war, terrorism, state-based violence … 18% 82% Riots, demonstrations, public disorder … 19% 81% Other stories on the economy 19% 81% Peace, negotiations, treaties…(local, regional, national), 21% 79% Migration, refugees, asylum seekers, ethnic conflict, integration, racism, xenophobia … 21% 79% Legal system, judicial system, legislation (apart from family, property & inheritance law) … 21% 79% Environment, nature, pollution, global warming, ecology, tourism … 22% 78% Other stories on politics and government 23% 77% Religion, culture, tradition, controversies, teachings, celebrations, practices … 23% 77% Other stories on science or health 24% 76% Other labour issues, strikes, trade unions, negotiations, other employment and unemployment … 24% 76% Violent crime, murder, abduction, kidnapping, assault, drug-related violence … 24% 76% Overall percent of Female Subjects 24% 76% Development issues, sustainability, community development … 25% 75% Science, technology, research, funding, discoveries, developments … 25% 75% Consumer issues, consumer protection, regulation, prices, consumer fraud … 27% 73% Arts, entertainment, leisure, cinema, theatre, books, dance … 28% 72% Disaster, accident, famine, earthquake, flood, hurricane, plane crash, car crash … 28% 72% Poverty, housing, social welfare, aid to those in need … 29% 71% Women electoral candidates (local, regional, national), 30% 70% Other stories on crime and violence 30% 70% Other stories on celebrities, arts, media 33% 67% Other stories on social or legal issues 33% 67% Medicine, health, hygiene, safety, disability, medical research, funding (apart from HIV-AIDS)… 33% 67% Media, including new media (computers, internet), portrayal of women and/or men, pornography … 34% 66% Child abuse, sexual violence against children, trafficking, neglect. 34% 66% Human rights, women's rights, children's rights, gay & lesbian rights, rights of minorities .. 34% 66% Education, child care, nurseries, pre-school to university, adult education, literacy … 34% 66% Other epidemics, viruses, contagions, Influenza, BSE, SARS … 36% 64% Other/DK 36% 64% Women's movement, activism, events, demonstrations, gender equality advocacy … 37% 63% Women in political power and decision-making (local, regional, national), 37% 63% Celebrity news, births, marriages, deaths, obituaries, famous people, royalty … 39% 61% Gender-based violence, feminicide, harassment, domestic violence, rape, trafficking, genital mutilation … 40% 60% HIV and AIDS, incidence, policy, treatment, people affected … 42% 58% Beauty contests, models, fashion, beauty aids, cosmetic surgery … 43% 57% Family law, family codes, property law, inheritance law and rights … 44% 56% Birth control, fertility, sterilisation, amniocentesis, termination of pregnancy … 47% 53% Changing gender relations, roles and relationships of women and men inside and outside the home … 51% 49% Women's participation in economic processes (informal work, paid employment, unemployment, unpaid labour) 58% 42% Family relations, inter-generational conflict, single parents … 58% 42% News about the girl child, including, cultural attitudes and practices impinging on girls, education, health, economic exploitation, violence (only where emphasis is on the girl child)… 69% 31% 50% 10 2. In Other News Occupation of news subjects The proportion of female news subjects identified, represented or portrayed as workers or professionals over the past 10 years has risen in some occupational categories. However, the picture painted through the news remains discordant with the reality; the world presented is one in which men outnumber women in almost all occupations. The highest disparity is in the professions. Of the total number of news subjects identified, portrayed or represented as educators, an overwhelming 69% are male, as health professionals (69%), as legal professionals (83%), as public/civil servants (83%), and as scientists (90%). Women’s share in all professions is much higher in reality. The picture seen through the news becomes one of a world where women are almost absent as participants in work outside the home. Of the news subjects represented as government officials, 17% are women, compared to 10% in the year 2000. The rise appears to be consistent with trends in the increase of women holding public office; taking statistics on the world average of women in parliaments as a general guide, the real world statistic was 13% in 2000 and currently stands at 19%2 . Of the news subjects represented as health/social service professionals, 31% are female, up from 20% in 2000, as office workers (from 35% in 2000 to 45% in 2005) and as civil society workers/activists (from 24% to 34%). In other cases there are small yet statistically significant decreases in women’s share in the professions as depicted in the news. In the case of news subjects portrayed as science professionals/ engineers, only 10% are female, down from 12% in 2000, as workers in agriculture/ mining/forestry (from 15% to 13%), as well as a notable drop in the case of news subjects presented as media professionals (from 36% to 29% over the past 5 years). 10. Occupations of female news subjects: 2000-2010.   Female %F Position or Occupation 2000 2005 2010 Homemaker, parent, either female or male. 81% 75% 72% Student, pupil, schoolchild 46% 51% 54% Child, young person (up to 18 years). n/a 44% 46% Office or service worker, non-management worker in office, store, restaurant, catering … 35% 40% 45% Celebrity, artist, actor, writer, singer, radio or television personality … 45% 42% 41% Other. 44% 42% 41% Sex worker, prostitute … n/a n/a 39% Villager or resident engaged in unspecified occupation. n/a 39% 39% Retired person, pensioner. 35% 33% 35% Unemployed, no other occupation given 33% 19% 35% Activist or worker in civil society organisation, nongovernmental organisation, trade union, human rights, consumer issues, environment, aid agency, peasant leader, United Nations … 24% 23% 34% Royalty, ruling monarch, deposed monarch, any member of royal family … n/a 33% 31% Academic expert, education professional, teacher or university lecturer (all disciplines), nursery or kindergarten teacher, child care worker … 27% 25% 31% Health or social service professional, doctor, nurse, laboratory technician, social worker, psychologist … 20% 30% 31% Media professional, journalist, video or film-maker, theatre director ... n/a 36% 29% Tradesperson, artisan, labourer, truck driver, construction, factory, domestic worker … 15% 23% 22% Government official, politician, president, government minister, political leader, political party staff, spokesperson … 10% 12% 17% Government employee, public servant, bureaucrat, diplomat, intelligence officer … 12% 17% 17% Lawyer, judge, magistrate, legal advocate, legal expert, legal clerk … n/a 18% 17% Business person, executive, manager, entrepreneur, economist, financial expert, stock broker … n/a 12% 14% Agriculture, mining, fishing, forestry worker … 15% 13% 13% Religious figure, priest, monk, rabbi, mullah, nun … 9% 21% 13% Sportsperson, athlete, player, coach, referee … 9% 16% 11% Science or technology professional, engineer, technician, computer specialist … 12% 10% 10% Criminal, suspect. 7% 9% 8% Police, military, para-military group, militia, prison officer, security officer, fire officer … 4% 5% 7% Percentage of female subjects in the news 18% 21% 24% 11 2. In Other News The Gleaner, Jamaica. 10 November, 2009. 12 2. In Other News Function of news subjects As persons interviewed or heard in the news, women remain lodged in the ‘ordinary’ people categories in contrast to men who continue to predominate in the ‘expert’ categories. ‘Ordinary’ people refers to those who provide eyewitness accounts, popular opinion reflecting the views of ordinary citizens, or speak based on personal experience. ‘Experts’ include those providing comment based on specialist knowledge or expertise, or are spokespersons representing or speaking on behalf of groups. 11. Functions of female news subjects: 2005-2010. The 2010 research shows that women are inching closer to parity as people providing popular opinion in the news, at 44% of persons interviewed in this capacity compared to 34% in 2005. Women are also 36% of those providing comments based on personal experience and 29% of those providing testimony or eyewitness accounts of events. Women’s presence as spokespersons and as experts in the news has also improved since 2005. Five years ago 14% of spokespersons and 17% of experts were female compared to 19% and 20% respectively in 2010. Despite the improvement, the gross underrepresentation of women in the expert categories contradicts reality where the sex gap in different fields of expertise is not as pronounced as it is in news media discourse and imagery. (See Table 12 on page 13) Almost half (49%) of the women who appear in the news as spokespersons are identified as government officials, politicians or political leaders. Underneath this seemingly impressive statistic is the sobering finding that in fact only 19% of spokespersons in the news are women, therefore, the representation of women as spokespersons in the rest of the occupational categories is very thinly distributed. Women providing popular opinion – the function in which they most appear –are identified as villagers/residents (24%), students (18%) and homemakers (16%). In the functions women most appear (as eye witness, popular opinion providers) they are more likely not to be identified as workers, not to be accorded a profession or not to be depicted as participants in social, economic or political life. In contrast, men are more likely to be identified as professionals in the entire range of functions in which they appear in the news, whether as ‘experts’, as ‘spokespersons’, as ‘eyewitnesses’ or as givers of popular opinion. Numerically the representation is highly skewed in favour of the male voice given that 75% of people speaking in the news (sources3 ) are men. Age of news subjects Monitors were asked to code the age of news subjects in print news where ‘age’ was explicitly mentioned within the text as well as in television news where an image of the person appeared. Age is mentioned for 22% of female news subjects and 12% of male news subjects. This strongly suggests that journalists are almost 2 times as likely to mention the ages of their female news subjects as they are to mention the ages of their male news subjects. An illustrative example is taken from a story in the online Croatian newspaper Slobodna Dalmacija. A person suspected of theft is described as a ‘talkative and nice to look at 47 year old woman’ despite the fact that the reporter, by his own admission, has never set his eyes on her! A comparison between the 2005 and 2010 findings shows an increase in the percentage of female news subjects described by age in all but the highest (65 and over) and lowest (12 and under) age groups. (See Table 13 on page 13) On television, women as news subjects now outnumber men in the 19 to 34 age bracket (at 54%), an increase over the past five years when only 35% of news subjects in this age bracket were female. Men continue to predominate in all age brackets despite the closing female to male gap of persons 35 and older appearing on the screen. Givespopularopinionreflecting viewsof'ordinary’citizens Providesopinionbasedon personalevperience Eyewitness Subject Expertorcommentator Spokesperson 34% 44% 36% 29% 23% 20% 19% 31% 14% 17% 23% 30% 2010 2005 13 2. In Other News 12. Functions of news subjects, by sex, by occupation: 2010. Spokesperson Expert or commentator Personal experience Eye witness Popular opinion Other Total %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M N Government official, politician 49% 53% 23% 24% 12% 23% 20% 22% 7% 14% 34% 60% 5505 Government employee, public servant 12% 12% 7% 9% 3% 4% 1% 3% 1% 7% 2% 5% 1443 Business person, executive 5% 7% 7% 9% 4% 9% 1% 9% 0% 6% 2% 2% 1103 Police, military, para-military group 2% 6% 2% 8% 2% 6% 0% 9% 1% 4% 0% 4% 879 Activist or worker in civil society organisation 10% 6% 10% 4% 2% 2% 5% 1% 1% 4% 1% 1% 861 Lawyer, judge, magistrate 3% 4% 11% 11% 1% 1% 2% 5% 1% 1% 1% 2% 795 Health or social service professional 4% 2% 12% 8% 5% 2% 3% 3% 3% 1% 0% 0% 783 Academic expert, education professional 4% 2% 11% 12% 5% 2% 4% 5% 3% 8% 7% 4% 706 Media professional, journalist 2% 1% 4% 4% 2% 1% 3% 5% 3% 1% 8% 2% 437 Villager or resident engaged in unspecified occupation 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 8% 15% 8% 24% 18% 1% 0% 410 Tradesperson, artisan 0% 1% 0% 1% 7% 8% 8% 10% 4% 6% 0% 1% 337 Sportsperson, athlete, player, coach, referee 1% 2% 0% 2% 1% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 2% 325 Homemaker, parent. 2% 0% 1% 0% 17% 4% 10% 1% 16% 7% 2% 0% 300 Celebrity, artist, actor, writer 1% 1% 4% 2% 6% 5% 1% 2% 3% 2% 20% 5% 265 Student, pupil, schoolchild 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 6% 11% 3% 18% 5% 0% 0% 229 Science or technology professional, engineer 1% 0% 3% 4% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 205 Office or service worker 2% 0% 3% 1% 5% 4% 7% 3% 3% 2% 2% 0% 200 Religious figure, priest, monk, rabbi, mullah, nun 0% 2% 0% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 0% 2% 0% 1% 189 Agriculture, mining, fishing, forestry worker 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 120 Child, young person (up to 18 years) 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 2% 1% 1% 7% 5% 12% 1% 103 Retired person, pensioner. 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 94 Royalty 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 5% 2% 67 Unemployed. 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 47 Criminal, suspect. 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 6% 41 Sex worker 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 15449 13. Age of news subjects in newspapers, by sex. 2005-2010. 2005 2010 12 years or under 41% 59% 21% 79% 13-18 38% 62% 58% 42% 19-34 36% 64% 44% 56% 35-49 33% 67% 42% 58% 50-64 22% 78% 37% 63% 65 years or more 43% 57% 24% 76% 50% 50% 14 2. In Other News The sex disparity in the functions of persons 18 years old or younger interviewed in the news is negligible; both males and females are more likely to appear as ordinary people providing views based on personal experience, as eyewitnesses or as givers of popular opinion. The patterns change in the older age brackets, with males appearing overwhelmingly as experts, notably so in interviewees between 35 to 64 years old. Women 65 years and older are more than 5 times as likely to be interviewed as ordinary people than as experts, in contrast to men who are as likely to be interviewed as experts as they are as ordinary people. Such portrayal reinforces stereotypes on male exceptionalism as men grow older in reverse to a diminishing average or below average expertise and knowledge in the case of women as they advance in years. 14. Age of news subjects on television, by sex: 2005-2010. 2005 2010 N 12 years or under 43% 57% 25% 75% 133 13-18 40% 60% 27% 73% 164 19-34 35% 65% 54% 46% 1649 35-49 25% 75% 37% 63% 2863 50-64 15% 85% 24% 76% 3041 65 years or more 12% 88% 17% 83% 676 Total 50% 50% 8526 15. Age of news sources (people interviewed), by sex: 2010.   12 years or under 13-18 19-34 35-49 50-64 65 years or more Total   %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M %F %M N Personal experience 25% 12% 8% 7% 14% 18% 31% 43% 38% 52% 4% 37% 6799 Eye witness 36% 67% 44% 49% 48% 45% 26% 15% 22% 15% 44% 30% 4147 Popular opinion 23% 5% 12% 32% 10% 8% 9% 7% 6% 4% 16% 13% 2365 Spokesperson 2% 0% 3% 7% 11% 17% 23% 28% 21% 25% 12% 13% 869 Expert or commentator 14% 15% 32% 6% 17% 11% 11% 7% 14% 4% 24% 7% 750 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 14930 *Excluded from this chart were news sources who were not coded for age or whose age could not be determined. Ordinary people Experts 12years orunder %F 73% 27% %M 88% 12% 13-18 %F 88% 12% %M 86% 14% 19-34 %F 75% 25% %M 64% 36% 35-49 %F 46% 54% %M 28% 72% 50-64 %F 41% 59% %M 23% 77% 65years ormore %F 84% 16% %M 50% 50% 15 2. In Other News Victims and survivors The GMMP 2010 research yielded fewer news subjects described as victims (3025) than in the 2005 research (3612) despite the broadly expanded dataset from 76 to 108 countries. At the same time, the number of news subjects described as survivors did not fall as dramatically, from 1576 in 2005 to 1300 in 2010. These statistics suggest perhaps an overall reduction over the past five years in the tendency to attribute victimhood to news subjects. 18% of female news subjects are portrayed as victims in comparison to 8% of male subjects. In contrast, women are now twice as likely to be portrayed as survivors than men. While the gap between the percentage of women and the percentage of men depicted as victims remains large, it has been narrowing gradually since 1995. Remarkably, in 2010, 6% of females in contrast to 3% of males are portrayed as survivors. This is a reversal of the situation in 2005 when 4% of females compared to 8% of males were portrayed as survivors. Closer scrutiny of the disaggregated victim categories reveals some notable changes. The percentage of females described as victims of domestic violence, assault, marital rape and murder by close family members and partners has risen from 9% five years ago to 14% in 2010. At the same time, the gap in the female to male ratio of news subjects described as survivors of domestic violence has widened almost proportionally, from 6:4 in 2005, to 13:4 in 2010. Therefore, the extent to which news media portray women as victims of domestic violence is matched by an 16. News subjects portrayed as victims, by sex: 2005-2010 2005 2010   %F %M %F %M Number of victims Accident, natural disaster, poverty, disease, illness 32% 36% 31% 32% 915 Other victim 14% 10% 19% 14% 475 Domestic violence (by spouse/partner/other family member), psychological violence, physical assault, marital rape, murder 9% 6% 14% 6% 302 Other crime, robbery, assault, murder 20% 22% 11% 17% 618 Discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion, ability 4% 3% 9% 8% 192 Non-domestic sexual violence or abuse, sexual harassment, rape, trafficking 7% 2% 7% 2% 123 War, terrorism, vigilantism, state-based violence 12% 21% 7% 17% 346 Violation based on religion, tradition, cultural belief, genital mutilation, bride- burning 2% 1% 1% 4% 54 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 3025 AVERAGE PORTRAYED AS VICTIMS 19% 8% 18% 8% 17. News subjects portrayed as survivors, by sex: 2005-2010. 2005 2010   %F %M %F %M Number of victims Accident, natural disaster, poverty, disease, illness 42% 52% 35% 38% 521 Domestic violence (by spouse/partner/other family member), psychological violence, physical assault, marital rape, murder 6% 4% 13% 4% 104 Other survivor 15% 10% 13% 13% 142 Non-domestic sexual violence or abuse, sexual harassment, rape, trafficking 10% 3% 11% 1% 60 Crime, robbery, assault, murder 17% 15% 10% 12% 203 War, terrorism, vigilantism, state-based violence 10% 16% 10% 18% 182 Discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion * * 7% 9% 66 Violation based on religion, tradition, cultural belief, genital mutilation, bride- burning n/a n/a 1% 5% 22 TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 1300 AVERAGE PORTRAYED AS SURVIVORS 4% 8% 6% 3% 16 2. In Other News Denmark. B.T Michelle Obamas kaerligheds-tips (Michelle Obama’s love tips) This short article summarizes an interview given by US First Lady Michelle Obama to Glamour magazine – publication based in the United States of America. The article notes that readers of Glamour have voted Michelle Obama as the most important woman of the year. The overwhelming focus on her appearance at once diminishes her position as “very important woman”. To emphasize this, her role in the news story is to provide advice on ‘what to look for in a man’, to speak about ‘what keeps her relationship with President Obama strong and stable’, and to discuss her fashion style. She is the only source in the article. The accompanying photograph which takes up a significant portion of the page is an intimate close-up shot of Michelle and Barack Obama. Although the article describes her as “important” and a “45 year- old super woman,” there is no reference to her Ivy League education or her highly successful career prior to becoming the First Lady. The story reinforces a stereotype that a woman’s goal is to attract, attain and keep a man. opposing depiction of women as survivors of such violence. The percentages of both females and males described as victims of discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, etc. have more than doubled. Interestingly, the female to male ratio of news subjects described as victims of violation based on religion, tradition, cultural belief, etc is dramatically reversed over the past five years. In 2005, 2% of female news subjects and 1% of male news subjects were described as victims of such violation. In 2010, the statistics are 1% of women and 4% of men in the news. This observation would be conclusively confirmed in a larger ‘victim’ sample as the dataset from 108 countries produced only 54 ‘victims’ in this category. Identity and family Female news subjects are identified by family status 4 times more than male news subjects, in opposition to a tendency in reportage to disassociate men from familial responsibilities. This finding taken in contrast to the statistics on representation of news subjects in their various occupations as well as their functions in the news is revealing. Identifying women by their family status and at the same time playing down their roles and authority in their communities masks women’s other identities as independent, autonomous beings, active participants in the wider society beyond the home. Evidently, takenfor-granted cultural norms are responsible for shaping our view of the world. A critical approach however calls for an interrogation of what is social-culturally constructed as ‘normal’. In the same vein, these findings suggest the need for a more gender-critical approach to newsroom journalistic practice. The overall continued patterns where women are almost 4 times as likely as men to be identified by their family status goes against efforts to assert women’s autonomy as individuals with roles, rights and responsibilities in the broader society beyond the home and household. It also discursively re-draws a gender divide in familial responsibilities that in reality is being eroded by men’s increasing childcare roles, as women work in paid labour outside the home. 19. News subjects by sex, identified by family status, by sex of reporter: 2010 Female news subjects Male news subjects Female reporters 16% 5% Male reporters 16% 4% Whether a reporter is female or male makes no difference in terms of the likelihood to portray different news subjects by their family status. Family status is mentioned for 16% of female news subjects in stories by female reporters, as in stories by male reporters. Both female and male reporters are much less likely to identify male news subjects by their family status, at 5% and 4% respectively. 4% 21% 2000 2005 2010 18. News subjects identified by family status, by sex: 2000-2010 17% 18% 5% 5% 17 2. In Other News Patterns in describing news subjects in each of the news function categories by their family status have remained constant since 2005. Five years ago 5% of female spokespersons were identified by their family status compared to only 1% of male spokespersons. The statistics are unchanged in 2010. Five years ago 29% of females providing testimony based on their personal experience were identified as mothers, daughters, etc, while 12% of males in the same function category were described as fathers, husbands, etc. The same is true in 2010. The encouraging change is the decline in the tendency to identify women providing popular opinion by their family status, reduced by one half from 14% in 2005 to 7% in 2010. The findings evidence an increasing tendency to quote female news subjects in newspapers. Currently, 52% of women are quoted, a rise from 50% in 2005. Given that the absolute number of female news subjects in contrast to male news subjects is far much less (only 24%), women’s direct voice in the news remains in effect quite minimal. Photographs Monitors were asked to indicate whether photographs of the subjects in the newspaper articles appeared. They were also asked to develop a gender analysis of the images if they considered them to be of special interest from a gender perspective. Photographs, news articles and the front pages of the newspapers were submitted together with the coded sheets. The research found that 26% of female news subjects appeared in photographs, in contrast to only 17% of males. Browsing through the pages of hundreds of newspapers from around the world, an overall impression of the gendered use of visual imagery in journalism emerges. How women and men are portrayed appears to differ considerably. It has been argued that images of women are employed in media to titillate or excite. Photos in tandem with captions and page layouts more often than not serve to reinforce gender stereotypes to varying extents. Women are often sexualized, in some cases brutalized, are pictured as passive, domesticated, as victims or as subordinate to men. Where women do figure as subjects of photos, it is most often younger women who are portrayed. While men are usually pictured either from the head up or fully clothed, the comparative frequency with which women’s bodies are pictured in various states of undress is much higher. Front pages from around the world are populated by images of young women in sexualized poses alongside lurid headlines and sexist catch phrases, often subtly, sometimes blatantly violent. One front page from the Italian ‘La Nazione’ illustrates this trend in macabre fashion: a male murder suspect is pictured in a headshot above a fullbody display of his victim on a beach in a bathing suit. The headline reads: ‘He killed her’. Images of women alongside suggestive titles abound. The images range from the blatantly pornographic (as the naked woman on the front page of the Hungarian newspaper ‘Budapest Blikk’ depicts) to the subtly suggestive (as illustrated by the frequent use of images of female models to publicize the fashion and beauty pages inside). Photos of a group of Ukrainian women protesting their government’s excessive measures against the H1N1 virus by wearing face-masks and facemask bikinis made the papers in a variety of countries, often with little contextual information about the protestors’ message. 20. News subjects’ functions and family status, by sex: 2005-2010. 2005 2010   %F %M %F %M Subject 22% 8% 24% 7% Spokesperson 5% 1% 5% 1% Expert or commentator 3% 0% 4% 1% Personal experience 29% 12% 29% 12% Eye witness 22% 15% 24% 11% Popular opinion 14% 5% 7% 5% 21. News subjects quoted in newspapers: 2000-2010. 22. News subjects photographed in newspapers, by sex: 2000-2010 18 2. In Other News 18 La Nazione, Italy Blikk, Hungary Dernière Heure, Belgium Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, UK El Sharouk, Egypt Metro Xpress, Denmark The Times, SurinameThe Citizen, South Africa The Star, Kenya 19 2. In Other News Le Rénovateur, SenegalThe Himalayan Times, Nepal Daily News, Botswana The New Zealand Herald El Pais, Uruguay The West Australian Australia Maariv, Israel Cambio, Bolivia El Caribe, Dominican Republic 20 2. In Other News Even when the captions or titles attempt to challenge stereotypes, they rely on the use of the sexualized female subject to draw attention to the article. For example, a photo in the Belgian ‘La Dernière Heure’ of a fashionable woman in sunglasses and smoking a cigar with a luxury vehicle in the background appears beside the headline ‘Gang of bimbos taken down’. The article is about a ring of female car thieves who had been arrested. While the idea of women as car thieves might defy the stereotype of the docile female, the presentation of this news item is decidedly misogynistic and sensationalist. The global monitoring day fell within the period leading up to the 2009 Miss Universe beauty pageant. Images abounded of various contestants, usually from the home country of the newspaper, most often pictured in the bathing-suit portion of the competition. The English contestant, Kristina Hodge, who is also a soldier in the British Army and had been deployed in Iraq, was featured in papers in at least four countries around the world, either in her army uniform or in her bathing suit, alongside captions like ‘combat Barbie’ (in the Belgian ‘La Dernière Heure’). In the same paper, her image was featured above an article on the Kalashnikov rifle, creating a collision of two common media tropes– the female body and the violent weapon. Very often, photos and captions of women in the news serve to reinforce a variety of stereotypes. For example, a British woman who sued her male boss for sexual harassment is pictured in an awkward stance in ’The Daily Mail’ and the caption refers to her as a ‘humiliated dumb blonde’. By contrast, the same story is presented in ’The Daily Telegraph’ with an image of the woman dressed in a business suit prominently displayed. In ’The Himalayan Times’ of Nepal, the caption of a story entitled ‘risky driving’ is accompanied by a photo of a woman applying lipstick behind the steering-wheel of a car, evoking a stereotype of women as dangerous drivers. Often the placement of photos of women is juxtaposed with suggestive or sexualized titles and captions that have little to do with the woman pictured, or the women pictured have little to do with the article. ‘The Daily News’ from Botswana pictures a woman and man at a dinner party below the headline: ‘Shun temptation – Mogae’. The woman’s dress has a low-cut neckline. However, further reading reveals that the article is about the former president of the professional accountants’ association asking members to avoid fraudulent accounting practices as he passes the presidency to the woman in the photo. On the cover of the South African ’The Citizen’, a cropped image shows the torso and pelvis of a seated woman beside the caption ‘hooker heaven’. Inside the paper however, the picture in its entirety appears with an accompanying article that reveals the woman is a theatre actress who plays the character of a sex worker. The front page of ’the West Australian’ provides a powerful overall view of gender stereotypes, including militarized masculinity and the sexualized female. The principal story and accompanying image is of a boy holding a photo of his father in military uniform while the father looks on approvingly in the background, appearing to mimic the pose of Queen Elizabeth II of England whose portrait is visible over his shoulder. The caption states that the boy has decided to follow in his father’s footsteps and join the military reserve. In the page sub-header is an image of a woman in a bathing suit announcing the fashion pages with the title ‘bikini blitz.’ The contrast between the young boy and his father on the one hand, and the bikiniclad woman on the other completes a picture of militarized masculinity and the sexualized female. Beyond the overt sexualisation of women in the news through image-selection, a number of other trends in the visual representation of women can be noticed. Women are often portrayed in the background of landscape shots, working in fields or doing domestic tasks. They are nameless and appear passive, as part of the scenery. Often these are women from rural areas. In contrast, images of men in papers around the world display active figures, engaged in activities from political debates to armed combat. In a Kenyan paper ‘The Star’, the front page shows armed male security forces preparing to evict settlers in the Mau forest region, while inside the paper, a photo accompanying the rest of the same article shows women standing passively around their makeshift homes. An Egyptian paper ‘El Sharouk’ features a picture of a woman making a peace sign in public alongside a separate photo of men rioting. In many cases women are presented as victims. After two boys drowned in Soweto, the South African newspapers ‘The Citizen’ and ‘The Star’ showed images of male rescue workers stoically removing the bodies while the tear-strewn faces of distraught women were pictured in close-up. A graphic image in ‘The Times of Suriname’ shows a woman lying in the street in the rain in front of a car, while bystanders stare. A news article on domestic violence in ‘metroXpress’ from Denmark shows a woman curled up against a wall crying, just visible between what appear to be the legs of a menacing male. Some photos do legitimately challenge stereotypes or present gender in a new light. Such photos include women speaking to audiences while holding footballs (New Zealand ‘Herald’), addressing rallies with fists raised (‘The News’ of St. Vincent and the Grenadines), or working in occupations not seen as traditionally ‘women’s work’, such as a female mechanic working in an auto shop (El Païs of Uruguay). In ‘Midi Madagasikara’ (from Madagascar), two girls are pictured as chess champions who ‘can beat men in chess’. A photo from Jamaica’s ‘Gleaner’ shows a man gently holding an infant child while the caption explains he is a leader in the Youth Parliament who has initiated a movement for young parents to provide moral leadership in society. While it is important to show images of women in non-traditional roles, the portrayal of powerful women and politicians is often subtly different from the portrayal of men. Male politicians often appear in head shots or alone at podiums above crowds, female politicians are often pictured as gendered subjects who rely on men. German Chancellor Angela Merckel appears in a variety of photos (in the Danish‘Jyllands-Posten’, and the Spanish ‘Las Provincias’), chaperoned by male politicians or flanked by famous past-world leaders like Mikhail Gorbachev. News imagery that does not accurately and ethically depict the complex reality of gender and society serves only to distort reality rather than reflect it. 21 2. In Other News Summary of findings ❚❚ Only 24% of the people heard or read about in print, radio and television news are female. In contrast, 76% - more than 3 out of 4 – of the people in the news are male. This is a significant change from 1995 when only 17% of the people in the news were women. Despite a slow but overall steady increase in women’s presence in the news over the past 10 years, the world depicted in the news remains predominantly male. This picture is incongruent with a reality in which at least one half of the world’s population is female. On the one hand the pace of increase in women’s visibility in the news has been maintained over the past decade, evidencing a persistently slow but constant pace of progress over the last ten years. On the other hand, the rise in women’s visibility stems largely from increased presence in topics of lower priority on the news media agenda, and much less in stories of high priority such as those pertaining to politics/government. ❚❚ Women’s presence in foreign news has increased to match their presence in local news. Between 1995 and 2005 women were most visible in local stories in comparison to those of a national or foreign scope. This trend is disrupted in the fourth GMMP where women’s visibility in foreign stories has increased to match their visibility in local stories. Further, the rate of increase of women’s presence in foreign stories during the past 5 years corresponds to the rate noted in the preceding period 2000 to 2005. This finding may be in synchrony with women’s increasing prominence at the global level although the extent to which increases in media portrayal accurately reflect real world changes is questionable given GMMP findings on under-representation of women in several areas. ❚❚ News continue to portray a world in which men outnumber women in almost all occupational categories, the highest disparity being in the professions. The proportion of female news subjects identified, represented or portrayed as workers or professionals over the past 10 years has risen in some occupational categories. Notwithstanding this, the sex gap remains high especially in the professions. 69% of news subjects portrayed as educators are male, 69% of health professionals, 83% of legal professionals and 90% of scientists. Out of 25 occupational categories, women outnumber men in only 2: news subjects presented as homemakers (72%) and those presented as students (54%). The picture seen through the news becomes one of a world where women are virtually invisible as active participants in work outside the home. ❚❚ As persons interviewed or heard in the news, women remain lodged in the ‘ordinary’ people categories, in contrast to men who continue to predominate the ‘expert’ categories. Women are inching closer to parity as people providing popular opinion in the news, at 44% of persons interviewed in the news in this capacity compared to 34% in 2005. Women’s presence as persons speaking based on personal experience, as spokespersons (people representing or speaking on behalf of others) and as experts (those providing comment based on specialist knowledge), has improved appreciably. Despite the gains, only 19% of spokespersons and 20% of experts are women. In contrast, 81% of spokespersons and 80% of experts in the news are male. ❚❚ Journalists are almost twice as likely to mention the ages of their female news subjects as they are to mention the ages of their male news subjects. Age is mentioned for 22% of female news subjects and 12% of male news subjects in newspapers. ❚❚ 18% of female news subjects are portrayed as victims in comparison to 8% of male subjects. In contrast, women are now twice as likely to be portrayed as survivors than men. While the gap between the percentage of women and the percentage of men depicted as victims remains large, it has been narrowing gradually since 1995. Remarkably, in 2010, 6% of females in contrast to 3% of males are portrayed as survivors. This is a reversal of the situation in 2005 when 4% of females compared to 8% of males were portrayed as survivors. ❚❚ Female news subjects are identified by their family status 4 times more than male news subjects. This finding taken in contrast to the statistics on representation of news subjects in their various occupations as well as their functions in the news is revealing. Identifying women by their family status and at the same time playing down their roles in their communities masks women’s other identities as independent, autonomous beings, active participants in the wider society beyond the home. ❚❚ 52% of women in the news are quoted, up from 50% in 2005. Women are slightly more likely to be quoted (52%) than men (50%). This is a shift from five years ago when men were more likely to be quoted (53%) than women (50%). However, given that the absolute number of female news subjects in contrast to male news subjects is far less (only 24%), women’s direct voice in the news remains in effect quite minimal. ❚❚ 26% of female subjects in newspapers appear in photographs, in contrast to only 17% male. A qualitative analysis of photographs appearing in newspapers during the global day of monitoring found that while men are usually pictured either from the head up or fully clothed, the comparative frequency with which women’s bodies are pictured in various states of undress is much higher. 1 Where stated, differences are statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval meaning that the possibility they occurred purely by chance is only 1 in 20. 2 Research compiled in 2010 by the the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the international organization of parliaments shows that 19% of parliamentarians across the world are women. http://www.ipu. org/wmn-e/world.htm 3 ‘News sources’ are defined as the people interviewed in the news and do not include people who the news is about. 22 3. Delivering The News Overview 52% of stories on television and 45% of those on radio are presented by women. The average combined total (49%) is less than half of all stories on television and radio, dropping 4 percentage points since 2005. This statistic is similar to the year 2000 level, and lower than 15 years ago when 51% of news stories were presented by women. (See Table 23) For stories reported across television, radio and newspapers, the percentage of those by female reporters is exactly similar to that registered in 2005, that is 37%. The percentages rose across all three mediums combined up until 2005. The statistics for radio are noteworthy for the sharp rise between 2000 and 2005 (from 27% to 45% of stories reported by women), followed by a dramatic 8 percentage point drop during the following 5-year period. The negative change on radio between 2005 and 2010 accounts for the stagnation in the overall average statistic found in 2010. The regional breakdown shows a pattern of overall decline during the decade from the year 2000 in the percentage of stories by female presenters and reporters in all but three regions – Europe, Asia and Latin America. The change in Europe is statistically insignificant while in Asia there was a slight increase. Latin America is exceptional in achieving an appreciable increase, from 28% in 2000 to 38% in 2010, a statistic that is however below the 42% global average. (See Table 24) Presenting the news Overall, 52% of stories on television and 45% of those on radio are presented by women. Studying the regional statistics for radio, we find that Europe and the Middle East are the only regions in which the number of stories presented by women is equal to that presented by men. Sex disparities exist in all other regions, falling below the global average of 45% and registering the largest gaps in the Caribbean (only 16% of stories on radio are by women) and in Latin America (29%). The regional statistics for television show that the Caribbean region followed by Asia exceed parity in the ratio of stories presented by women to those presented by men. 60% of stories in Caribbean television newscasts are presented by women, and 52% in Asian television newscasts. All other regions fall below the global average of 52%, with the largest gaps being in the Pacific (only 26% of stories presented by women) and in North America (32%). (See Tables 25 and 26 on page 23 ) Five years ago, only 7% of stories with presenters between 50 and 64 years old had female newscasters. The statistic at present is 51%, suggesting a possible achievement of numerical parity with male presenters in the same age bracket. Supplementary research is necessary in order to confirm whether this is indeed the case. 23. Stories by female presenters and reporters: 1995-2010. 1995 2000 2005 2010 TOTAL N Female presenters (Male and Female) Radio presenter n/a 41% 49% 45% 4040 Television presenter n/a 56% 57%  52% 3999   TOTAL PRESENTERS 51% 49% 53% 49% 8039 Female reporters (Male and Female) Newspaper reporter 25% 26% 29% 33% 4693 Radio reporter n/a 28% 45% 37% 1514 Television reporter n/a 36% 42% 44% 3339 TOTAL REPORTERS  28%  31%  37%  37% 9546 24. Stories by female presenters and reporters, by region: 2000-2010. Region 2000 2005 2010 Total N Africa 36% 41% 34% 1658 Asia 42% 49% 44% 3729 Caribbean 41% 41% 34% 897 Europe 40% 42% 41% 7244 Latin America 28% 38% 38% 2328 Middle East 47% 41% 46% 991 North America 46% 48% 35% 407 Pacific 49% 50% 35% 751  TOTAL     42% 18005 23 3. Delivering The News Reporting the news Closer scrutiny of the regional breakdown of news stories by sex of reporter by medium shows a common pattern. Across all mediums in all regions, stories by women comprise less than 50% of the total number of those reported, with the exception of stories on television in the Caribbean. In most regions, women report between 20% and 40% of all news stories. The Caribbean leads with the highest proportion of stories by newspaper female reporters (48%) as well as by female reporters on television (51%). The Caribbean is interesting given that at the same time, the region lags behind in the proportion of stories by female reporters on radio, at 26%. The Pacific region leads as the region with the highest proportion of stories on radio reported by women, at 42%. The region however is not much ahead of Europe where 40% of radio stories are reported by women, Africa (38%) and Latin America (38%). (See Table 27) Further scrutiny of the regional breakdown across the period 2000 to 2010 reveals improvement in the percentage of stories by female reporters in most regions. Latin America’s impressive performance is repeated here, the region having made exceptional strides from 27% of stories reported by women in 2000 to 41% in 2010. Africa improved as well from 21% to 30%, although well below the 37% world average and lagging behind all other regions on this indicator. The Caribbean leads at 45% of stories reported by women. We see a regression in the Pacific region which may be due to the larger sample size in 2010 that is perhaps more reflective of the region at present. Overall, there was no repeat of the narrowing of the sex gap registered between 2000 and 2005; the world percentage of stories reported by women remains at 37%, a finding exactly similar to the one uncovered five years ago. Studying the breakdown by topic we find that the percentage of stories reported by women compared to those reported by men has increased over the past decade in all major topics except ‘science/health’. The changes range between 3 to 11 percentage points, the highest increase being in stories on ‘celebrity/arts’. Nonetheless, stories by male reporters continue to exceed those by female reporters in all topics. Under 4 major topics, the order in how likely stories are to be reported by women has reverted back to the order uncovered in 2000 when this indicator was first measured. Stories under the major topics politics/government and crime/violence have remained least likely to be reported by women. Inversely, those under science/ health and social/legal are still most likely to be reported by women. Reflecting back to the finding that the former two topics are placed highest on the hierarchy of news media agenda priorities, we may conclude that the probability for stories accorded high news value by newsroom decision 25. Stories presented on radio and television, by region, by sex of announcer/presenter: 2010. RADIO  TELEVISION Female Male N Female Male N Africa 34% 66% 447 44% 56% 505 Asia  43% 57% 1137 52% 48% 1881 Caribbean 16% 84% 434 60% 40% 252 Europe 50% 50% 2126 44% 56% 3063 Latin America 29% 71% 805 41% 59% 1037 Middle East 50% 50% 501 44% 56% 349 North America 42% 58% 91 32% 68% 132 Pacific 44% 56% 184 26% 74% 368 TOTAL 45% 55% 5725 52% 48% 7587* *Statistics for radio from Canada only. No radio newscasts were monitored in the U.S.A 26. Stories presented on television by female announcers, by age of announcer/presenter: 2010. 52% 58% 51% 57% 19-34 35-49 50-64 65 years or more* 27. Stories by female reporters, by region, by medium : 2010. Africa 24% 38% 36% Asia 33% 35% 47% Caribbean 48% 26% 51% Europe 31% 40% 42% Latin America 45% 38% 35% Middle East 38% 29% 29% North America 34% 29% 33% Pacific 43% 42% 31% Newspapers Radio Television 28. Stories by female reporters, by region: 2000-2010. Africa 24% 28% 30% Asia 31% 37% 40% Caribbean 39% 41% 45% Europe 34% 34% 35% Latin America 27% 44% 41% Middle East 34% 35% 33% North America 36% 35% 34% Pacific 43% 44% 39% 2000 2005 2010 24 3. Delivering The News makers to be assigned to female reporters is much lower than the probability of stories accorded lowest priority to be assigned to women. Monitors were asked to code the scope of the story, that is, whether it pertained to local, national or foreign events. Stories pertaining to events in which the country and others – such as those of a regional focus – were coded as ‘national and other’. To some extent, foreign and national stories are now just as likely to be reported by women as are local stories. 40% of local stories are reported by women, 38% of national stories and 37% of foreign stories. This situation is different from 5, 10 and 15 years ago when a higher percentage of local news was reported by women than news of a broader scope. Therefore, while the divides between local, national and foreign stories are becoming blurred in terms of the percentage of stories assigned to female reporters, the high reporter sex gap continues across the entire range of stories. Stories by female reporters contain more female news subjects than stories by male reporters. This trend has persisted over the past 10 years. In 2000, 24% of news subjects in stories by female reporters were female, in contrast to only 18% in stories by male reporters. Currently, the statistics stand at 28% and 22% respectively. These figures reflect an extremely slow rate of progress during the decade towards more gender-balanced journalism. Five years ago 34% of stories by reporters in the 35-49 age bracket were filed by women, compared to 42% of stories in 2010. The proportion of stories by women in the cluster of reporters between 50- 64 years old has also risen remarkably, from 17% in 2005 to 40% currently. This encouraging finding would need to be conclusively confirmed through supplementary research. Overall, the findings suggest that ground has been gained in the higher age brackets. Interestingly, the statistic pertaining to the 19-34 age bracket has fallen well below parity. In 2005, 52% of stories by reporters in this age group were reported by women while now, only 39% are by female reporters. This fact, despite the gains, has resulted in a situation where stories by female reporters are now outnumbered by those by male reporters in all age brackets. 29. Stories by female reporters, by major topics: 2000-2010. Science and Health 46% 38% 44% Social and Legal 39% 40% 43% Economy 35% 43% 40% Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 27% 35% 38% Crime and Violence 29% 33% 35% Politics and Government 26% 32% 33% The Girl-child* * * 43% * This category contained fewer than 1% of the total number of stories in the GMMP. This was not a separate topic in 2000 and 2005, hence the statistics are not available. 2000 2005 2010 30. Stories by female reporters, by scope: 1995- 2010. Local 33% 34% 44% 40% National 24% 30% 34% 38% National and other 28% 33% 32% 32% Foreign 28% 29% 36% 37% * Statistics for stories coded as ‘do not know’ not shown 1995 2000 2005 2010 31. Female news subjects, by sex of reporter: 2000-2010 2000 2005 2010 * Not shown: Other sources (transgender, transsexual, each showing less than 0.2% for female and male reporters), and sources that could not be classified. 24% 25% 28% 18% 20% 22% 25 3. Delivering The News The prevailing approach to journalism in a newsroom determines how genderresponsive the final output will be, where ‘approach’ is taken as the interaction between several aspects. These aspects include the editorial policy, the editor’s level of gender awareness and commitment, assignment of stories, the story angle, the interviewing techniques, the language employed, the choice of images, the amount of space allocated to issues of concern to marginalized groups (of which women are a substantial majority) as well as ethical and quality assurance in news coverage. The GMMP 2010 research has found some positive changes in the dimensions of gender in the news media studied. However, that the changes are small points to a number of possible contributory factors. My commentary concentrates on factors within newsrooms and the news production process itself. The questions that readily come to mind are: What is the nature of the production routines and processes in the media houses? Who oversees these processes, and what positions do women and men occupy? Are women in positions of influence? Do newsrooms have a directory of women experts who can serve as sources of news? Do newsrooms have guidelines that will enhance their reporting of gender issues? Are there mentoring programmes on gender and development reporting in the media houses? Are there effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms in the media houses to ensure fair gender portrayal and  improve gender balance both in the newsroom and in journalistic practice? To begin, newsroom editors, features editors, and senior reporters who are mostly male, are ordinarily responsible for assigning stories to reporters and journalists. Work allocation within media houses is not always based on competence in covering certain areas; stereotyping in the distribution of stories persists. Female journalists continue to cover what are termed as ‘soft’ stories such as culture, health and other social issues rather than reporting what may be seen to be more challenging topics, such as politics, business, technology, science, elections and finance. Rarely are female journalists considered to be ‘grand reporters’. Further, it is important for newsroom decision makers to be conscious of the need for gender balanced reporting and to be mentors who can guide their colleagues in producing more genderfair coverage. As leaders who oversee the news production processes, it is vital that they recognise the value of improving the reporting skills of their journalists from a gender perspective, which in turn will improve the overall quality of reportage. Newsroom decision makers need to constantly remind reporters during editorial meetings and before assignments of the importance of paying attention to high professional standards, ethics and creativity, where gender-balance and fairness are integral components of professionalism. In a different scenario, a reporter may be gender sensitive and may provide progressive, gender-balanced stories but does not have the final say on the editorial judgments. Taking the case of Africa where generally the majority of media gatekeepers, editors and senior reporters are male, certain prejudices about gender in media content do not occur by accident. These prejudices are reflected in the way assignments are distributed, who covers what story, the way stories are re-written and edited, what sources reporters are referred to, and the perspectives that are seen as important and that should be retained, just to mention a few. In fact, the lack of diversity in voices in the news reflects the status quo in society where reliance on stereotypes that are part of our shared culture remain, giving more voice to men than women as sources and purveyors of information and knowledge. Most of the voices in the news are male and given the ways in which newsrooms are run, the primary objective is to get the story regardless of the fact that sources can be diversified. Another area worth reflecting on is the complex nature of media houses. Most media houses have units/sections and or desks that deal with different aspects of programming such as education, features/and or documentaries, sports, the newsroom, drama, etc. Experience shows that at times there is little or no coordination between the different units and sections, particularly within the news rooms. In places where the news room and the production units do not work together to produce quality reports, there 32. Stories by female television news reporters, by age of reporter: 2005-2010. * Only 1 reporter (male) 65 years and older in 2005 2005 52% 34% 17% 0% 2010 39% 42% 40% 45% 19-34 35-49 50-64 65 years or more* Special commentary by Amie Joof 26 3. Delivering The News are bound to be missed opportunities in gender coverage. This is particularly true of the broadcast and print news media where the events-driven nature of news production practice coupled with the need for rapid results leads to missed opportunities to incorporate gender or even rights’ perspectives during coverage. How to link gender as a common thread cutting across development issues whether it is education, health, human rights, poverty, good governance, democracy, elections, HIV and AIDS, reproductive health or economic issues remains a challenge for the media. Gender concerns are relegated to magazine, discussions, features or documentary programmes in broadcast media. At times, magazine programmes targeting a largely female audience are erroneously referred to as ‘gender programmes’. Experience with media houses in Africa reveals an impression that ‘gender’ is synonymous with ‘women’. This suggests an inadequate comprehension about the concept and the impact of skewed power relations on social progress. Media audiences have come to expect news columns or broadcasts about ‘gender’ to focus on ‘women’s issues’. This observation suggests the need for mainstreaming gender in media houses to be a management decision requiring the full support of the gatekeepers in newsrooms, the production units/departments and other segments of media houses. Related to this is the level of awareness and knowledge about gender issues, gender protocols and what they imply, and institutional commitment to genderbalanced reportage. Where awareness is low, stories will tend to reinforce gender stereotypes rather than challenge them. Where awareness is high and there are in-house gender policies, guidelines, materials and resources, the tendency will be to produce stories that will challenge gender stereotypes, highlight gender equality or inequality and even utilise national gender equality policies or human and women’s rights legal instruments as bases for programming and news content. Most media houses lack resource materials and policy guidelines that can serve as guide for reporters. A gender-supportive in-house policy framework in isolation is not sufficient; it needs to be backed by a systematic training programme that may consist of short formal training sessions with inhouse coaching and mentoring activities, taking into account the newsroom structure, dynamics, staff and other requirements. Training should begin in journalism training institutions and continue within the media houses. Journalist training institutions on their part have a responsibility to review curricula, to incorporate gender into teaching, develop the relevant training resources and encourage students to embark on research in gender and media issues. Mainstreaming gender in media training and journalism education will build journalists’ capacities to challenge the stereotypes that continue to relegate women to the background and ensure gender-just news media coverage. As well, it will enhance the skills and capacity of trainers and lecturers to teach journalism that is aware and responsive to concerns about gender-based inequality and discrimination. Finally, in-house plans should spell out indicators to monitor impact in terms of not only quantity, quality and diversity of voices but also the periodicity of stories and programmes on gender-equality issues. Such a holistic approach will bridge the gap that exists between the gate keepers and decision makers on the one hand and the reporters and producers on the other, and can gradually help transform media practice. Most media houses and journalists unions and associations do not have structured and systematic training plans or mentoring programmes with a well integrated gender component for their workers and or members. Training and sensitisation of editors , reporters and journalists is a sine qua non to address stereotypical reportage. If we consider media houses that have rare examples of gender-aware reportage, we note some contributory factors. Of prime importance is political will from the highest level. Taking again an illustration from Africa, we find a strong correlation between what transpires at the national level in terms of policies and programmes on gender and development in line with the Beijing Platform for Action, the African Union (AU) Protocol on the rights of women, protocols on gender and development and other instruments and the manner in which media report gender and development issues.  At the national and regional levels, most governments have ratified and adopted all the protocols mentioned. Yet the protocols have not been domesticated to a significant extent due to reservations on some articles especially those hinging on culture, tradition, religion and customary laws. In some instances, the provisions in the protocols are in contradiction with the national laws, resulting in policies with glaring gaps. What this implies is a lack of political will to put in place or implement gender policies effectively and resistance to change, not only from power holders, but from a predominantly patriarchal society in general. The media being part of that same society follows suit, with attitudes and perspectives that are reflected in and through media coverage and in-house culture. This explains, to some extent, the biases and stereotypes portrayed through the media in coverage. The media mirrors society to the extent that reportage and practices echo the bias and discrimination taking place in real, lived experiences. The level of training and education are closely linked to recruitment, career development and advancement as well as the ability to professionally contest gender injustices within media houses, unions and associations. This has an impact on opportunities for women to occupy positions of leadership and decision making. Gaps in these factors combined result in the perpetuation of the status quo of male dominated leadership positions in media institutions, unions and associations. The cycle is reproduced when media owners assign positions of responsibility to men rather than women, the most common reason cited being a prejudice against women’s other responsibilities in their families. That women occupy few leadership positions in media institutions limits the possibilities available to them to influence content in favour of women or genderequality concerns. The GMMP results and analysis support an argument for the establishment of gender policy and reporting guidelines backed by effective monitoring and evaluation in media houses in order to contribute to increasing fair, balanced and ethical reporting. To this effect, training and sensitisation of editors, reporters and journalists remain sine qua non. 27 3. Delivering The News Summary of findings ❚❚ For stories reported on television, radio and newspapers, the percentage of those by female reporters is exactly similar to that registered in 2005, that is 37%. The percentage of stories by female reporters across all three mediums combined rose until 2005. The statistics for radio are noteworthy for the sharp rise between 2000 and 2005 (from 27% to 45% of stories reported by women), followed by a dramatic 8 percentage point drop 5 years later. The negative change on radio between 2005 and 2010 accounts for the stagnation in the overall average statistic found in 2010. ❚❚ 52% of stories on television and 45% of those on radio are presented by women. The average total of stories on television and radio presented by women is 49%, less than half of the total number of stories on both mediums combined, a 4 percentage point drop since 2005 and lower than in 1995 when the statistic was 51%. ❚❚ More stories on television are presented by older women now than 5 years ago Five years ago, only 7% of stories by presenters between 50 and 64 years old had female newscasters. Currently, 51% of stories by presenters in this age bracket are presented by women, suggesting a possible achievement of numerical parity with male presenters of the same age. Supplementary research is necessary in order to confirm whether this is indeed the case. As well, the percentage of stories by female reporters in the older age brackets has increased. Five years ago 34% of stories by reporters between 35 and 49 years old were filed by women. The statistic has risen to 42% in 2010. The proportion of stories by women in the cluster of reporters between 50-64 years old has also risen remarkably, from 17% in 2005 to 40% currently. Again, supplementary research is essential to conclusively confirm this possible trend. ❚❚ Since the year 2000 the percentage of stories reported by women compared to those reported by men has increased in all major topics except ‘science/health’. Nonetheless, stories by male reporters continue to exceed those by female reporters in all topics. The changes range between 3 to 11 percentage points, the highest increase being in stories on ‘celebrity/arts’. Men report 67% of stories on politics/ government, 65% of stories on crime/ violence and 60% of stories on the economy. The percentage of stories on science/health reported by women declined sharply between 2000 and 2005 from 46% to 38%, a decline that was followed by an increase to 44% in the subsequent 5-year period that nevertheless has not been sufficient to bring the proportion back up to the level noted a decade ago. The statistics strongly suggest that stories accorded high news value by newsroom decision makers are least likely to be assigned to female reporters, while those accorded lowest priority will most likely be assigned to female reporters. ❚❚ Foreign and national stories are now reported by women almost to the same extent as local stories. This situation is different from the period 1995 to 2005 when local stories were more likely to be reported by women than those of a broader scope. 40% of local stories are reported by women, 38% of national stories and 37% of foreign stories. Thus, while the divides between local, national and foreign stories are becoming blurred in terms of the percentage of stories assigned to female reporters, the high reporter sex-gap continues across stories of all scopes. ❚❚ Stories by female reporters contain more female news subjects than stories by male reporters. This trend has persisted over the past 10 years. In 2000, 24% of news subjects in stories by female reporters were female, in contrast to only 18% in stories by male reporters. Currently, the statistics stand at 28% and 22% respectively. The statistics reflect an extremely slow rate of progress during the decade towards more gender-balanced journalism. GMMP Monitors, Ethiopia 28 Women’s centrality in the news The concept of ‘women’s centrality’ in the news refers to the extent to which women ‘make the news’ in a significant way. While most of the people whose actions and opinions are reported in the news are male, women do sometimes appear as a central focus in some stories. One example is stories that deal with matters that affect women in particular ways, for instance stories about glass ceilings for women in employment, or, stories about African grandmothers’ burden of care for children orphaned by AIDS. The GMMP research found that women are central in only 13% of all stories, which nevertheless is a statistically significant improvement from the 10% finding in 2005. There has been no improvement however over the past 5 years in the likelihood of stories to focus centrally on women in social/legal, crime/violence and celebrity news. In news on ‘politics/government’, women are now central 13% of stories compared to 8% in 2005; in ‘science/health’ from 6% in 2005 to 16% in 2010, and in stories on ‘economy’, from 3% to 11%. (See table 33 on page 29) Even though the propensity of economic stories that focus centrally on women has increased by almost 4 times, important subtopics such as those on economic policies and the rural economy are among those with alarming percentages of stories in which women are not central. Under both sub-topics, over 95% of stories do not focus centrally on women. The 2010 findings evidence a visible difference in reporting patterns between female and male reporters unlike in 2005 when no real difference was detected on this indicator. Looking closely at the personnel behind the stories we find that women are central in 13% of stories by female reporters in contrast to 10% of stories by male reporters, revealing a significant difference in reporting patterns. Gender (in)equality in the news Slight progress is observed in the proportion of news stories highlighting issues of gender equality or inequality. In 2005, 4% of stories highlighted inequality issues, compared to 6% currently. Some regions have improved remarkably. Latin America is noteworthy for tripling the proportion of such stories, from 4% in 2005 to 12% in 2010. North America and the Caribbean were leading at 5% in 2005. They now fall in second and third place respectively having achieved double the figures registered five years ago. The seeming progress in reportage in the Middle East from 1% of stories highlighting (in)equality issues in 2005 to 4% in 2010 may in fact be a truer representation of the region: the rise in the number of participating countries from only 2 in 2005 to 6 in 2010 could account for the new finding that is close to the 6% global average. Other regions have either stagnated or regressed as in the case of the Pacific that fell 2 points from 3% in 2005 to only 1% currently. The decline in the Pacific however, may be explained by the larger sample size from the increased number of participating countries from the region, in turn suggesting a finding that may be more regionally representative at present. (See table 34 on page 30) In 2005 women reported 47% of stories found to raise inequality issues with the remainder 53% being reported by men. These findings are more or less similar to the 2010 research results. In 2005 women reported 36% of the stories that did not highlight an aspect of inequality and male reporters 64%. The status quo is maintained in 2010. The stagnation in the world averages implies that overall journalistic patterns in reportage have remained unchanged. That said, the regional breakdown shows variations between female and male reporters. (See tables 35 and 36 on page 30) Breaking down the 2010 data by region reveals varying patterns. In Africa, Europe and Latin America, stories by female reporters are more likely to raise issues of gender equality or inequality than stories by male reporters. In Africa 7% of stories by female reporters compared to 4% by male reporters evoke (in)equality issues. In Europe the statistics are 7% of stories by women and 3% of stories by men while in Latin America the findings are 12% and 10% for female and male reporters respectively. The difference noted in North America is statistically insignificant while none at all was found in Asia and the Middle East. The Caribbean region is striking in that stories by male reporters (18%) are to a larger extent more likely to highlight (in)equality issues than stories by female reporters (10%). Looking at the female to male ratio of news subjects in stories where issues of gender equality are raised, we find wildly differing patterns. In the Caribbean the female to male ratio of people in stories where gender (in)equality issues are raised is 1:2. The gaps in Asia, the Pacific, North America and Europe are much narrower, at an average of 5:6. In the Middle East the ratio is enormous: only 3 in every 10 individuals in stories highlighting (in) equality are male. (See table 37 on page 30, and table 38 on page 31) It is not surprising to find that stories explicitly about women, such as those on birth control and on women’s economic participation are high on the list (ranked in descending order) of stories that highlight issues of gender (in)equality. 39% of stories on birth control highlight gender inequalities and 31% of those on women’s economic participation. Minimal proportions of stories under themes of concern to women from a gender equality perspective in fact highlight (in)equality, for instance, only 3% of stories on domestic politics, 3% on poverty and 2% on education. 4. News Content 29 4. News Content 29 33. Women’s centrality in the news: 2010. Are women central to this story? No Yes News about the girl child, including, cultural attitudes and practices impinging on girls, education, health, economic exploitation, violence (ONLY WHERE EMPHASIS IS ON THE GIRL CHILD)… 24% 71% Women in political power and decision-making (local, regional, national), 28% 69% Women's participation in economic processes (informal work, paid employment, unemployment, unpaid labour) 34% 66% Women's movement, activism, events, demonstrations, gender equality advocacy … 26% 62% Women electoral candidates (local, regional, national), 38% 54% Gender-based violence, feminicide, harassment, domestic violence, rape, trafficking, genital mutilation 42% 54% Child abuse, sexual violence against children, trafficking, neglect. 51% 39% HIV and AIDS, incidence, policy, treatment, people affected … 48% 39% Family law, family codes, property law, inheritance law and rights … 60% 37% Celebrity news, births, marriages, deaths, obituaries, famous people, royalty … 59% 35% Human rights, women's rights, children's rights, gay & lesbian rights, rights of minorities .. 60% 34% Birth control, fertility, sterilisation, amniocentesis, termination of pregnancy … 63% 34% Family relations, inter-generational conflict, single parents … 61% 34% Beauty contests, models, fashion, beauty aids, cosmetic surgery … 69% 31% Changing gender relations, roles and relationships of women and men inside and outside the home … 47% 22% Other stories on crime and violence 72% 20% Other stories on celebrities, arts, media 75% 19% Global partnerships (international trade and finance systems, e.g. WTO, IMF, World Bank, debt) … 80% 19% Migration, refugees, asylum seekers, ethnic conflict, integration, racism, xenophobia … 80% 17% Violent crime, murder, abduction, kidnapping, assault, drug-related violence … 80% 16% Other stories on the economy 81% 15% Other stories on social or legal issues 82% 15% Media, including new media (computers, internet), portrayal of women and/or men, pornography … 84% 14% Medicine, health, hygiene, safety, disability, medical research, funding (apart from HIV-AIDS)… 83% 13% Other stories on politics and government 81% 13% Disaster, accident, famine, earthquake, flood, hurricane, plane crash, car crash … 82% 13% Other stories on science or health 77% 11% Religion, culture, tradition, controversies, teachings, celebrations, practices … 85% 11% Arts, entertainment, leisure, cinema, theatre, books, dance … 88% 10% Education, child care, nurseries, pre-school to university, adult education, literacy … 88% 9% Peace, negotiations, treaties…(local, regional, national), 85% 9% Development issues, sustainability, community development … 87% 9% Poverty, housing, social welfare, aid to those in need … 84% 9% Non-violent crime, bribery, theft, drug-dealing, corruption, (including political corruption/malpractice) … 88% 8% Other epidemics, viruses, contagions, Influenza, BSE, SARS … 89% 8% Other subject: use only if none of the above subject codes is suitable 86% 7% Sports, events, players, facilities, training, policies, funding … 87% 7% Riots, demonstrations, public disorder … 90% 7% Legal system, judicial system, legislation (apart from family, property & inheritance law) … 89% 6% War, civil war, terrorism, state-based violence … 89% 6% Other domestic politics/government (local, regional, national), elections, speeches, the political process 89% 6% Consumer issues, consumer protection, regulation, prices, consumer fraud … 93% 6% National defence, military spending, military training, military parades, internal security … 91% 5% Foreign/international politics, relations with other countries, negotiations, treaties, UN peacekeeping … 92% 5% Environment, nature, pollution, global warming, ecology, tourism … 93% 4% Other labour issues, strikes, trade unions, negotiations, other employment and unemployment … 89% 4% Economic indicators, statistics, business, trade, stock markets … 93% 4% Science, technology, research, funding, discoveries, developments … 93% 4% Economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers … 94% 3% Economic policies, strategies, models (national, international) … 96% 2% Transport, traffic, roads …… 95% 1% Rural economy, agriculture, farming practices, agricultural policy, land rights … 96% 1% No Not sure Yes 50% 30 4. News Content Scrutiny of the list of stories by rank reveals that the major topics ‘science/ health’ and ‘social/legal’ contain higher proportions of stories that highlight (in)equality issues, than topics in which women have historically been marginalized, namely ‘politics’ and ‘the economy’. The first concern is that these topics are accorded relatively little space in the news in contrast to the other major topics. Thus, the overall impact of the stories in these topics that do indeed highlight inequality issues is in fact quite minimal within the larger news context. The second and perhaps more serious concern is that the relatively smaller proportions of stories that highlight inequality issues in topics in which women have historically been marginalized in real, lived experiences, namely ‘politics’ and ‘the economy’, means that no challenge is offered to the status quo. The dearth of stories that challenge stereotypes in these topics implies a continued propagation of inequalities as well as lost opportunities to raise public awareness and encourage debate on these issues. 34. Stories were issues of gender equality or inequality are raised, by region: 2005-2010. Africa 4% 5% Asia 3% 3% Caribbean 5% 9% Europe 3% 3% Latin America 4% 12% Middle East 1% 4% North America 5% 10% Pacific 3% 1% 35. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by sex of reporter: 2005-2010. Highlights gender inequality 2005 47% 53% 2010 46% 54% Does not highlight gender inequality 2005 36% 64% 2010 36% 64% 36. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by region, by sex of reporter: 2010. Africa 7% 4% Asia 2% 2% Caribbean 10% 18% Europe 7% 3% Latin America 12% 10% Middle East 2% 2% North America 7% 6% Pacific *3% 0% * Only 1% of stories from the Pacific region on the global monitoring day were found to highlight gender equality issues, hence this statistic should be interpreted with caution. 2005 2010 Female Reporters Male Reporters 37. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by region, by sex of news subject: 2010. Female news subjects Male news subjects Africa 36% 64% Asia 44% 56% Caribbean 32% 68% Europe 47% 53% Latin America 40% 60% Middle East 71% 29% North America 46% 54% Pacific 46% 54% Global average 44% 56% 31 4. News Content 31 Highlights gender equality or inequality  Yes No Changing gender relations, roles and relationships of women and men inside and outside the home … 85% 15% Birth control, fertility, sterilisation, amniocentesis, termination of pregnancy … 39% 61% Women's participation in economic processes (informal work, paid employment, unemployment, unpaid labour) 31% 69% Human rights, women's rights, children's rights, gay & lesbian rights, rights of minorities .. 29% 71% HIV and AIDS, incidence, policy, treatment, people affected … 25% 75% Gender-based violence, feminicide, harassment, domestic violence, rape, trafficking, genital mutilation … 24% 76% Family relations, inter-generational conflict, single parents … 11% 89% Women's movement, activism, events, demonstrations, gender equality advocacy … 11% 89% Media, including new media (computers, internet), portrayal of women and/or men, pornography … 10% 90% News about the girl child, including, cultural attitudes and practices impinging on girls, education, health, economic exploitation, violence (only where emphasis is on the girl child)… 10% 90% Women in political power and decision-making (local, regional, national), 9% 91% Religion, culture, tradition, controversies, teachings, celebrations, practices … 8% 92% Beauty contests, models, fashion, beauty aids, cosmetic surgery … 8% 92% Other labour issues, strikes, trade unions, negotiations, other employment and unemployment … 5% 95% Family law, family codes, property law, inheritance law and rights … 5% 95% Peace, negotiations, treaties…(local, regional, national), 4% 96% Consumer issues, consumer protection, regulation, prices, consumer fraud … 4% 96% Development issues, sustainability, community development … 4% 96% Migration, refugees, asylum seekers, ethnic conflict, integration, racism, xenophobia … 4% 96% Violent crime, murder, abduction, kidnapping, assault, drug-related violence … 4% 96% Celebrity news, births, marriages, deaths, obituaries, famous people, royalty … 4% 96% Other domestic politics/government (local, regional, national), elections, speeches, the political process … 3% 97% Poverty, housing, social welfare, aid to those in need … 3% 97% Transport, traffic, roads …… 3% 97% Medicine, health, hygiene, safety, disability, medical research, funding (apart from HIV-AIDS)… 3% 97% Environment, nature, pollution, global warming, ecology, tourism … 3% 97% Non-violent crime, bribery, theft, drug-dealing, corruption, (including political corruption/malpractice) … 3% 97% Child abuse, sexual violence against children, trafficking, neglect. 3% 97% War, civil war, terrorism, state-based violence … 3% 97% Arts, entertainment, leisure, cinema, theatre, books, dance … 3% 97% Foreign/international politics, relations with other countries, negotiations, treaties, UN peacekeeping … 2% 98% Economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers … 2% 98% Education, child care, nurseries, pre-school to university, adult education, literacy … 2% 98% Legal system, judicial system, legislation (apart from family, property & inheritance law) 2% 98% Disaster, accident, famine, earthquake, flood, hurricane, plane crash, car crash … 2% 98% Sports, events, players, facilities, training, policies, funding … 2% 98% Women electoral candidates (local, regional, national), 1% 99% Global partnerships (international trade and finance systems, e.g. WTO, IMF, World Bank, debt) … 1% 99% National defence, military spending, military training, military parades, internal security 1% 99% Economic policies, strategies, models (national, international) … 1% 99% Science, technology, research, funding, discoveries, developments … 1% 99% Other epidemics, viruses, contagions, Influenza, BSE, SARS … 1% 99% Economic indicators, statistics, business, trade, stock markets … 0% 100% Rural economy, agriculture, farming practices, agricultural policy, land rights … 0% 100% Riots, demonstrations, public disorder … 0% 100% *Not shown: statistics for the response ‘don’t know’ and for stories classified as ‘other’ under each of the major topic areas. 38. Whether stories raise issues of gender (in)equality: 2010. 50% 32 4. News Content Gender stereotyping in the news Monitors were asked to classify stories into (1) those that reinforce gender stereotypes (2) those that challenge such stereotypes and (3) those that neither challenge nor reinforce stereotypes. Stories that challenge stereotypes include those that overturn common assumptions about women and men in terms of their attributes, traits, roles or occupations. Inversely, stories that reinforce stereotypes will reinscribe the generalized, simplistic and often exaggerated assumptions of masculinity and femininity in a given cultural context. The results of the 2010 monitoring are starkly different from those obtained in 2005 in view of the efforts made to develop a shared understanding of the ‘stereotypes’ concept. Feedback from monitors who participated in the 2005 research revealed that while they were able to identify many more news items that contained stereotypes, they were unable to code properly because of lack of clarity on this question. The question was sharpened in 2010 and pictorial examples of ‘stereotyping’ added. Considerable training was provided as well as constant, collective virtual and in-person exchanges about the concept, how to identify ‘stereotypes’ and how to respond to the question. Multilevel training was provided, from a global training workshop, to several regional workshops, to national workshops and the smaller local monitoring teams’ training. Given the diversity of ‘stereotypes’ in different cultural contexts, monitoring team leaders were encouraged to identify and discuss examples exhaustively with monitors in preparation for the coding. Title of article: At ovulation, women have the propensity for cheating on their partners Source: Gandul Country: Romania Summary: The story reports on the results of two American research projects that have examined the impact of menstruation and ovulation on women’s infidelity. The article is first mentioned on page 1. The longer version of the article is placed in page 12 within the health section. Analysis: The title of the article blatantly stereotypes women by stating that infidelity among women is instigated by reproductive hormones. The title does not indicate that this is from a research study. Three sources are quoted in the article. Two are men and one is a woman. The sources opinions are presented in a balanced manner by the author as ‘credible’, ‘non-sexist’, and ‘scientifically proven’. The reporter uses a variety of terms typical of women’s identity such as: menstruation, fertility, ovulation, and sexual attraction. Although the title of the article presents the outcomes of the studies (most likely to turn reader’s attention to the subject) in the article the author uses a lot of modal verbs of probability – “may” “should” “would” – which means that the results of the study cannot be generalized. The accompanying photograph is of a woman wearing a short black dress and stilettos. The photo stereotypes women as sex symbols. The researchers suggest that the high level of women’s hormones during ovulation increases women’s libido, not their beauty. The photograph is meant to reflect this line of thinking. Conclusion: The stereotype that ovulating women are unfaithful enhances public perceptions that there are major differences between women’s fidelity in relationships. It suggests that female hormones severely contribute to infidelity. As a result, women are more unfaithful than men. This is a stereotype which also suggests that because men do not ovulate, they are less likely to cheat. 33 4. News Content 46% of the stories monitored reinforced gender stereotypes, almost eight times higher than stories that challenged such stereotypes (6%). The 6% statistic is small however it is double the figure found in 2005, implying an increase in tendencies in news reportage to challenge stereotypes during the past five years. (See table 39) The largest percentages of stories that reinforce stereotypes pertain to crime/ violence, celebrity and political news. Considering this in light of the finding that these topics combined occupy almost 60% of the news media agenda, their overall contribution to reinforcing stereotypes is high. Inversely, if economic and political news stories in particular were to be reported in a less stereotypical manner, their overall contribution to gender-just news content would be transformative. With the exception of stories on the girl child, ‘social/legal’ news contains the highest proportion (8%) of stories that challenge stereotypes. This topic however occupies only 9% of the space in the news. All regions have made progress in the past five years on the proportion of stories that clearly challenge stereotypes. Latin America however deserves special mention for its impressive performance, and now leads as the region with the highest percentage of stories that challenge stereotypes (13%) after a quadruple increase since 2005. The Middle East leads as the region with the highest percentage of stories that reinforce stereotypes at 81%, followed by Africa at 77%. (See table 40) 7% of stories reported by women challenge stereotypes, in contrast to 4% of stories by male reporters. 35% of stories by female reporters reinforce stereotypes compared to 42% of stories reported by men. These statistics evidence a sex disparity in reporting patterns; the probability of stories by female reporters to challenge stereotypes is higher than that of stories by male reporters. Stories by women are also less likely to reinforce stereotypes than those reported by men. (See table 41 on page 34) With the exception of North America, the sex disparity in reporting patterns is visible in the regional breakdown particularly in the Caribbean and Middle East regions. In the Caribbean, stories by female reporters are almost 5 times as likely as those by male reporters to challenge gender stereotypes while in the Middle East they are 7 times as likely. Stories by female 39. Stories and gender stereotypes, by topic: 2010. Topic Reinforces stereotypes Clearly challenges stereotypes Neither challenges nor reinforces N Crime and Violence 51% 5% 44% 3233 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 48% 6% 45% 1712 Politics and Government 46% 5% 49% 4522 Economy 43% 4% 53% 2869 Science and Health 43% 5% 52% 1495 Social and Legal 40% 8% 51% 2079 The Girl-child** 20% 33% 46% 37 Global average and total 46% 6% 49% 15947* * Excluded statistics for ‘other topics’ and the response ‘don’t know’ ** The seemingly impressive results should be interpreted in light of the fact that stories classified under the ‘girl child’ topic will more often than not be female-centered. 40. Stories and gender stereotypes, by region: 2010. Topic Reinforces stereotypes Neither challenges nor reinforces Clearly challenges stereotypes Africa 77% 18% 5% Asia 42% 53% 5% Caribbean 39% 55% 6% Europe 46% 49% 4% Latin America 30% 57% 13% Middle East 81% 14% 4% North America 61% 30% 9% Pacific 10% 88% 2% 34 4. News Content reporters in the Middle East are visibly much less likely to reinforce stereotypes than those by male reporters. In North America not much difference is detected between stories by female reporters and those by male reporters. (See table 42) Patterns in news stories that clearly challenge stereotypes are similar to those noted in stories highlighting aspects of gender (in)equality. Stories specifically on women such as women’s economic participation, women in political power and birth control are more likely to challenge stereotypes than those on topics sometimes uncritically assumed to impact women and men equally, such as politics, the economy, national defence and trade. In fact, these topics do indeed have repercussions that inordinately impact women. High proportions of stories on peace (64%), development (59%), war (56%), and gender-based violence (56%) reinforce gender stereotypes. The greater proportion of news items on important topics such as education (63% of stories) and family law (63%) appear to be neutral, neither challenging nor reinforcing stereotypes. Neutrality however veils and serves to perpetuate subtle or unquestioned gender bias, compounding the overall effect stereotypical reportage has in cementing discrimination. Gender, media and women’s human rights Rights: Proponents for gender-just media contend that human and women’s rights are relatively invisible in mainstream news content.1 The GMMP research purposed to discover the extent to which journalists exploited opportunities presented in news stories to raise awareness on legal instruments in place designed to protect human and women’s rights. The research found that only 10% of the stories monitored quoted or referred to relevant local, national, regional or international legal instruments on gender equality and/or human rights. This finding suggests that numerous stories miss the opportunity to create awareness on instruments enacted to protect human rights, women’s rights or gender equality, supporting the observation on the relative invisibility of rights in mainstream news content. 41. Gender stereotypes in reportage, by sex of reporter: 2010. Topic Reinforces stereotypes Neither challenges nor reinforces Clearly challenges stereotypes Female 35% 55% 7% Male 42% 51% 4% * Comparison with the 2005 research is not possible due to efforts made in 2010 methodology to increase precision and clarity on the question pertaining to this indicator. 42. Gender stereotypes in reportage, by sex of reporter, by region: 2010. Female reporters Male reporters   Reinforces Neither Challenges Reinforces Neither Challenges Africa 75% 15% 10% 78% 18% 4% Asia 39% 50% 11% 43% 54% 3% Caribbean 35% 51% 14% 40% 57% 3% Europe 46% 46% 8% 46% 50% 3% Latin America 29% 50% 21% 31% 59% 10% Middle East 64% 21% 14% 85% 13% 2% North America 60% 29% 11% 61% 30% 9% Pacific 12% 84% 4% 9% 90% 1% 35 4. News Content 35 43. Gender stereotypes in story sub-topics: 2010. Topic Reinforces stereotypes Neither reinforces nor challenges Challenges stereotypes Changing gender relations, roles and relationships of women and men inside and outside the home … 42% 15% 43% Women's participation in economic processes (informal work, paid employment, unemployment, unpaid labour) 36% 22% 42% News about the girl child, including, cultural attitudes and practices impinging on girls, education, health, economic exploitation, violence (ONLY WHERE EMPHASIS IS ON THE GIRL CHILD)… 20% 46% 33% Family relations, inter-generational conflict, single parents … 21% 47% 32% Birth control, fertility, sterilisation, amniocentesis, termination of pregnancy … 49% 22% 30% Women in political power and decision-making (local, regional, national), 38% 33% 29% Human rights, women's rights, children's rights, gay & lesbian rights, rights of minorities .. 47% 29% 24% Family law, family codes, property law, inheritance law and rights … 16% 64% 21% Media, including new media (computers, internet), portrayal of women and/or men, pornography … 31% 52% 17% HIV and AIDS, incidence, policy, treatment, people affected … 38% 46% 16% Women electoral candidates (local, regional, national), 38% 47% 15% Child abuse, sexual violence against children, trafficking, neglect. 44% 43% 13% Women's movement, activism, events, demonstrations, gender equality advocacy … 26% 61% 13% Beauty contests, models, fashion, beauty aids, cosmetic surgery … 58% 29% 13% Religion, culture, tradition, controversies, teachings, celebrations, practices … 52% 38% 9% Gender-based violence, feminicide, harassment, domestic violence, rape, trafficking, genital mutilation 56% 35% 9% Rural economy, agriculture, farming practices, agricultural policy, land rights … 45% 46% 9% Other stories on crime and violence 57% 34% 9% Celebrity news, births, marriages, deaths, obituaries, famous people, royalty … 52% 40% 8% Other stories on politics and government 54% 38% 8% Other stories on celebrities, arts, media 41% 51% 8% Migration, refugees, asylum seekers, ethnic conflict, integration, racism, xenophobia … 35% 57% 7% Violent crime, murder, abduction, kidnapping, assault, drug-related violence … 52% 41% 7% Riots, demonstrations, public disorder … 36% 58% 6% Science, technology, research, funding, discoveries, developments … 41% 53% 6% Poverty, housing, social welfare, aid to those in need … 49% 46% 5% Education, child care, nurseries, pre-school to university, adult education, literacy … 32% 63% 5% Peace, negotiations, treaties…(local, regional, national), 64% 30% 5% Other stories on social or legal issues 31% 64% 5% Economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers … 49% 47% 4% War, civil war, terrorism, state-based violence … 56% 40% 4% Arts, entertainment, leisure, cinema, theatre, books, dance … 49% 47% 4% Sports, events, players, facilities, training, policies, funding … 49% 47% 4% Other stories on the economy 39% 57% 4% Disaster, accident, famine, earthquake, flood, hurricane, plane crash, car crash … 48% 49% 4% Medicine, health, hygiene, safety, disability, medical research, funding (apart from HIV-AIDS)… 39% 58% 3% Foreign/international politics, relations with other countries, negotiations, treaties, UN peacekeeping … 44% 53% 3% Environment, nature, pollution, global warming, ecology, tourism … 46% 50% 3% Other domestic politics/government 45% 52% 3% Transport, traffic, roads …… 36% 61% 3% Economic policies, strategies, models (national, international) … 53% 44% 3% Development issues, sustainability, community development … 59% 38% 3% Legal system, judicial system, legislation (apart from family, property & inheritance law) … 44% 53% 3% Other labour issues, strikes, trade unions, negotiations, other employment and unemployment … 52% 46% 3% Economic indicators, statistics, business, trade, stock markets … 36% 61% 3% Consumer issues, consumer protection, regulation, prices, consumer fraud … 36% 62% 3% Other subject 58% 39% 2% National defence, military spending, military training, military parades, internal security … 46% 52% 2% Other epidemics, viruses, contagions, Influenza, BSE, SARS … 41% 57% 2% Non-violent crime, bribery, theft, drug-dealing, corruption, (including political corruption/malpractice) 52% 46% 2% Other stories on science or health 45% 54% 1% Global partnerships (international trade and finance systems, e.g. WTO, IMF, World Bank, debt) … 42% 57% 1% Global average and Total N 46% 49% 6% *Not shown: statistics for the response ‘don’t know’. 36 4. News Content 44. News stories citing gender equality or human and women’s rights instruments: 2010. Region % stories Africa 13% Asia 8% Caribbean 9% Europe 9% Latin America 5% Middle East 22% North America 21% Pacific 2% Global average 10% The Middle East and North America news produced the highest proportions (in over 20% of stories). News in the Pacific and Latin American regions had the lowest proportions at 2% and 5% of stories respectively. The Latin American findings are noteworthy in light of the region’s exemplary performance in other indicators of journalistic practice monitored in the GMMP, that is, as the region with the highest proportion of stories that challenge gender stereotypes as well as stories that highlight gender (in)equality issues. While there is no direct correlation between the indicators, evoking legal provisions on human rights can potentially raise awareness on legal recourses in the event of discrimination or injustice, including gender injustice. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): The eight Millennium Development Goals were adopted in the year 2000 as a framework to guide development upto 2015, the target year by which the goals should be achieved. The overarching goal is to reduce absolute poverty by half for the world as a whole, with gender equality and women’s empowerment said to be cutting across each goal.2 The MDG development paradigm however has been the subject of feminist critiques on numerous fronts, among them, the failure to integrate gender perspectives in all eight goals.3 The GMMP research attempted to uncover, from a gender lens, patterns in media reportage on issues related to the MDGs. On one indicator of gender-aware media, the research found that only 8% of stories on poverty focus centrally on women, 9% of stories on education, HIV and AIDS (39%), environment (4%) and 19% of stories on global partnerships (MDGs 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 respectively). On a second indicator– the extent to which stories highlight gender inequality – the study found only 3% of stories on poverty, education (2%), HIV and AIDS (25%), environment (3%) and 1% of those on global partnerships highlight gender (in) equality issues. On a third indicator, the study found that only 5% of poverty stories, education (5%), HIV & AIDS (16%), environment (3%) and global partnerships (1%) clearly challenge gender stereotypes. 45. GMMP 2010 results on selected Millennium Development Goals. % Stories with Women as a Central Focus MDG 1. Poverty MDG 2. Education MDG 6.HIV and AIDS MDG 7.Environment MDG 8.Global partnerships 8 9 39 4 19 % Stories Highlighting Gender (In)Equality MDG 1. Poverty MDG 2. Education MDG 6.HIV and AIDS MDG 7.Environment MDG 8. Global partnerships 3 2 25 3 1 % Stories Challenging Gender Stereotypes MDG 1. Poverty MDG 2. Education MDG 6.HIV and AIDS MDG 7.Environment MDG 8. Global partnerships 5 5 16 3 1 Out of the 5 MDGs selected, reportage on HIV and AIDS was found to be the most gender-responsive in the context of the GMMP research world average statistic. It is highly probable that the emphasis placed on the gender dimensions of HIV and AIDS including work done to encourage gender-aware HIV and AIDS media reportage are to be credited for the encouraging results. At the same time, it is possible that media have as well been proactive in highlighting gender issues in HIV and AIDS reportage as a result of the general increased public awareness. What this suggests then are openings for both media and civil society in general to address inadequacies in understanding the MDGs from a gender perspective, to bring gender concerns about the MDGs to the forefront of public debate. 37 4. News Content News and the formation of thinking Reflection on the role of media in the construction of social imaginaries – or the values, institutions, laws commonly held in a given society – necessitates a consideration of the power of mass media, their capacity to influence social thinking, and their ability to shape behaviours. Media’s power resides in two aspects that are two sides of the same coin: the first, the media’s capacity to pose their ‘truths’ as absolute truths and, the second, the limited ability of media audiences to confront and question media messages. When audiences read a newspaper, watch a television news bulletin, or listen to a radio newscast, they generally accept what is presented as ‘truth’. The level of this acceptance is reversely proportional to the level of knowledge of the person or society. In other words, the greater a person’s or society’s knowledge about their realities, of their surroundings, and the firmer their worldviews, the less they will accept a media news item as ‘truth’. Inversely, the lower a person’s or society’s knowledge about their realities, the more likely they will be to accept the media’s representation of ‘truth’. Unfortunately, individuals and communities today draw from fewer sources of knowledge and information on the reality in which they live. We dedicate less time to interpersonal interactions that could help us better understand ourselves, we read fewer books and spend less time learning from nature. We have become more dependent on the media to understand life and to know our own realities. What is presented in the mass media progressively and rapidly transforms into the truth. In other words, it morphs into the ‘reality’ around us, even when this ‘reality’ is far removed from our daily lives, even when it is constructed by purposively selected facts, focused and mediatised by editors or news executives. From this perspective, the messages produced and disseminated by the mass media intermix with the happenings of our daily lives, constituting a frame of reference, reflection and conceptualisation of what is real, creating our worldview of the social ‘ideal’. Let us consider 3 statistics from the fourth GMMP, 31 years after the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1979. Only 24% of people in the news are female even though women constitute at least half of humanity, only 13% of the news centrally focuses on women and a staggering 46% of stories reinforce gender stereotypes. The evidence gathered points to news media support of a social imaginary that excludes and discriminates against women. As we know, exclusion and discrimination are pillars of subordination. Thinking in action: behaviours and habits Media’s representation of reality normalizes the exclusion of girls and women; they remain at the periphery of news despite the fact that for several decades now women have inserted themselves into public spaces that were once exclusively male domains. For instance, the flexibilization of labour led women to waged employment outside the home in addition to their unpaid work in the home. Public spaces are where events that make the news happen. Social behaviours, actions and attitudes are governed by a mass ‘common sense’ – the social imaginary. Given the role of gender-unfair, gender-imbalanced news as a constitutive element in the maintenance and reinforcement of a social imaginary that excludes, discriminates against and subordinates women, we will subsequently, also to an equal measure, adopt behaviours, actions and attitudes that exclude, discriminate and subordinate. When women are perceived to be merely one quarter of humanity as the 24% statistic of women’s presence in the news shows, the logical consequence is media representation that fails to advocate specifically on behalf of women. Further, if gender inequality issues are not evoked in important issues in the news, the result is evident: actions and concerns about inequality take a back seat on the public agenda. When women and men are portrayed through gender stereotyped lenses, this impacts the behaviours, actions and attitudes of society, in turn impacting societal development, the exercise of gender equality and women’s rights. For example, girls and women will have fewer possibilities to secure access to education in comparison to boys and men for different stereotypical reasons. A female student who becomes a mother is expected to abandon her studies to fulfil her maternal duties, in particular if no one else is available to care for the child. The standards for a male student who becomes a father are different – he is free to complete his studies, find a job and continue on his life’s trajectory. The young mother meanwhile has few possibilities of finding decent employment whereas she has to assume the economic support role for her child, even though this role is not part of the stereotype. The social imaginary views the public space as exclusive to men, with women as intruders occupying spaces that they lack the knowledge, capacities and character to reside in. Within this parameter, when a woman is violated in the public space, the event does not generate social uproar. She is obliged to demonstrate that her behaviour before the violation occurred adhered to the female stereotype in compliance with the societal expectations. Women’s marginality in the news media, be it due to their relative absence from the content, the type of news considered worthy of dissemination, or the role they play in the news, is illustrative of their minimal importance or relevance in the public and media sphere. In such a way that, when women suffer violence within the home, social behaviour does not repudiate the aggressor, but rather seeks the ‘reason’ that motivated the event. Continuing to reinforce such human behaviour will distance us further away from the path of development, democracy, justice, and peace. Change is possible only if our imaginaries are transformed. Monumental steps need be taken to construct media messages that shape alternative, more empowering, more equitable understandings of our societies. Special commentary by Nidya Pesántez C. 38 4. News Content Summary of findings ❚❚ 13% of all stories focus specifically on women. This is a statistically significant change from the 10% found in the 2005 research. In 3 of the major topics there is no improvement since 2005 in how likely stories are to focus centrally on women. The exceptions are ‘politics/government’ where women are now central in 13% of stories compared to 8% in 2005; in ‘science/health’ from 6% in 2005 to 16% in 2010, and in stories on ‘economy’, from 3% to 11%. ❚❚ Only 6% of stories highlight issues of gender equality or inequality. However this is a slight positive change from 2005 when 4% of stories were found to contain discussion or evoke issues of gender (in)equality. The findings show impressive change in Latin America where such stories have tripled over the past five years. In Africa, Europe and Latin America, the incidence of stories that raise (in)equality issues is higher for female than for male reporters. By contrast, stories by male reporters in the Caribbean are twice as likely to highlight (in)equality as those by female reporters. 46% of stories reinforce gender stereotypes, almost eight times higher than stories that challenge such stereotypes (6%). Over 50% of stories on ‘crime’ reinforce stereotypes, followed closely by celebrity and political stories. That two of these topics occupy significant space on the news agenda implies that their impact on reinforcing stereotypes is monumental. Of all the topics, ‘social/legal’ stories most often challenge stereotypes than stories on any other topic. The low priority of this topic on the news agenda minimizes its overall impact on increasing nonstereotypical news content. ❚❚ Stories by female reporters are visibly more likely to challenge stereotypes than those filed by male reporters, they are also less likely to reinforce stereotypes than those reported by men. 7% of stories reported by women challenge stereotypes, in contrast to 4% of stories by male reporters. 35% of stories by female reporters reinforce stereotypes compared to 42% of stories reported by men. These statistics evidence sex disparity in reporting patterns on this indicator. News media in all regions generally have made progress in outputting stories that challenge stereotypes. The most impressive change is in Latin America where such stories have more than quadrupled in the past 5 years. Latin America now has the highest percentage of stories that challenge stereotypes (13%) while the Middle East has the highest percentage of those that reinforce stereotypes. ❚❚ High proportions of stories on peace (64%), development (59%), war (56%), and gender-based violence (56%) reinforce gender stereotypes. The greater proportion of news items on important topics such as education (63% of stories) and family law (63%) appear to be neutral, neither challenging nor reinforcing stereotypes. Neutrality however veils and serves to perpetuate subtle or unquestioned gender bias, compounding the overall effect stereotypical reportage has in cementing discrimination. ❚❚ Out of 5 selected Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), reportage on HIV and AIDS was found to be the most gender-responsive from a world average standpoint. A close look at reportage on issues related to five Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), namely, poverty, education, HIV and AIDS, environment and global partnerships (MDGs 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 respectively) shows that news on HIV and AIDS is the most gender-responsive in the context of the GMMP research world average. A comparison of findings on 3 indicators – women’s centrality in the news, stories that highlight gender equality and stories that challenge gender stereotypes – across the five topics shows exceptional positive results in news on HIV and AIDS. It is highly probable that the emphasis put on the gender dimensions of HIV and AIDS including work done to encourage gender-aware HIV and AIDS media reportage are to be credited for the encouraging results. At the same time, it is possible that media have as well been proactive in highlighting gender issues in HIV and AIDS reportage as a result of the general increased public awareness. What this suggests then are openings for both media and civil society in general to address inadequacies in understanding the MDGs from a gender perspective, to bring gender concerns about the MDGs to the forefront of public debate. ❚❚ Only 10% of stories quote or refer to relevant local, national, regional or international legal instruments on gender equality and/or human rights. This finding suggests that numerous stories miss the opportunity to create awareness on instruments enacted to protect human rights, women’s rights or gender equality, supporting an observation by gender and communication groups on the relative invisibility of human/women’s rights in mainstream news content. 1 Discussion at the WACC global consultative meeting on gender and media, Cape Town. 2008 2 The Millennium Development Goals Report, 2008. United Nations. 3 See for instance Carol Barton’s essay in Women’s movements and gender perspectives on the Millennium Development Goals in Civil society perspectives on the Millennium Development Goals. UNDP 39 Introduction Internet news is a crucial addition to the GMMP in view of the increasing importance of the World Wide Web as a news medium. In fact, the Internet is displacing traditional news mediums in technologically advanced countries, if the newspaper closures in some countries in favour of their online versions are a reliable indicator. Existing research has studied the ways in which women use ICTs to create their own news or to mobilize politically, both locally and trans-nationally.1 Other studies have provided feminist critiques of the globally expanding structures of the media and information and communication technologies (ICTs) industries, including their role in reinforcing existing power relations in society based on patriarchy and capitalism.2 There appears to be a vacuum however in empirical work on gender in internet news; preparatory research for the GMMP uncovered one published work on gender in online news content, a research report on three U.S.-based internet news sites3 . The fourth GMMP’s Internet news monitoring pilot project may perhaps be the first cross-cultural research on gender in online news. The project responds to the question on the extent to which online news replicates patterns of gender portrayal and representation observed in traditional media. In order to design the study, it was important to first understand the structure of the internet and the content of webbased news. We begin by recognizing that great divides exist in access to the internet and to ICTs between the global north and the global south. This uneven diffusion and adaptation of ICT products and access to the internet characterised as the ‘digital divide’ operates both between and within countries and is manifested along geographic, gender, racial and class lines. Whilst a lot has been written about ICTs deepening existing inequalities between industrialized and developing countries, the “digital divide” is also present in technologically advanced countries, where internet-use still does not figure prominently in the lives of many citizens4 . In many regions of the world, particularly in Africa, South-East Asia and Latin America, internet use is still not widespread; news media audiences rely on the traditional print and broadcast mediums for news.5 Further, there is debate surrounding the gender-gap in patterns of access to, and use of ICTs. A number of caveats to the novelty of internet news content must be mentioned. The advent of the internet inspired visions of a futuristic world characterized by the democratic production and sharing of news and information. The potential for usergenerated content, particularly by women, to promote gender-balanced perspectives in communication was celebrated by many.6 The reality of internet-news content has been somewhat less transformative. Already by the year 2000, it was noted that ‘online journalism is a modern instrument of traditional information’.7 Even in the age of user-generated content and ‘social media sites’ like Twitter and Facebook, traditional media houses and news agencies dominate the provision of news and information. This suggests that internet content and consumption, despite its potential to transcend national contexts, remains surprisingly localized. According to Thorsten Quandt, ‘the World Wide Web is not as ‘global’ as we might believe, at least when it comes to news. The content is very much limited by the traditional, national context and the (expected) interests of the users’.8 Further, while content for news websites is sometimes originally produced for the web, some GMMP online news monitors observed content that was more or less identical to the print parent publications. It was with this background that the pilot project was introduced and the monitoring methodology developed. The study was designed to monitor only major internet news providers in selected countries characterized by high internet connectivity and usage. 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? Online international news on 10 November 2009 40 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? Internet News Monitoring Methodology Monitors in 25 countries were invited to participate in the internet news monitoring pilot research. The countries had been selected on the basis of their high global per-capita internet access as recorded in the 2009 UN Human Development Indicators report. The final number of participating countries is 16. The international news websites coded covered all regions worldwide. 46. Participating countries and number of news websites monitored China 5 Japan 5 Malaysia 4 Taiwan 5 Jamaica 3 Austria 3 Denmark 6 Estonia 5 Germany 4 Netherlands 1 Norway 3 Sweden 7 Iceland 5 Australia 8 New Zealand 6 Canada 6 International media 8 Only major national or local news websites were selected for coding – many of which are associated with major media houses in each country. For global networks that supply international news but also provide their countries of origin with international as well as domestic news, monitors in the respective countries coded only the national or domestic news web pages. Content from wire services, specialty information sites, blogs, or newsfeeds was not coded. In view of the frequent changes made to online content throughout a day as older news is updated, replaced or archived , the monitoring team coordinators made decisions about the time during which coding would take place. The decisions were based on contextual knowledge such as the average population’s ‘news habits’ or patterns in accessing online news or the time of day when fresh content was uploaded . Monitors saved screenshots and kept records of the stories in order to locate them again easily in the event that the website contents changed before the coding had been completed. Generally 12 to 14 news items or stories from the home page and news sections of the media websites were monitored. For each news item, information was provided about the website, the story (including multi-media components), the journalists, the people in the story, and an analysis of the story. For each news item, specific information about the website of origin was provided, including the site name, the internet address or URL, date and time accessed and country of origin. Research on use patterns between the print and on-line versions of two Dutch newspapers found few differences in the amount of news available and the way internet users read and retained the news (D’Haenens et al. 2004). While there were more articles on-line, their smaller size meant that the overall amount of news available was larger in the print versions. What was significant was the manner in which on-line news allows readers to choose the order in which they access stories and the amount of time they spend reading the front page: the home page of the electronic news contained more information than the first page of the printed versions. The home page allowed readers to browse and click on news that caught their attention, which they would read in whole or in part, before returning to the home page. Given this, the GMMP internet news monitoring guide classifies story placements into ‘layers’ or the location of the news item on the website. Articles on the home-page are on the first layer, those located one mouse-click from the home-page are on the second layer of the website, and those two clicks way from the home page are considered to be on the third layer. Stories found beyond the third layer of a site were not coded. The internet news agenda The Internet news agenda matches the one observed in traditional media; stories on crime/violence, politics and the economy dominate online news at 25%, 21% and 19% of the space respectively. Similar to the case of traditional news media, social/ legal and science/health news take a back seat in on the Web, each occupying a mere 9% of the space. 47. Main topics in internet news: 2010. % share N Crime/violence 25% 267 Politics/Government 21% 226 Economy 19% 199 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 14% 150 Social/legal 9% 100 Science/health 9% 93 Other 2% 21 Girl child* 0% 1 Total** 100% 1057 *denotes less than 1%; 48. Main topics in Internet news by sex of subject: 2010 Female Male Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 23% 77% Politics/Government 17% 83% Science/Health 33% 67% Crime/Violence 22% 78% The Girl-child 70% 30% Social/Legal 32% 68% Economy 24% 76% Global Average 23% 77% 41 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? Women’s presence in online news is just as dismal as in the case of traditional news media. Only 23% of the news subjects in the sample websites were female, a finding that suggests that the historic underrepresentation of women in traditional news media has been carried over into the virtual world. In all topics except the ‘girl-child’, women comprise between 17% and 33% of news subjects, with stories on science/health containing the highest proportion (33%) and politics/government the lowest (17%). (See table 48 on page 40) The sex-disaggregated findings on patterns in portraying news subjects as victims are comparable between ‘new’ and ‘traditional’ media. 16% of female online news subjects are depicted as victims in contrast to 5% of the male news subjects. To express the statistics differently, in online news women are more than 3 times as likely as men to be portrayed as victims. The rate is higher than in traditional news mediums albeit not statistically significant. Within the category of female news subjects depicted as victims, 35% are victims of domestic violence, 19% of accidents/disaster/poverty, and 4% of violation based on religion/ culture. Within the category of victim male news subjects, 28% are victims of crime, 23% of accidents and 2% of non-domestic sexual violence. (See table 49 on page 42) News subjects in photographs and multimedia Still images, audio, animation, video and other multimedia content are employed to attract and retain the attention of online audiences. Monitors were asked to indicate, for each news subject coded, whether the person was featured in visual multimedia accompanying the story. 26% of female news subjects were in the photos and multimedia clips, compared to 21% men. The findings show that news subjects in international news websites are featured in multimedia content far more frequently than news subjects in national websites. This is not surprising given the resources available to international media to develop, host and maintain such content. Multimedia features accompanying international news web stories contain almost twice or more of the sample average on this indicator, at 47% and 50% respectively of female and male news subjects. While the sex gap in the relative proportions of news subjects in multimedia content is low in the case of international media, a gap is non-existent in Swedish online news media. Swedish news websites contain equal proportions (27% each) of female and male news subjects. The 2009 UN Human Development Report lists Iceland as the country with the highest per capita internet users, it has a small population size and is among the least densely populated countries in the world. Although Icelandic internet news produced the lowest absolute number of news subjects in multimedia content relative to the rest of the sample, this was the only country in which more than one half of female news subjects (56%) were featured in such content. Overall, female news subjects were featured more frequently (63%) than their male counterparts in visual multimedia and images in 10 out of 16 of the countries in the sample. (See table 50 on page 42) Reporters in online news Only 36% of the news stories in the sample were reported by women, compared to 64% of stories by men. Again we see a replication of the situation in traditional media where stories reported by men grossly exceed those reported by women. The number of stories reported by men surpass those reported by women in all major topics, notably so in news about the economy where 64% is reported by men, in news on crime/violence (69% by male reporters) and celebrity/arts/media/sports news (75% by male reporters). Tentative comparisons with the global averages on reporters in traditional media show remarkably higher percentages of stories by female online reporters on politics/ government and social/legal news: 42% of political stories on the internet are by women, compared to 33% of the same in traditional print and broadcast media. 47% of online social/legal news is reported by women, compared to 43% of the same in traditional media. In the remainder major topics except for science/health, there are far fewer online stories by female in contrast to male reporters than in print, television and radio news. Even in celebrity/arts/media/sports news, only 25% of online stories are by female reporters compared to the global average of 38% in traditional media. These findings point to two conclusions. First, the dominance of male reporters in traditional mainstream news media is replicated in online news and is even more prominent in economic, crime/violence and celebrity news. A comparison of the findings with those from the print, television and radio news in the same countries reveals a statistically significant difference.9 41% of stories in traditional mainstream media in the countries participating in the internet pilot were by female reporters, in sharp contrast to the 36% of online news stories. Second, female reporters on politics/ government are more likely to get stories published on the Internet than in traditional news media, if the striking positive difference in contrast to television, radio and print news is a reliable indicator. This is good news for female reporters given the historical trends of gross reporter sex imbalance in political stories in traditional media – a topic that is of prime importance on the news media agenda. (See tables 51 and 52 on page 43) Stereotypes and marginality in online news 42% of the online news stories were found to reinforce gender stereotypes, only 4% challenged them and the majority 54% neither reinforced nor challenged stereotypes. These findings echo the situation in traditional mediums: in both cases, stories are between 8 to 9 times more likely to reinforce than to challenge stereotypes. (See table 53 on page 44) Of all news topics, political news online reinforces stereotypes most (46% of stories) while social/legal news reinforces in the least number of cases (36%). Science/ health stories challenge stereotypes the most (7% of stories). Social/legal stories are most likely neither to challenge nor reinforce stereotypes, a trait that has been argued earlier serves to reinforce the status quo which more often than not is one of gender-based inequality and discrimination that mark most societies worldwide. 42 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? (See table 55 on page 44) Women are central in 11% of the online story sample, comparable to the situation in traditional media where the statistic is 13%. Stories in which women are central are those that focus specifically on women or deal with matters that affect women in a particular way, for instance, women’s unemployment. Women are most central in online news on celebrity/arts/media/sports (23% of stories) and least central in stories about the economy (5%). Planning ahead Guiding the pilot project on internet-news monitoring was the question on whether the gender biases observed in newspapers, radio and TV are reproduced in online news content. Of importance was the need to know the particular impact of the choices made by online news editors and journalists faced with the pressure to attract and retain online audiences who have been described as demanding, hard-to-please and fickle. What effects do the compromises made to shorten stories into news-bytes and all the other trade-offs necessitated in publishing for the web, have on the gender dimensions of online news content? The findings show a state of gender in online news media that is equally dismal if not worse than in traditional media. In fact, every indicator studied produced a result that was, to varying extents, worse than in radio, print and television news. Taking one key indicator – the percentage of stories reported by women, the research revealed a statistically significant difference between stories published on the internet and stories reported in newspapers, television and radio. This is alarming given that the websites selected are reputable, are linked to major media houses, and that the sample countries are at the forefront of progress in ICTs with regard to connectivity and possibly content development. It is possible that the internet news websites are in fact magnifying lenses through which gender biases transmitted through traditional news mediums become even more visible, supporting a worldview that is detrimental for equality, women’s and societal wellbeing. 49. Portrayal of Internet news subjects as victims, by sex: 2010 Female Male N Victim of domestic violence (by husband/wife/partner/other family member), psychological violence, physical assault, marital rape, murder … 35% 20% 55 Victim of an accident, natural disaster, poverty, disease, illness … 19% 23% 43 Other victim: describe in 'Comments' section of coding sheet … 15% 13% 29 Victim of other crime, robbery, assault, murder … 12% 28% 42 Victim of discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion, ability … 9% 6% 15 Victim of non-domestic sexual violence or abuse, sexual harassment, rape, trafficking … 5% 2% 7 Victim of war, terrorism, vigilantism, state-based violence 4% 8% 13 Victim of violation based on religion, tradition, cultural belief, genital mutilation, bride-burning … 0% 0% 0 Global average and Total N 16% 5% 204 50. Internet news subjects in photographs and video components, by sex: 2010. Female Male N International Media 47% 50% 143 China 19% 11% 172 Japan 14% 18% 104 Malaysia 24% 32% 112 Taiwan 22% 20% 183 Jamaica 29% 16% 69 Austria 16% 11% 128 Denmark 30% 25% 130 Estonia 30% 39% 103 Germany 34% 14% 203 Netherlands 0% 13% 20 Norway 33% 37% 81 Sweden 27% 27% 152 Iceland 56% 47% 46 Australia 33% 21% 377 New Zealand 6% 10% 220 Canada 18% 13% 280 Global average and Total N 26% 21% 2523 43 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? The internet’s rapid trajectory towards becoming a key news source implies that proponents for gender-fair news should act now to influence change in online journalistic practices before it is too late. To this effect, the sensitivity of Internet news sites to user ratings and feedback provides a point of entry. It has been said that anyone can be a ‘journalist’ on the internet. Professional and quality online journalism sets itself to a higher standard, one which gender equality proponents, within and outside the media, can leverage. While traditional media will remain the key source of news for many, it is crucial that the example shown by Internet news providers in technologically advanced countries especially be one where gender fairness and balance in online journalism are seen as ideals to be aspired to and pursued. 51. Main topics in Internet news, by sex of reporter: 2010. Female Male N International Media 31% 69% 45 China 31% 69% 45 Japan 15% 85% 13 Malaysia 68% 32% 19 Taiwan 32% 68% 91 Jamaica 43% 57% 7 Austria 57% 43% 23 Denmark 34% 66% 59 Estonia 44% 56% 39 Germany 40% 60% 20 Netherlands 50% 50% 2 Norway 14% 86% 43 Sweden 37% 63% 70 Iceland 43% 57% 7 Australia 51% 49% 51 New Zealand 40% 60% 10 Canada 35% 65% 43 Global average and Total N 36% 64% 587 52. Internet news stories reported, by sex of reporter: 2010. Female Male N Social and Legal 47% 53% 57 Science and Health 45% 55% 56 Politics and Government 42% 58% 125 Economy 36% 64% 88 Crime and Violence 31% 69% 178 Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports 25% 75% 72 The Girl-child 0% 0% 0 Global average and Total N* 36% 64% 576 * Excludes statistics for stories classified under ‘other’ topics 44 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? 53. Internet news stories and gender stereotypes by topic: 2010. Reinforces stereotypes Neither reinforces nor challenges Challenges stereotypes N Social/legal 36% 57% 7% 99 Economy 42% 52% 6% 195 Celebrity/arts/media/sports 40% 54% 6% 148 Politics 46% 51% 2% 220 Science/health 43% 55% 2% 88 Crime/violence 43% 55% 2% 261 Global average and Total N 37% 59% 4% 1011 54. Internet news stories and gender stereotypes: 2010. Reinforces stereotypes Neither reinforces nor challenges Challenges stereotypes 42% 54% 4% 55. Women’s centrality in internet news stories: 2010. Are Women Central? No Yes N Celebrity/arts/media/sports 77% 23% 149 Crime/violence 87% 13% 259 Science/health 88% 12% 90 Politics 92% 8% 222 Social/legal 92% 8% 98 Economy 95% 5% 192 Global Average and Total 89% 11% 1010 45 5. Who Makes The News In Cyberspace? Summary of findings ❚❚ Women comprised only 23% of the news subjects in stories from the sample news websites This finding suggests that the underrepresentation of women in traditional news media has been carried over into the virtual news world. ❚❚ 16% of female online news subjects were depicted as victims in contrast to 5% of the male news subjects. In other words, women are more than 3 times as likely as men to be portrayed as victims in Internet news. ❚❚ 26% of female news subjects compared to 21% men were featured in the photos and visual multimedia accompanying the stories. ❚❚ Only 36% of the news stories in the sample were reported by women, compared to 64% of stories by men. First, a comparison of the findings with those from the print, television and radio news in the same countries reveals a statistically significant difference. 41% of stories in traditional mainstream media in the countries participating in the internet pilot were by female reporters, in sharp contrast to the 36% of online news stories. Second, the dominance of male reporters in traditional mainstream news media is replicated in online news and is even more prominent in economic, crime/violence and celebrity news. 64% of stories on the economy are reported by men, 69% of stories on crime/violence and 75% of those of celebrity/arts/media/sports news. However, 42% of political stories on the internet are by women, compared to 33% of the same in traditional print and broadcast media. This is good news for female reporters given the historical trends of gross reporter sex imbalance in political stories in traditional media – a topic that is of prime importance on the news media agenda. ❚❚ 42% of the online news stories were found to reinforce gender stereotypes, only 4% challenged them and the majority 54% neither reinforced nor challenged stereotypes. ❚❚ Women are central in 11% of the online news items, comparable to the situation in traditional media where the statistic is 13%. Overall, the differences, some of which are statistically significant, point to a conclusion that Internet news is a format in which gender biases become not only more visible but even more concentrated than in the traditional news media. References 1. Burke, Cindy and Sharon Mazzarela, 2008. ‘A slightly new shade of lipstick’: Gendered mediation in Internet news stories.’ Women’s Studies in Communication, Vol. 31, No. 3. 395-418 2. D’Haenens, Lee, Nicholas Jankowski and Ard Heuvelman. 2004. ‘News in Online and Print Newspapers: Differences in Reader Consumption and Recall.’ New Media and Society, Vol. 6, No.3, 363-382. 3. Gajjala, Radhika. 2002. ‘An Interrupted Postcolonial/Feminist Cyberethnography: Complicity and Resistance in the ‘Cyberfield’’. Feminist Media Studies, Vol.2, No.2, 177-193. 4. Kopper, Gerd G, Albrecht Kolthoff and Andre Czepek. 2000. ‘Research Review: Online Journalism – a Report on Current and Continuing Research and Major Questions in the International Discussion.’ Journalism Studies, Vol.1, No.3, pp.499-512. 5. Lee, Micky. 2006. ‘What’s Missing in Feminist Research in New Information and Communication Technologies?’ Feminist Media Studies, Vol. 6, No.2, 191-210. 6. Pierce, Justin. 2010. ‘World Internet Project Report Finds Large Percentage of Non-Users, and Significant Gender Disparities in Going On-Line.’ USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, Annenberg Center for the Digital Future. 7. Quandt, Thorsten. 2008. ‘(No) News on the World Wide Web? A Comparative Content Analysis of Online News in Europe and the United States.’ Journalism Studies, Vol.9, No.5, 717- 738. 8. Somolu, Oreoluwa. 2007. ‘ ‘Telling Our Own Stories’: African Women Blogging for Social Change.’ Gender and Development, Vol.15, No.3, 477-489. 9. Thompson, Margaret E., Katerina Anfossi Gómez, and María Suárez Toro. 2005. ‘Women’s Alternative Internet Radio and Feminist Interactive Communications: Internet Audience Perceptions of Feminist International Radio Endeavour (FIRE)’. Feminist Media Studies, Vol.5, No.2, 215-236. 10. United Nations Development Program UNDP. 2008. Human Development Report 2007-2008. http://hdr.undp.org/ en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/ 1 Somolu, 2007; Thompson et al., 2005; Gajjala, 2002 2 Lee, 2006 3 Burke & Mazzarella, 2002 4 Pierce, 2010:1 citing Jeffrey I. Cole, the World Internet Project, University of Southern California-Annenberg. 5 UNDP, 2008 6 Somolu, 2007 7 Kopper et al. 2000: p.500 8 Quandt, 2008:733 9 The difference is significant at the 95% level of confidence. GMMP Monitor, Nepal 46 Monitors were asked to classify stories interesting for further gender analysis into a matrix grouping 4 categories of stereotypes. ‘Blatant stereotypes’ are defined as those that present women and men in stereotypical roles such as women as sex objects or men as strong entrepreneurs. Blatant stereotypes abound generally in the mass media, and in news media as well. ‘Subtle stereotypes’ are not always easily identifiable; these reinforce notions of femininity or masculinity in ways that ‘normalize’ them, such as a ‘mother’s agony’ over the loss of child rather than a ‘parent’s agony’. A second example is stories in which women are referred to according to their personal relationships that in fact have no relevance to the story, for instance, a female government minister referred to as the ‘wife’ of someone. ‘Gender-blind stories and missed opportunities’ are those that could have been enriched and expanded by including a wider range of viewpoints, or by shedding light on different implications for women and men. They include articles that lack a gender balance of sources and those devoid of a gender perspective where one could have been provided. Finally, ‘gender-aware’ stories are those that challenge stereotypes and prompt debate on topical gender issues. Some stories in this category will have a gender balance of sources or will demonstrate or discuss how issues impact women and men differently. Other stories are more genderspecific, exposing issues of central concern to gender equality The case studies in this section appeared in the news on 10 November 2009. It is telling that overall, stories that reinforce stereotypes were far more readily available than stories that challenge stereotypes, as the monitors reported. That most of the stories challenging stereotypes were received from Latin America confirms the statistical findings on the higher prevalence of such stories from the region, in contrast to others. 56. GMMP case studies classification matrix 1. Blatant stereotype 2. Subtle stereotype Articles or images in which women are presented in stereotypical roles such as victims or sex objects. Articles or images that reinforce notions of women’s domestic and men’s more public roles in ways that make this seem normal, e.g. a mother’s agony, rather than parents agony over a child. Articles or images in which men are presented in stereotypical roles such as strong entrepreneurs or leaders. Articles in which women are referred to according to personal relationships that have no relevance to the story; e.g. a woman minister is referred to as the wife of someone. 3. Missed opportunities / Gender-blind (GB) 4. Gender-aware Articles in which there is a lack of gender balance (and therefore of diversity) in sources, resulting in only one perspective being given on an issue. 4A. Articles and images that challenge stereotypes and prompt debate on topical gender issues from a human rights perspective, such as women pilots or men care givers. Articles that lack a gender perspective in every day issues such as elections or the budget, depriving these stories of new and interesting angles, such as how cuts in grants affect poor women. 4B. Articles that have a gender balance of sources; demonstrating different perspectives/impact on women and men including through use of gender disaggregated data; for example how many women and men receive certain types of grants; what they use them for and why cuts may have different kinds of impact. 4C. Gender specific: Articles that concern inequality between women and men; structures, processes; campaigns to advance gender equality such as glass ceilings in certain types of occupation. * The GMMP case studies classification matrix is an adaptation of the Gender and Media (GEM) system developed by Gender Links for the Southern African Gender and Media Baseline Study. � 6. Case Studies 47 6. Case Studies 1. Blatant stereotyping Title: ‘Hot photos of Angie posing with condoms in her mouth crashes the web’ Country: Chile Source: La Cuarta, Tabloid Newspaper, Front Page and p.17 Summary: Angie is the daughter of a famous Chilean Madame (sex brothel owner) and alleged human trafficker, who has become famous because of her mother and stars in a reality television program. The article reports that photos of her making suggestive poses were posted to the website ‘Califas’ – womanizer – by an amateur and attracted so much webtraffic that it crashed the site. The photos are reprinted on the front-page of the newspaper and on page 17, accompanied by suggestive headlines. Analysis: The title of this piece on the cover of the tabloid is accompanied by various photos which are repeated with the main story in the inner pages. The rise of the girl as a reality TV star is dubiously attributed to her identity as the daughter of a famous Madame in Chile who wrote a book about her career and became a celebrity in the popular media. In the context of this article, the girl is depicted, both visually and in the text, as another product of her mother’s career. In the upper headline she is referred to as ‘the mini recruit,’ poking fun at both the girl’s small physical stature and degrading women who are sexually exploited by sex-trade entrepreneurs/ exploiters like her mother. The images themselves portray a young girl in provocative and sensual poses, themselves contributing to the stereotype of the image of women purely as sexobjects. The feminine-sex-object is a resource that is used widely in Chilean advertising to boost the ratings of television programs, including to attract readers to newspapers in which all sorts of evocative images are featured uncensored. In the side column beside the pictures are headshots of the new participants in Angie’s reality TV show under a headline: ‘new shorties in the platoon!’ By now it should be clear: this sensationalist and sexualized portrayal of a young woman’s body in the guise of news about a website crashing is really just a big advertisement for a reality TV program. Conclusion: In the world of ‘reality’ television and ‘infotainment,’ where sex is used to sell the news, the lines separating news and advertising are wearing thin. In this world of mirrors and distorted reflections, fictions about women are dressed up as truths about celebrities, falsely masquerading as reality. 48 6. Case Studies Title: ‘Man kills wife and mother-in-law, both pregnant, before attempting suicide in Florencia de San Carlos.’ Country: Costa Rica Source: Canal 7- Telenoticias, TV news. Summary: The reporter, at the site of a double-homicide in San Carlos, presents the story as follows: ‘A man of Nicaraguan nationality arrived at the home of a neighbour where he found his wife and mother-in-law, the former 7 months pregnant and the latter 9 months pregnant, and about to give birth. He killed both of them with a knife which he grabbed from a child who was peeling an orange in the entrance to the home. After killing these two people, he tried to take his own life with a machete.’ Subsequent to this statement, the reporter interviews a male paramedic who refers to ‘him’ as the culprit while video images of a man in the ambulance are presented on-screen. Next, the reporter interviews a child as the principal witness, referring to him as a young man, when in reality he is a boy. After this, another man, a taxi-driver who was passing by offers his version and a female neighbour gives more details of what happened. Throughout the news item, the murderer is referred to as ‘the man’ and the women as ‘victims of intrafamiliar (or domestic) violence’ and the murder as ‘the bloody deed.’ Analysis: This is the first item in the news and its duration is five minutes. The piece concentrates on the description of the act without giving any context or cause. The two pregnant women are referred to simply as the victims alongside mention that 30 women in 2009 have been killed as a result of ‘intra-familiar or domestic violence,’ reducing the gravity of the violence by diverting attention from its gendered nature. Meanwhile, the act itself is neither denounced nor analyzed and no inquiry, debate or explanations into the death of these women is offered. Use of the term ‘intra-familiar or domestic violence’ serves to conceal the gendered nature of the violence: this is feminicide, the killing of women because of their gender and is made possible by the same stereotypes that society and the media perpetuate about women as submissive, inferior and docile. Gender violence is to a significant extent fuelled by stereotypes about masculinity and femininity. Any or all such discussion is completely omitted from this news item, even though it lasts five minutes. In addition to identifying the alleged killer as ‘Nicaraguan’ at the outset, at one point toward the end of the report, a headline appears on the screen stating: ‘Nicaraguan attacks women with machete’. The emphasis placed on the nationality of the alleged killer serves to perpetuate the xenophobia in Costa Rica. Further, the evocation of nationality implicitly distances the crime from Costa Rican society, implying that such acts are in fact foreign. The images presented on-screen include those of the deceased bodies of the women covered in tarpaulins alongside graphic explanations by the witnesses as to what happened. The female witness describes the stabbing as if the man was ‘stabbing slabs of meat’. A man dispassionately describes what he saw. The dispassionate, almost clinical telling of these graphic details disrespects the dignity and memory of the women who become victims of the sensationalization of gender-violence in the reportage style. At one point an inconsistency in the reporter’s telling of the events gives away the attempt at sensationalizing the story: while originally it is stated that the man killed the women with a knife he took from a young boy peeling an orange in the doorway of the home, at a later point it is stated that the man tried to cut his own throat with the same machete he used to kill the women. Such reports, which display horrific images in a manner that pornographizes the dead bodies of victims of feminicide, can only serve to perpetuate violence against women. Conclusion: Women who have suffered gender-violence are often doubly victimized: once by the perpetrators of violence against their bodies and a second time by insensitive and unethical reporting which sensationalizes the violence. Title: ‘A new law to prohibit prostitution: Madrid; a show-case of prostitution’ Country: Spain Source: Tele 5, TV Summary: This television news piece consists of two separate stories broadcast together to deepen the impact of the theme of prostitution in Madrid. The first story informs viewers about a new law put into effect by the Municipality of Granada that prohibits prostitution within 200 m of residences, schools and businesses under threat of fines to both the client and the prostitute. The voice of the news anchor gives way to that of a female reporter who recounts the content of the new municipal order while the camera shows a series of images of street-walking women filmed from a distance. Three men are interviewed. Although the report does not identify them, two seem to be residents of zones with high sex-trade traffic and doubt the law will change anything. The third, by his language and appearance, appears to be a politician. Included at the end of the piece is mention of an additional segment of legislation requiring all street vendors of retail merchandise to be licensed and flashes images of male police officers speaking with people packing up boxes on street corners. This piece gives way to the second story with these words of introduction from the anchor: ‘indeed Madrid by night is an authentic show-case of sex…’ Following this lead, it is explained that women and transsexuals who practice prostitution in secluded zones at night face great dangers. The report begins with a masculine voice explaining that it is midnight in the ‘Casa de Campo’ (a large urban park in Madrid). Analysis: The juxtaposition of these two separate but related stories says much about the journalistic practice of the television newsroom and the hypocrisy of masculinist treatments of social problems like the safety and rights of sex workers. First, the opinions presented about the new law in the first story are exclusively male. Second, the inclusion of distant shots of street-walking women is tainted with an air of voyeurism. None of the women shown are asked for their opinions on how the new law will affect them. It is not even certain that the women are indeed sex workers. Little detail is given as to how this law, ostensibly designed to curb prostitution at the behest of property owners, will impact the economic rights of small vendors unrelated to the sex trade, or what it will do to sex workers on the street. In the second story, the problem of prostitution in Madrid is verbally associated with ‘women of various nationalities’ controlled by the mafia while images of black and Latin-Americanlooking women are portrayed. The direct impact of the new law, that sex workers will be forced to ply their trade in more secluded areas of the city, away from buildings and lit streets, putting them in even greater physical danger, is more implied by mention of the increasing ‘ghettoization of prostitution’ rather than stating the link directly. 49 6. Case Studies When sex workers are finally interviewed, it is night time. The verbal interventions are presented without revealing the speakers’ faces. Viewers hear a huskymasculine voice, presumably that of a transsexual sex-worker recount how men come at night to ‘discharge’ and in the morning continue ‘happily with their marriages’ while the camera traces closeups of lips and cleavage. Under the pretext to discuss the dangers which face sexworkers who walk secluded areas of the city looking for clients, the report descends into a visual feast of female anatomy. The final segment of the story speaks of women in the centre of Madrid where ‘South American, Sub-Saharan and South Asian prostitutes’ work, ‘often under control of the mafia’ while again the voice of a masculine sounding sex-worker recounts how she has heard tales of rape and violence used against ‘African girls’ and how greater dangers lurk in secluded parts of the city. Nevertheless, the interviewee explains how she can make good money by clarifying the terms with the male clients. Conclusion: The viewer is left with the impression that the real problems of violence, sexual and economic exploitation and gender-biased discrimination against sex workers are the domain of criminals, ‘illegal aliens’ and the desperate. The reportage gives an impression these are not the problems of ‘real’ legitimate Spanish women and are not the responsibility of the Spanish men who employ the services of sex workers. Meanwhile, the Spanish sex workers (presented exclusively are the voices of Spanish-accented transsexuals) are portrayed as empowered and aware of their rights while the foreigners, none of whom are interviewed, are said to be vulnerable. While attempts are made to link narrowly conceived legal solutions to the social problems associated with prostitution, the serious nature of the problem is undermined by the use of visual imagery: under pretence of concern, the actual voices of the people affected are not taken seriously. From the double message in the contrast between the serious nature of the conversation and the sensationalist and sexually explicit imagery, it would appear from this report that prostitution is only taken seriously to the extent that it provides material to indulge fantasies about feminized bodies. This reinforces an air of permissiveness to the Spanish male prostitution clientele while putting the blame for violence against sex-workers on undocumented workers and organized human trafficking rings. Title of article: ‘Clara the Hacker. She has thrown the head of her victim into a ventilation shaft’ Country: Hungary Source: Bors, newspaper Summary: The feature article is an excerpt from a book written by one of the newspaper’s female journalists. Above the article is a brief advertorial of the book titled “The Devils’ Advocates, Part 3, Women who Became Murderers”. The advertorial features the cover of the book and a photo of the journalist with one celebrity lawyer, an old man. According to this article, the author was touched that one of her interviewees, a woman who had killed her abusive father, came to the book launch. However, the introduction to the actual story makes it clear that this is only an advertising opportunity, aimed at enhancing sales of the book. The story itself is a short account of how a woman, who was a drug user, was gangraped by her dealer and several of his male friends, and at a later time – still under the influence of drugs – she killed and mutilated the man. The story is presented from her perspective, it is short, describes only the two acts. The woman concludes that she would do it again to anybody who rapes her, even without the influence of drugs. The accompanying photograph shows the woman’s face. Her name is stated in both the story headline and the caption accompanying the article. A cut out of a bloody knife is included alongside the photograph of the woman. This serves to heighten the effects of shock and horror. Analysis: Whilst the story challenges the stereotypes of women as nurturers not murderers, her culpability for the crime is mitigated by the fact that she was under the influence of drugs. The story presents the woman as an irrational creature who cannot curb her passions. Although it could be presented in a way that would throw light on the broader issue of sexual violence not limiting it to the individuals, this angle is completely ignored in preference for a focus on Clara. Conclusion: The sensationalist presentation of this story leaves no room to consider the complexity of this phenomenon or to dispel gender stereotypes. Several projects highlighting the connections between women’s imprisonment for violent crimes and the violence they have suffered from their male partners have been undertaken by women’s associations in Hungary. Surveys, interviews and self-help group discussions have pointed to the complexity of the problem: men face virtually no punishment or restriction of access in the case of partner violence, while authorities and society still mostly turn a blind eye to the violence, and women receive no help from authorities. Those who kill their abusers receive harsh sentences, as the criminal justice system recognizes and punishes murder but neither acknowledges nor punishes sexual or gender-based violence. Title: ‘A 5th Grade Girl Student Delivers Child in BanshKhali’ Source: Dainik Azadi, Newspaper Country: Bangladesh Summary: The article is about a female 5th grade student who gave birth to a baby at a local hospital. The girl became pregnant after a sexual assault by her teacher. The article states that the teacher had had an ‘immoral relationship’ with the child for a year. He enticed her by offering to assist her prepare for her primary school exams. No action was taken against the teacher despite the local people’s reports to the authorities about the case. 50 6. Case Studies Analysis: The headline – ‘A 5th Grade Girl Student Delivers Child in BanshKhali’ – is sensationalist and suggests the young girl is sexually active. Taking into account the broader societal context where access to education has historically been skewed in favour of boys, this kind of representation draws on stereotypes about the girl child. It potentially reinforces traditional attitudes which discourage the education of the girl child. In reality the child’s pregnancy is the result of rape by her teacher, a person in a position of power and authority over her. This crime and the failure of the authorities to protect the child and to take proper actions against the teacher could have been the focus of the news story. While the story does not mention the name of the girl, it provides information about her address, the name of her school and the hospital where she is being treated. The accompanying photograph shows the girl holding her baby albeit with the face blurred. By providing details about the girl that make it easy to identify her, the story places this girl and her family at risk of further social castigation. Conclusion: Through language use and photography, this story tries to portray the girl child to readers as being sexually promiscuous. Not only does it blatantly reinforce negative stereotypes about the girl child, but in failing to protect the girl’s privacy it puts her at risk of further social stigma. Title: Dino je već sa 12 godina ranio oca, a sa 16 je na majku krenuo nožem (Dino wounded his father at the age of 12, at 16 he attacked his mother with a knife) Source: Večernji list, Newspaper Country: Croatia Summary: The story printed in the crime and violence section of the newspaper describes the murder of a mother by her son. The author tends to be understood as fully accurate, giving only data and pure facts. In the first sentence of the article the journalist states that: “One among many fights due to alcohol abuse, the callous and lustful life style of Silvana Babić (46 years old), ended as a tragedy on Sunday. Her son Dino (22) beat her to death with a statuette and strangled her with a silk tie”. After describing how the crime was committed, the article states that the father of the boy left home 18 years ago and that the boy was first brought to the attention of the police after he intervened in a fight between his parents when he was just 12 years old. The story also states that the boy started hitting his mother in June “because she was bringing many men into the apartment”. Analysis: From several adjectives used to describe the mother (callous and lustful life, addicted to men and alcohol), as well as descriptions of the violent behaviour of the son, the story implicitly suggests that the mother’s lifestyle is responsible for her death. It is a representation that implicitly suggests that the murder could be justified because of the mother’s lifestyle. There is no single positive statement related to the murdered mother. This works to eradicate readers’ empathy for the victim. Without any effort of an in depth analysis, the reporting draws on and reconstructs stereotypes about motherhood and family life which see women as responsible mothers, nurturers and wives. A mother, who drinks and leads a promiscuous life, deviates from this prevalent and prescribed societal view of how a mother should behave. Conclusion: The social framework within which the media function is one in which passivity, marriage and responsible motherhood are largely expected of women. Women who challenge these expectations are seen as an expressing deviant femininity. The story presents the victim as having led a promiscuous lifestyle prior to her murder. It suggests that deviant mothers are likely to blame when their children become drug addicts and perpetrators of crime. 2. Subtle stereotyping Title: ‘How to educate children’ Country: Mexico Source: Hechos AM, Radio Summary: This piece takes up the debate about the shared responsibility for childrearing and education between women and men. Analysis: Even though the reportage affirms that raising children is a responsibility shared between women and men, the use of sources of information for opinions on the subject is itself a subtle form of stereotyping: only women are consulted on the roles of parents in educating their children. One of the sources is a ‘stay-athome’ mother while the other is a female expert on child development. That a mother engaged full-time in unpaid work in the home would be presented as the first authority on child-rearing seems to reinforce the notion that women’s realm is in the domestic sphere and their primary responsibility is to care for children. Women in the paid work force and those who share childcare responsibilities with partners or family are not consulted. This ignores the reality of many women working double shifts within and outside the home. Nor does the reporter consult men, a group that has increasingly taken on childcare work in recent years with shifts in patterns in the gender division of labour. It is progressive that women experts are presented as sources of information. However, the choice of interviewee reinforces a stereotype on women’s areas of professional expertise (on traditional female gender roles). Interviewing a male expert would have served to dispel this stereotype. 51 6. Case Studies Conclusion: While it is important that women’s voices be heard in the media, the choice of sources can send a genderedmessage about a topic. Absence of the male voice on this topic implies child-rearing does not concern them, even given the reality that men have increasingly taken on child-care responsibilities. The subtle stereotype, reinforced by the selection of sources, serves to undermine the message as well as the perspective of the article: that both women and men are jointly responsible for raising and educating children. Title: ‘Berlin evokes the triumph of liberty: World leaders past and present meet in the German capital to celebrate the ‘peaceful revolution that changed the world’ ‘ Country: Spain Source: Las Provincias, Newspaper, Section International, p.29. Summary: This newspaper article describes the official ceremony hosted by Chancellor Angela Merkel celebrating the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. The article mentions that set against the backdrop of the Brandenburg Gate, the evening featured songs by Placido Domingo and speeches by the current leaders of the Allied powers that occupied Germany after World War II, Gordon Brown of Great Britain, Dimitri Medvedev of Russia, Nicolas Sarkozy of France, with the presence of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of the USA. Quotes from the speeches by Gordon Brown and the videobroadcast of a speech by the absent Barak Obama were followed by quotes from Merkel and the current German President, Horst Kohler praising ex-chancellor Helmut Kohl, Mikhail Gorbachev and George Bush Sr. for their roles in the ‘peaceful revolution’ out of communism. Analysis: In this newspaper article the transmission of gender stereotypes is subtle yet noticeable. First of all, only two women are mentioned among the names of eight or nine men, a bias reflective of the higher presence of men in politics and hardly the fault of the journalist. However more subtle portrayals of gender stereotypes intrude upon the article: while Merkel is named as the principal host of the ceremony as Chancellor of Germany, she is not quoted until after Gordon Brown and Barak Obama. This would seem to have more to do with her gender as a woman than her position as Chancellor. Further, Merkel is described in emotive terms, as ‘carrying the melody’ and pronouncing an ‘emotional message’. Merkel is pictured holding an umbrella and squeezed between Sarkozy and Medvedev who do not appear to be holding umbrellas and appear stoic in the face of the rain. This image could be read slightly differently, though: Merkel holds her own umbrella above her head while it might appear that the two men rely on assistants behind them to shelter them from the rain. Other gendered stereotypes abound: Hilary Clinton is described as ‘breaking with the rigid protocol’ of the male dominated ceremony by presenting a video-message from Obama in his absence. Clinton herself is not quoted. The description of the arrival of the male German President Kohler escorted by soldiers suggests military rigidity. Finally, although the president commends the ‘ordinary people of Germany’ for the ‘peaceful revolution’ and for taking down the wall that separated East and West, he claims it all would not have been possible without the three ‘visionary states-men’, Bush, Gorbachev and Kohl at the helm of the USA, USSR and West Germany at the time. Placing credit for historical processes in which millions of people participated simultaneously, in the last instance, on the ‘great men’ serves to undermine the importance placed on the same ordinary women and men. Conclusion: Despite the rise of women to positions of political power, such as Merkel in Germany, Michelle Bachelet in Chile, and Cristina Fernandez in Argentina, women, even powerful women, continue to be represented in the media in the shadow of archetypical ‘great men.’ Title: Local elections in South West Bulgaria Source: Struma, newspaper Country: Bulgaria Summary: The story placed on Page 2 of Struma newspaper reports on local elections in South-West Bulgaria. Analysis: Only male electoral candidates are presented and described. Only the opinions of men about the candidates are cited and only men are photographed. The gender imbalance in news sources blatantly stereotypes politics and public life as the preserve for men. It seems that in this part of Bulgaria, there are neither women voters nor candidates. Even though men still dominate politics in the country, women’s empowerment movements have led to the presence of more women in Bulgarian public life. During the 2009 elections to the European Parliament, 60 percent of the centerright party candidates were women. Other women in positions of authority in the country include the mayor of Sofia, the justice minister and the speaker of Parliament. Conclusion: By featuring only men (in both the photographs and the story), the story both devalues and disregards women’s participation in and contribution to political processes. 52 6. Case Studies 3. Gender-Blind Stories and Missed opportunities Title: ‘Growth will reach 9% in India with reforms’ Country: Mexico Source: Reforma, Business Section, p.1 Summary: The article discusses some of the reasons behind India’s economic growth and suggests that, according to projections made at the World Economic Forum, with reforms to the education, healthcare and the financial sectors, India’s growth in the subsequent year could reach 9% of GDP. Nevertheless, growth in India has not meant progress for all as there is a wide gender gap in income, employment and power. Analysis:This article clearly presents a lost opportunity to delve deeper into the gender-gap evident from the statistics presented on the ‘new’ economy of India. The reporter lauds at length the reforms that the Indian government has made to rationalize spending on education and health. No mention is made of the extent to which these sectors have been privatized, or whether reforms have involved public spending cuts. Considering that these are the usual pathways to reforming the public sector, and that such cuts impact poor and working women the most as the burdens of social reproductive responsibilities increase, this narrow interpretation of the data is troublesome. The impact of the reforms on women and other explanations behind the gender gap in access to paid employment, in wages and in positions of power in the private sector are not explored despite the fact that this issue is highlighted in the news article. The article instead focuses on reforms and attempts to overhaul the financial sector and to attract foreign direct investment through increased ‘competitiveness.’ No mention is made of the fact that the lowcost of labour, or rather the low-wages paid to workers, particularly women, is one of the key factors in business decisions to set up operations there. This link between macro-economic growth in terms of GDP expansion, the profitability of the finance sector and the fiscal viability of the public sector and the magnification of the gender gap is not made. That the gender gap would result from the growth of the private sector in India is not even considered at all. What is taken up is the supposed desirability of further reform of health, education and the financial sectors in order to enhance India’s ability to attract foreign investment and expand GDP growth, with the claim that this is a strategy to reduce the gender gap in income, wages and status. Conclusion: Ignoring the exploitation of women’s labour and the gendered nature of cuts to public services in the era of neoliberal globalization comes at a great risk. Taking the gendered impacts of national economic growth and the role of women in economic processes into account would provide an opportunity to raise the awareness of media audiences on these issues, spurring debate through which a more critical and engaged citizenry is created. The manner in which this article is written however has ensured that any such possibilities are buried. Title of article: ‘Jüri Mõis: Nord Stream could create working places’ Country: Estonia Source: DELFI, Internet news. http://www.delfi.ee/news/ paevauudised/eesti/juri-mois- nord-stream-oleks-loonud- tookohti.d?id=26814767 Summary: The story reports on a discussion on Estonian Television (ETV) about the Nord Stream gas project in the Baltic Sea. The title of ETV program is “Citizens of the Republic”. E-poed E-mail Eesti kaart Autod Kinnisvara Töö Raha Kataloog Otsing Naljad Mängud Esmaspäev, 23. august Delfi RusDelfi Majandus Sport Publik Forte Naistekas Rahva hääl Ekspress Maaleht TV Pilt Video Kasulik MisToimub Date Täheke Eesti Kohalikud uudised Ilm Arvamus Maailm Krimi Kultuurileht e-Eesti Uut Delfis Foto: Ilmar Saabas 18:00 17:58 17:54 17:40 17:38 17:31 17:30 17:23 17:20 17:18 RAHVA HÄÄL UUDISED Päevauudised Eesti Kohalikud uudised Ilm Arvamus Kommentaaridest Delfi persoon Neljapäevik Maailm Krimi Päevapilt Päevavideo Kultuurileht e-Eesti Uut Delfis Reklaam Viimased uudised Uudiste arhiiv TÄNANE KÜSIMUS Kas istud taksos juhi kõrvale või tagaistmele? (5) Juhi kõrvale Tagaistmele Kuidas kunagi Ma ei sõida taksoga Sinu vastusevariant PÄEV PILDIS VIDEO: Mis saab, kui Samaral katus mustaks võõbata? (5) Uudised > Päevauudised > Eesti Jüri Mõis: Nord Stream oleks loonud töökohti www.DELFI.ee 10. november 2009 21:51 LIITU DELFI POMMUUDISEGA saada sõbrale e-mailiga teade toimetajale loe kommentaare (208) prindi uudis Suurärimees Jüri Mõis leiab, et Nord Streami küsimuses on Eestis teadlasi rakendatud poliitilise vankri ette ning Eesti oleks pidanud rajatava gaasitoruga võitlemise asemel hoopis sellest enda jaoks kasu lõikama. ETV saate “Vabariigi kodanikud” stuudios olid täna mereuurija Tarmo Soomere, õigusteadlane Heiki Lindpere, looduskaitsja ja poliitik Aleksei Lotman ning ettevõtja Jüri Mõis. Mõisa hinnangul ei võitle mõistlikud riigid investeeringutega, vaid üritavad neid just riiki sisse tuua. Praegu Rügeni saarel ehitust ootavad Nord Streami torud oleks pidanud olema hoopis Paldiski sadamas ja Eesti on sellise poliitika tõttu jäänud ilma paljudest töökohtadest, avaldas Mõis arvamust. Nord Streami projektist eemale jäämine võib Eesti jaoks tähendada ka seda, et jäädakse kõrvale Põhjamaade energeetika peamistest tegemistest, millest näiteks Soome, Rootsi ja Taani koos Venemaaga tulu hakkavad saama, selgitas ettevõtja. Keskkonnariskidest rääkides nentis Mõis, et kui teadlastele ja looduskaitsjatele võim anda, siis varsti keelataks ka lennuliiklus. Samuti tõi ta näite Eesti ja Soome vahel olevast Estlinki kaablist, mis on tema väitel sama ohtlik kui gaasitoru. Lotman ja Soomere Mõisa kriitikaga nõus ei olnud Roheliste ridades riigikokku kuuluv Aleksei Lotman seletab Rootsi ja Soome valitsuste poolt Nord Streamile antud rohelist tuld sellega, et nende valitsused ei kaasanud teadlasi piisavalt otsustusprotsessi. “Jutud, et Eestis kiusatakse kuidagi pahatahtlikult Nord Streami taga ei pea paika. See on jama,” lisas Lotman. Ka Tarmo Soomere lisas, et Eesti pole teinud midagi rohkem, kui öelnud, et Nord Streami keskkonnamõjusid pole piisavalt uuritud. VIIMASED ENIMLOETUD Neljapäeval on Tallinna Botaanikaaias lahtiste uste päev Toomas Leito: Võrreldes igava Sirbiga on Nelli Teataja lugemine mõnus! Laine Trapido: Inimväärsest meditsiinist. I OSA - kui patsient muudetakse asjaks Joel Lindpere: tunnen ennast Red Bullsis kindlalt ERR: Teletorni uuele ehitushankele tuli neli pakkumist Wikileaksi asutajat süüdistab ahistamises ülikooli töötaja? (2) Riik toetab rahvusvähemuste pühapäevakoole (2) PÄEVA KOMM: Eesti teedel valitseb anarhiline egoism (11) Nädalavahetusel tabas 52 mereväe ajateenijat viirusepuhang (7) Rupert Grint keeldub ennast alasti näitamast (1) Kõik uudised Flash VAATA JA KLIKI Flash EESTI KÖÖGID KOHE KÄTTE _ HIND ALATES 4590,Tee Scandinavian Toursi kliendikaart tasuta ja VÕIDA! MATI KULLAÄRI - suur valik ehteid parima hinnaga! BRONEERI LENNUPILETID JA HOTELL ONLINES e-mööbel - parimad hinnad garanteeritud HISPAANIA, PORTUGAL, Ilm Valuuta Horoskoop TV-kava RSSSaada vihjeDelfi avaleheksKontaktReklaam Päeval: 19 .. 22°C Öösel: 15 .. 18°C Täpsem ennustus > Internet Firmad Delfi Telefonid Kaart Kinnisvara Auto VEEBIKATALOOG Saada lugu Saada foto Saada video Saada vihje Loe rahva häält ANNA TEADA: Kas oled pidanud vastu võtma ümbrikupalka? (137) ANNA TEADA: Kui õnnelikuna tunned ennast sina? (51) Analysis: The Nord Stream pipeline project will transport gas from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. Estonia has no direct involvement in the project because the pipeline will not pass through Estonia. However, as a Baltic nation, Estonia has expressed concerns about the environmental impact the project might have on the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea. Only four men are interviewed in the story - a gender imbalance in sources which results in only one perspective being given on the issue. The title of ETV program is “Citizens of the Republic”. However, by featuring just the views of men, the program implicitly suggests that only men are citizens and have the authority speak on political and environmental issues affecting the country. In a country with many female politicians and scientists, the failure to reflect that diversity in news sources in such a story, reinforces the traditional image of men as intellectuals, scientists and figures whose opinions are worth listening to by the rest of the population. Title: ‘More antitrafficking control on the northern border: Authorities in Carchi and Nariño initiate a joint plan to slow down human trafficking in the area’ Country: Ecuador Source: El Telégrafo, Section ‘Zona Ciudadana’, p.8 Summary: This article reports about collaboration between authorities in the Ecuadoran province of Carchi and the Colombian department of Nariño to address the problem of human trafficking in the border region between the two Andean countries. Greater vigilance of border tourist and commercial traffic was put in effect along with a moratorium on licenses to open bars and night-clubs in the regions. According to the governor of Carchi, Efren Benavidez, interviewed by the reporter, the problem can be synthesized as follows: ‘we find girls working as prostitutes without papers, we deport them, but they return to work – it is a vicious circle, and that is why we are taking these actions.’ The article indicates that 23 cases of sexual exploitation of Colombian women were reported in Ecuador last year. The article also cites the non-governmental organisation FUNDAPAZ as estimating that 95% of all cases of sexual exploitation (presumably in Ecuador) are women and girls. Most of the women who arrive in Ecuador are purported to originate from Antioquia, Caldas and Quindio in Colombia. In addition to the trafficking 53 6. Case Studies of women for sexual exploitation, the trafficking of children for forced labour is also mentioned as a key social problem that is to be addressed by increased vigilance by authorities on the border. Analysis: It is widely acknowledged that the trafficking of women is the most profound and violent evidence of the effects of the subordination, discrimination and exclusion of women. This type of violation of the rights of women is one of the more shocking examples of violence exercised against women for the simple fact of being female. This report draws further attention to this issue, particular in its mention of the overwhelming proportion the victims being women. However, the article does not probe deeper into the questions of why this is the case. Instead, the issue is addressed from the perspective of authorities as they try to implement legal measures to prevent the problem. No attempt is made to include the voices of trafficked women who would have revealed why they are caught in the cycle. They would have shed light on the social, economic or cultural conditions that renders them prey to traffickers. What is it, for example, about the Colombian departments of Antioquia, Quindio or Caldas that makes them the principal sources of women who fall victim to human traffickers? A more comprehensive reportage would have injected perspective into the story, illuminating readers’ understanding about the issue. Such an approach would have evoked different aspect of the rights of women, children and other vulnerable groups caught in the human trafficking ring. Conclusion: More attention to the root causes of human trafficking from a broader gender-aware perspective would facilitate readers’ comprehension on the reasons why women in particular become trapped in the webs of traffickers. By taking a wider gender-conscious perspective, the article could have provided information that would widen public debate on the rights, dignity and safety of women, children and vulnerable groups at risk of exploitation. Title of article: The way to school for children in the flooded area Source: Voice of Vietnam (VOV1), Radio Country: Vietnam Summary: The report is about a recent flood disaster in An Ninh Tay, Phu Yen province, a rural part of the country. The flood resulted in property loss and displaced many communities. The main subjects of the story are school children in flooded areas who are uncertain about when they can go back to school because all resources at the school have been swept away by the flood. The report also states that the children do not have hats and shoes. Two pupils, one woman and two men are interviewed in the report. Analysis: Only one woman is cited in this story. However, the woman is quoted in her capacity as the victim of the disaster. From her interview, it is evident that her voice is shaking and she is crying as she talks about the damage caused by the flood. Two highranking men are cited, discussing possible solutions to problems caused by the disaster. The different capacities in which the men and the woman are interviewed perpetuate gender stereotypes of women as emotional and victims, in contrast to men as decision-makers and problem-solvers. It is reflective of the broader social and political culture of Vietnam where decision makers are often men. Conclusion: The story subtly stereotypes women as victims and men as important people who solve major problems such as natural disasters. It shows men as active doers and women as passive victims. It misses the opportunity to show listeners the dynamics between the sexes, the collaborative efforts by both women and men in confronting challenges in society, in this case, those caused by natural disasters. 4. Gender-aware Stories Title of article: ‘Bright lights big city is high risk for students’ Country: Ethiopia Source: The Daily Monitor Summary: This story reports on the prevalence of high risk sexual behaviour among university students. It locates the dangers of such behaviour within the broader context of the prevalence of HIV/ AIDS in Ethiopia and the particularly higher rates of prevalence in Addis Ababa. It uses a variety of sources to highlight different HIV/AIDS prevention programs at the university and other higher education institutions. The accompanying picture is of a section of the campus called ‘the kissing pool’. The caption reads ‘the ‘kissing pool’ at Addis Ababa Siddist Kilo campus is a favourite haunt for student couples’. Analysis: The story demonstrates a balanced use of sources. Selam, a female student of the Addis Ababa University (AAU) and a man who is former student of the university and now project coordinator at a local non-governmental organisation (NGO) are sources cited in the story. Having a female and a male source introduces different perspectives on the prevalence of HIV and AIDS, including initiatives to curb its spread. The story clearly depicts the different sexual experiences of female and male students that may put them at risk of contracting HIV. In addition, the story highlights the experiences of female students from rural and urban areas joining the university. The female source has an opportunity to comment on a statement by the male source that the some female students on campus often fall prey to ‘sugar daddies’. The article provides data on the prevalence of HIV/AIDS at national and the local urban level. It also tries to corroborate its assumption that students might be among high-risk groups for HIV/AIDS in the city. Conclusion: The story is a good example of gender-aware stories in its balance of sources, its introduction of different perspectives and experiences and its use of data. The story provides a fuller picture and understanding of the issue. 54 6. Case Studies Title: ‘Female Mortality: the Principal Cause is a Lack of Medical Attention’ Country: Chile Source: La Nación, newspaper Summary: The article details the results of scientific studies on epidemiology and health which found that the principal cause of female mortality and morbidity is a lack of access to medical care and a lack of medical attention. Analysis: In general, newspaper editors tend to print information directly from wire services in cases where scientific studies, statistical analysis or complicated data are presented. It is important that this particular piece has been included in the paper. The data is well presented and the extent of the problem is clearly shown. The reportage style is fully gender-sensitive and seeks to create readers’ awareness on the problem of women’s inadequate access to healthcare. The newspaper is partially owned by the Chilean state. Thus, information published in it is linked to the interests of the government. The previous administration led by President Michelle Bachelet had put much emphasis on public policy from a gender-justice perspective. Curiously, this news item is not featured in other papers on this date November 10. This suggests that this type of news item is accessed only when it is extracted from a press agency that employs journalists specialized in themes of science and public health. Conclusion: The article demonstrates that it is possible to be concise, clear and genderaware through careful attention to the accurate portrayal of gender issues facing women, in this case, access to healthcare. Title: ‘Women cops unite in the fight against breast cancer’ Country: Costa Rica Source: Radio Columbia 98.7 FM Summary: Female police officers get together to send a message about breastcancer prevention and awareness to the residents of Curridabat. The slogan is ‘our security starts with ourselves’. Featured were music, food, talks and testimonials from women who survived breast cancer. The reporters interviewed one of the police officers, chief of the public police of Curridabat, who stated that the goal of the event was to transmit a message of prevention to both women and men to take measures to protect their health and safety. Analysis: This is the first piece of a news feature and receives 40 seconds of air-time. It publicizes and praises an activity organised by police officers about preventing breast-cancer in ways that demonstrate a positive awareness of gender concerns. First, it shows women as police officers, a domain traditionally dominated by men. Second, it shows women as active defenders of their own health and security through measures to increase the possibility of surviving cancer. Third, it shows women actively involved in public health and safety campaigns. Further, it highlights how these women employ a creative definition of public safety which expands the responsibilities of the police beyond fighting crime to include fighting disease through good health practices. Finally, that the police officer interviewed mentioned the objective of the event was to reach both women and men highlights the importance of inclusiveness. The article demonstrates the awareness about the issue by both the news subjects and the journalists themselves. Conclusion: Not only is the actual event featured a fine example of the social benefits of the active participation of women in professional roles traditionally dominated by men; but also the news editor and journalists, in their genderaware and prominent portrayal of this piece, pay homage to the active power of women to foment social change. Title: Untitled Country: Nicaragua Source: Radio Ya, radio news story Summary: This short radio news report describes the increasing participation of men in activities that were once considered the responsibility of women such as nursing the sick, accompanying women during labour and caring for children. Analysis: This piece shows gender-aware journalism by highlighting the changing attitudes in society on the role of men in caring for others or in accompanying spouses and family members through labour and child-birth. It adequately reflects changing gender-roles and cultural norms in addition to actively supporting the creation of public awareness about the changing trends. Conclusion: Journalists can support attempts by women and men to overcome the limitations imposed by traditional gender-stereotypes by calling attention to trends that defy stereotypes, rather than using language that reinforces gender-roles and prevailing cultural norms. GMMP Monitor, Papua New Guinea 55 7. Towards Ethical Reporting And Gender Balance: A Trade Union Perspective Mindy Ran The scope of the Global Media Monitoring Project can be seen throughout this report to fall into two intertwined categories; how women are portrayed in news content in contrast to men and how women, again in contrast to men, participate in creating the news as reporters and newscasters. Each category clearly impacts the other. In order to understand the mechanisms at work that keep change to a snail’s pace and appear to strengthen the status quo into a further stagnant, barely moving sticky mass, the stark reality of statistics are essential. Equally essential is to understand the human realities and circumstances behind the numbers in order to develop new pathways for change. In this regard, journalists’ trade unions and trade union federations are an excellent source to both inform, and shape the debate. In these days of speedy media: shorthand news bulletins, quick web journalism and instant blogging, ethical journalism is an old fashioned ideal – promoting quality, fair and balanced reporting. In fact, it refers back to what quality journalism is supposed to be; it recognises the impact and input of the media in shaping societal norms, informing debate, creating a change in consciousness, or supporting and reinforcing bias and discrimination, and/or pandering to the status quo. Ethical journalism is about taking responsibility for the choices made with an awareness of the impact of those choices; decisions on who to interview, in what capacity, how to visually portray them, as well as who has access to training, who is hired, who is promoted, who presents the news, and its content. Inherent in this responsibility is the concept that fair, balanced reporting is ethical reporting, which in turn, can only be achieved by equity, both in the news content, and within the newsroom. So while the concept of ethics in relation to various aspects of the media is not new, applying it specifically to gender is a more recent result of the long journey searching for new and more efficient pathways to effect change. The statistics and case examples of the GMMP 2010 reflect reality very clearly by showing the continuing trend of small percentages of progress. It is therefore important to understand what lies behind those numbers, in both the industry treatment of women and in the portrayal and representation of them, because a continuing lack of women’s voices, faces and opinions can never be ethical, or offer a fair or balanced media. “Sticky floors” and worse While statistics show that more and more women are training and entering the field, the number at the very top of the profession remain shockingly low, or in some countries, non-existent. In the US, Western Europe, Canada and Australia they speak of “sticky floors” and “glass ceilings”, with the result that the lack of promotion for women in these countries means that as they age, the pay gap increases, despite almost 50 years of equal pay legislation. In trade union reports to the Gender Council of the International Federation of Journalists (the IFJ represents 600,000 union journalists in 123 countries globally) the following conditions are still rife throughout the industry globally, and therefore impact the quality and content of the news: high stress levels, unequal pay, bullying, harassment and intimidation (including sexual and actual threats of violence), unacceptable workloads, lack of access to training and education, systemic or hidden discriminatory practices (such as curfews and lack of child care) and overt sexism in hiring and assignment practices. Additionally, anti-social work hours and lack of flexible work time may contribute to forcing many working mothers, in particular, into part-time, temporary or freelance positions. This in turn puts them in even more vulnerable positions in terms of promotion, legal status, job security and the ability to share the same rights as contracted colleagues. In countries that “protect” maternal rights, women are often still penalized; losing pension time, seniority, and in some cases providing an excuse for dismissal. In other countries, women can often be more vulnerable to intimidation and threats (death, violent and sexual, threats against the family) than their male colleagues when working on cases of investigative journalism, particularly in the fields of human rights or corruption, from criminal groups and corrupt officials. Sadly, these conditions are neither new, nor improving very quickly, but they are improving albeit very slowly. Initiatives: Old and new If a shift in laws was the answer, (although they are an essential start), then the equal pay gap for example would simply be a horror story we tell our children of the “bad old days”. The simple truth is that after all of these years of activists battling inequality the simple, obvious things have been changed (International Labour Organisation (ILO) and human rights treaties, equal pay legislation, etc.), so it is clear that more subtle mechanisms are at work that in turn require a different, more subtle approach. Within the journalists’ trade unions and federations, older initiatives have been slowly, quietly working to achieve change; women’s charters (that lay out action plans to create change adopted by individual unions), Dignity at Work clauses in collective bargaining agreements (that set out guidelines for behaviour at work and create a procedure to handle instances of bullying and harassment) and codes of conduct for the industry. The National Union of Journalists in the UK and Ireland is one of the oldest journalists’ trade union in the world. In order to join this union one must agree to abide by their code of conduct (originally drawn up in 1936, with changes over the years), which includes ideals such as fair and balanced reporting, and the following clause: “10. Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation” In a statement created at the IFJ conference on Ethics and Gender: Equality in the 56 7. Towards Ethical Reporting And Gender Balance newsroom1 , the following points were highlighted; “it is essential to hold strong to principles of ethical reporting to fight gender stereotypes, to combat aggressive behaviour, harassment, inequality in promotion, training and pay, and to stand up for dignity in our work as journalists and media professionals...” “that all media workers, journalists, and trade unionists should work together to improve ethical journalism, to respect the rights and dignity of all women, and to ensure that the images of women in media and society reflect the need to end all discrimination in social, economic, political and cultural life...” By creating and adopting these sorts of declarations, which in turn are brought back to each of the countries (journalists unions) involved, a cohesive statement of intent filters down to individual and local groups, much like the women’s charters. Further, concrete actions included: increasing efforts to eliminate all forms of violence, sexual harassment and bullying, to insist these issues are brought into the mainstream of core union work, to increase training on both the ethics of equal rights, but also on gender issues and to encourage more gender sensitive and aware media content. With these actions in mind we now turn attention to the way forward charted following the 2005 GMMP in order to propose a revised action plan for the next 5 years. Revisiting the GMMP 2005 Action Plan2 Advocacy and lobbying This action point pertains to change driven by gender activists in civil society groups including journalist unions and federations, using the GMMP results as hard evidence for advocacy. It will continue to be essential to have this sort of data in order to answer those that believe, mistakenly, that equality has already been achieved. The action point outlines the role activists can play to encourage debate and improve awareness of gender content and impact in the news and among the public. Media policies and accountability As an extension of, and complementary component of union codes of conduct, editorial guidelines for gender balanced reporting admit the responsibility of the media to be held accountable. Therefore, developing editorial guidelines that include an increased awareness of gender sensitive content will also help to inform and increase a fair and balanced gender image in the media. Gender and media activists should actively disseminate gender aware guidelines, and lobby all media outlets to either develop or increase gender-sensitive content in their guidelines. Organizational targets and in-house monitoring This action point also remains valid, as the guidelines and goals mentioned above can easily become a never-ending story that tires and frustrates everyone involved if no change is detected. By monitoring news content for gender balance in sources, subjects and news staff, media outlets can use this information, not only as a measure of progress, but also to help set attainable goals. Sensitisation and training of journalists and editors Journalism courses, university media programmes and technical schools should include ethical reporting guidelines and gender guidelines. These should also be incorporated in on-the-job training and professional development workshops for working journalists. Also, thought should be given to training managers, editors, producers and publishers to raise awareness and to inform and support ideals to create gender balance in the newsroom and in media content. Additionally, care should be given within the trainings to ensure fair and equitable access; balancing as much as possible the numbers of those who are eligible for the training to 50/50 women/men. Training programmes should remain aware of and address requirements and practices that may have hidden impacts such as disallowing certain groups from participating. Media analysis skills As the media pace increases, we are now more than ever before saturated with images that become difficult to actually “see” and understand. Media analysis skills become even more essential as time and pace march on. Therefore, the ability of the public to critique what we are seeing, and to monitor the messages received is essential. It is as important now, as then, to support media literacy groups that can inform democratic debate and train the public to see and understand the messages they are being offered. The 2005 action plan highlights the need for funders to recognize and support critical media skills in the context of informed citizenship. Development of media monitoring One of the primary action areas assisted by the GMMP research is the development of monitoring tools and methods. The ability to monitor and understand is often the first step in providing concrete evidence of the need for change. Additionally, the type of method employed by researchers in the GMMP can be tailored to address the needs of media organisations, journalists, academics, and public interest groups. There are a variety of possibilities, from the implementation of more regular monitoring of specific media in a specific geographic area, to an expansion into monitoring new media forms, such as internet news or “news feeds” that use “social media” sites such as Facebook and Twitter. One final note: Improving the gender balance in the industry Work in the next five years should also include trade unions and federations in terms of their role in achieving a more gender-sensitised and balanced work floor. Activists within and outside media should encourage trade unions to press for among other rights, flexible work times, jobsharing possibilities, accessible childcare and parental leave. They should encourage journalists unions and federations to lobby for the right to organise, for the improvement of the rights of temporary and freelance workers, and for the development and adoption of ‘Dignity at Work’ clauses to combat bullying and discrimination. 1 Held in 2009 and attended by 60 participants from 45 countries. To Tell You the Truth: The Ethical Journalism Initiative (by Aidan White) and the IFJ Ethical Journalism campaigns were launched at the conference. Read more at the International Federation of Journalists website www.ifj.org. 2 Gallagher, Margaret. 2005:104-106. Who makes the news? Global Media Monitoring Project 2005. Report available at www.whomakesthenews.org 57 8. A Roadmap to Accelerate Progress in the Portrayal and Representation of Women in the News The GMMP research shows an increase of 6 percentage points in women’s presence as subjects in the news since the year 2000. If conditions remain unchanged and the rate of progress is maintained, it will take at least 40 more years to reach parity. The plan of action below drawn from agreements adopted at regional and global meetings1 is intended to not only accelerate the pace of change but also re-direct progress to areas of media policy and practice that constrain advancement towards more gender-just news media. The actions refer back to the strategic objectives in Section J on ‘women and the media’ in the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action which first recognized the importance of media monitoring as tool for change towards gender equality. Strategic objective J.1. Increase the participation and access of women to expression and decision-making in and through the media and new technologies of communication. In partnership with editors, media regulatory bodies, journalist associations, training institutions, government, communication and information, and civil society among others 1. Compile and promote the use of regional directories of Women Experts. Specific actions: a. Create a regional on-line and print version of the directory of women experts covering diverse thematic areas. b. Partner with existing networks and contacts in the region to develop the directory. c. Distribute the directory to media in order to increase the presence of women as sources in the news. Under the lead of media trainers, journalism training institutions and researchers with support from governments, regional organisations and international organisations: 2. Create ‘gender and media’ curricula and modules in schools, journalism training institutes and centres, 3. Equip managers and instructors with skills to apply the modules to train gender sensitive media professionals 4. Train media owners, publishing directors, director generals of radio and television, chief editors, programme directors, producers and animators on gender issues and genderbalanced reporting Under the lead of media practitioner associations, journalist unions and media owners with support from governments: 5. Adopt and apply policies on gender parity in media a. Encourage adoption and application of policies on gender parity. Rectify gaps b. Act to strengthen policy implementation systems favourable to media development and promotion of gender responsiveness and gender equality in the media 6. Promote women’s leadership in media a. Encourage training and re-training of women media professionals b. Support the creation of news agencies which originate in women’s networks and organizations for new practices in the media portrayal and representation of women to emerge. Strategic objective J.2. Promote a balanced and nonstereotyped portrayal of women in the media. Aidan White, IFJ Secretary General attributes the persistence of gender-unfair and stereotyped media content to ‘economic interests and age-old customs at work’.2 As he rightly points out, the relationship between, on the one hand, the enactment of policies and the increase in the numbers of women in media, and on the other hand the decrease in gender-unfair and stereotypical content is not linear. Deeply entrenched and more often than not unrecognized prejudices obstruct the institutionalisation of gender balance in media practice. The recommendations below are intended to provide practical guidelines for a professional ethic of gender-just media practice. In partnership with editors, media regulatory bodies, journalist associations, training institutions, government, officials of communication and information, and civil society among others Under the lead of civil society organisations with support from governments, international non governmental organisations and the private sector: 7. Carry out gender and media sensitisation initiatives. Specific actions: a. Sensitize the media on gender balanced reporting: i. Work in collaboration with national, regional, and international media associations as well as media training institutes to develop training and sensitization findings from media monitoring research such as the GMMP to address the gap in representation of women in the news. ii. Engage the media in debates and dialogue on the GMMP findings to address the issues raised in the report. b. Expose both mainstream and community media to existing gender instruments which would guide gender responsive coverage. 58 8. A Roadmap to Accelerate Progress 8. Build a new social imagination of gender-fair, gender-balanced media as women’s human rights. Specific actions: a. Re-train media consumers to understand that violence in the media contributes to and reinforces a culture of violence. b. Re-train media consumers to challenge media that promotes, incites, glorifies, glamorizes, eroticizes or trivializes violence against girls and women. c. Train communities - women and men – in critical media literacy to ‘read’ media content from a gender perspective. d. Establish annual gender media awards in recognition of best practices in gender-fair, gender-balanced media practice. e. Create an interactive gender and media monitoring website for media users. 9. Undertake gender and media monitoring initiatives. Specific actions: a. Train trainers in media monitoring. b. Develop a training manual for gender and media monitoring. c. Produce statistics and reference databases on the gender dimensions of news, advertising, entertainment, soap operas and telenovelas running over extended periods of time. d. Disseminate the results of studies by media observatories using audiovisual products that show the lack of coherence between media messages, country realities and the need for awareness of a reflective and critical approach to media. e. Share tools and experiences in policy and media monitoring. f. Establish media monitoring working groups to undertake ongoing and consistent media monitoring at national level.  g. Work with media councils and media associations to implement action plans using the results of national media monitoring as evidence.  10. Forge positive partnerships, networks and coalitions with media councils, media associations and other organisations. 11. Working with relevant inter-governmental agencies and women’s NGOs, develop national and regional action plans on ‘gender & media’. 12. Support women’s media as an alternative at the same time as they work to transform mainstream media. 13. Undertake advocacy campaigns for policies upholding freedom of expression. Under the lead of media practitioner associations, journalist unions and media owners with support from regional and international organisations: 14. Establish gender sensitive media codes of practice. Specific actions: a. Review existing media codes of ethics and communication policies to establish whether or not they are gender sensitive. b. Propose amendments of the codes to make them more gender responsive. c. Lobby for the adoption, dissemination and enforcement of these codes. d. Create awareness on policy advocacy tools 1 The agreements were adopted by media practitioners, civil society organisations and representatives from government agencies at meetings convened by WACC as a follow-up to the third GMMP in 2005. The agreements are: Nairobi Declaration on Gender and Media Advocacy, 2007; Déclaration de Dakar sur le Plaidoyer Genre et Médias, 2007; Outcomes statement of the Pacific Region Gender and Media Advocacy Training workshop, Suva, October, 2007; The Caribbean Region Gender and Media Advocacy Plan Of Action, Kingston, 2008; Propuesta De Plan De Incidencia Para La Region De America Latina Y El Caribe, Quito, 2008; Declaration from the international consultation on ‘gender and media’, Cape Town, 2008. 2 White, Aidan. 2008. The Ethical Journalism Initiative. International Federation of Journalists. GMMP Monitors, Suriname 59 Annex 1. Methodological Notes The 2010 Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) was the fourth time the GMMP was undertaken, it was also the second time Media Monitoring Africa was privileged to be the data analyst. The GMMP continues to grow not only in terms of participating countries, but also in refining and improving the monitoring methodology. As with previous years, the overall methodology has remained the same to ensure comparability between different iterations of the GMMP research. As was the case in 2005, the challenges were identified and the methodology team was able to focus on making key changes in order to ensure even more reliable and accurate results. One of the key changes was the provision of a database to participants to allow in-country data capture. In addition this GMMP also saw the introduction on a pilot basis of internet media monitoring. Other changes are highlighted below. The process One of the innovations for GMMP 2010 was the introduction of an international virtual working group which over a period of 6 months reviewed the coding materials in detail and scrutinised, suggested, discussed and debated criteria, aims and results. Their objective was to revise and update the methodology1 to reflect new thematic concerns and the current news media environment. The group consisted of a range of international gender and media experts, researchers, NGOs and academics from across the world and was coordinated online by the World Association for Christian Communication (WACC). The impact of the online consultation was that many of the challenges experienced in 2005 were resolved and new features included. An example is the refinement of the GMMP story classification system. The 2010 system categorizes stories into 7 major topics areas and 52 sub-topics. The 52 sub-topics are a refinement as well as expansion of 44 sub-topics in the previous GMMP, a fine-tuning intended to add specificity and reflect current topical concerns. For instance, ‘economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers, global financial crisis, etc…’ was added as a new sub-topic under ‘Economy’ in view of the global financial crisis that began to show its effects in 2007. A second example is the effort to increase clarity on the question whether a story challenged, reinforced, or neither challenged nor reinforced stereotypes. Feedback from monitors who had participated in GMMP 2005 revealed lacunae in the formulation of this question in the 2005 monitoring guide. The 2010 guide addressed this by revising the question and adding illustrative examples from winning entries to the WACC 2009 Photo Competition themed Portraying Gender. The photo examples portray women or men in ways that offer new perceptions about their roles and responsibilities; they challenge conventional understandings of ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’. The inclusion of a diversity of approaches and perspectives applied to the method resulted in even better coding materials which were more comprehensive and easier to understand across the different countries. In a further effort to promote more accurate and uniform monitoring ,WACC arranged a workshop in Cairo where the GMMP regional coordinators received training on the methodology. Country and regional workshops were held as well, but generally, national coordinators conducted their own in-country training of monitors, with technical support from WACC. Methodology training resources for trainers as well as self-administered tutorials for monitors were made available through the GMMP website www.whomakesthenews. org. Participating groups were provided with detailed information packs outlining the activities and what would be involved in the research. This included: a guide to selecting media, the number of media to code, guidelines on which bulletins and programmes to select and contextual information for each country. Clear practical instructions were given on how to code. Monitoring teams in selected countries with high per capita internet access were invited to code their national internet news websites chosen following set criteria. Instructions to monitors included illustrative examples of news items as well as completed coding sheets. In 2005 a media band system was introduced to ensure a more even spread of data. For this GMMP, the same system was applied after information about each participating country had been checked and updated. As in 2005 the bands were determined by the overall number of each type of media in each country. For example, a country with 5 national television channels was in band 3 while a country with only 1 national television channel was in band 1. Participants were given further guidelines to select the major news bulletins and newspapers. For television and radio, participants had to code the entire bulletin while for newspapers they had to code the 12 to 14 most important stories/items starting on the most important news pages. For accuracy in coding each radio and television bulletin was recorded. For the internet news monitoring pilot, 12 to 14 news stories from the home page and news sections of the websites were coded. Articles beyond the third layer of the website – 2 mouse clicks away from the home page – were not coded. For all media each news story was coded as a separate item and for each story up to 20 pieces of information needed to be captured on the coding sheet. In each item, information about the story, the people in the story as well analytical elements were captured. For standardisation purposes, all pieces of information were numerically coded from fixed lists. The following example illustrates how the coding system worked. In the newspaper example below, the story was about Global warming (subject code 24) and the scope of the story was international (code 4). No reference was made to gender and or human rights policy or relevant legislation (code 2 – This was a new criteria in 2010). The story had one female journalist (sex code 1). There were two subjects. One a person, (code 1 person), and the other a UN report was quoted, (code 2 – secondary source). The person was a man (sex code 2) whose age was not stated (age code 0 – do not know) and his occupation was an 60 Annex 1. Methodological Notes academic (occupation code 5 – academic expert). The secondary source codes, 5 for sex, 7 for Age and 27 for Occupation were all default codes which indicated that it was a secondary source. This aided in accuracy of coding. All other pieces of information were similarly coded. Given the changing nature of the media environment it was also decided that monitoring internet media should be included in GMMP 2010. As a new Story 1. Page number only if stated 1 2. Subject 24 3. Scope 4 4. Relevant policies 2 Journalists/ Reporters 5. Sex 1 People 6. Person / Secondary Source 1 2 7. Sex 2 5 8. Age - 0 7 9. Occupation/ position 5 27 element it was decided by the virtual working group that internet news media should be piloted with a view to including it as a core monitoring component in GMMP 2015. As a new element, certain challenges had to be addressed, including which websites to code, which stories and how they could be selected. It was also important that the existing methodology be used as much as possible so as to enable comparison with other media along similar criteria. While there were some challenges that will be ironed out for the following GMMP, for example, adding internet specific criteria to the methodology, the internet pilot was successful in adapting and utilising the existing methodology. 16 countries participated in the internet GMMP pilot. In addition to the quantitative data, participants submitted qualitative case studies written following the GMMP qualitative case studies matrix1 . These included highlighting examples of stories which are blatantly stereotyped, stories that are more subtly stereotyped, missed opportunities or stories that were gender blind, as well as stories that were gender aware. Thus for the qualitative analysis stories were examined according to the criteria set out below as outlined in the user guide: Stories that are blatantly stereotyped, for example, stories which use language or visual images that denigrate women, or trivialise women’s achievements, or that glorify or justify male violence; 1. Stories that are more subtly stereotyped, for example, stories that contain unstated assumptions about the roles of women and men (e.g. a successful woman who is ‘nevertheless a good wife’), or stories that convey stereotyped beliefs, such as those that depict women as emotionally fragile; 2. News items or stories that are missed opportunities or gender blind, for example, stories that could have been enriched and expanded by including a wider range of sources and viewpoints, or by shedding light on different implications for women and men; 3. Gender aware stories, these were further broken down into subcategories: a. Stories that challenge stereotypes, for example stories that overturn common assumptions about women and about men. For instance a journalist may choose to include female experts in a story about national economic policy, or fathers in a story about play groups for preschool children. b. News items or stories that demonstrate a balance of sources and show the different impact of particular situations on women and men. There are many examples of everyday news that is reported only from a male perspective. Conversely, these may be stories in which both women and men are consulted and this brings fresh perspectives to the news. c. Gender specific: News items or stories that highlight issues pertaining to equality or inequality between women and men or are about campaigns, structures or processes to advance gender equality: These will include stories that focus directly on an area of inequality - for instance, the ‘glass ceiling’ in employment. Another innovation was the introduction of a database that could be used to capture the data in-country. The country databases were subjected to a series of quality control checks before the data could be integrated into the central database. The country databases, monitoring sheets, newspaper samples, TV and radio newscast recordings and website snapshots were submitted to WACC and MMA. Data from the coding sheets was captured into the database. A series of over 5000 queries were run on the data to produce the final results. Accuracy Accuracy and reliability are critical features of any media monitoring project and given the magnitude of the GMMP it was essential that these criteria were factored into every stage. Care was taken during the design of the codes and coding information sent to participants to ensure a standardised approach to the coding. One of the greatest challenges the GMMP poses is that it involves several hundred people spread throughout the world, speaking many different languages and with a diverse range of fields of speciality and interest. In order to help ensure accuracy, detailed coding information and examples were provided to the monitors as well as email support. Responsibility for organising the monitoring was placed in the hands of national GMMP coordinators. Their role in ensuring accuracy in the coding was crucial and this was made clear to each country coordinator. It should be noted that all groups that participated did so voluntarily. In an ideal situation the monitoring would have been carried out by specially trained gender media researchers. However, WACC’s approach to the GMMP ensures not only a diverse participation but also that by participating, new skills are developed, and grassroots organisations are empowered. MMA’s 17 years of media monitoring experience has shown that these diverse groups do not detract from the accuracy and reliability of the data, but rather, because they have new skills to develop and their own information to gain they tend to demonstrate greater levels of commitment to the project. It can be concluded that the accuracy of the results has not been compromised. The coding sheets received by MMA as well as the country databases demonstrated that in the overwhelming majority of cases coding was done in line with the GMMP methodology. In those instances where this was not the case, the data was omitted 61 Annex 1. Methodological Notes so as not to compromise the reliability of the study. In addition, data was checked at four stages during the analysis process. Data was scanned when it was received by MMA for any apparent inconsistencies and to ensure the correct numbers of media were monitored. Any discrepancies were checked with the national coordinators. The data was then submitted to dedicated GMMP team members in MMA where further data checks were run. These included random sampling as well as consistency checks. As data was captured, to reduce any potential errors, comparison checks were run where samples were selected and compared with what had been entered into the database. Where MMA received a completed country database a series of automated quality control queries were run. Where any inconsistencies occurred they were checked back with the country coordinator concerned. In some instances, coding sheets were submitted and data recaptured to ensure greater accuracy. One of the challenges encountered related to minor differences in coding information which resulted in MMA rechecking all data from Spanish language participants. Finally, data was checked again as each of the results were produced. In a global project of this nature and scope, some errors in interpretation as well as in coding may be expected. In most instances these errors were quickly identified and rectified. Similarly to GMMP 2005, less than 0.5% of all results were excluded from the final data set. In all, MMA made substantive corrections to less than 10% of all data received, indicating an extremely high accuracy level. Weightings GMMP 2010 used a similar weighting system to that used in 2005. As with all other GMMP processes the weighting system was scrutinised, updated and retested to ensure reliability and accuracy. It is worth noting some of the core criteria for utilising such a system. To produce global results, certain assumptions must be made. To begin with, it needs to be accepted that simply adding up all the monitoring results of all the participating countries’ would mean that the countries that submitted the most data would on average determine the overall results. Thus if India, for instance, submitted data for 100 media, the data submitted by, say, Swaziland for 5 media would have little, if any, impact on the results. Similarly it would be equally unfair if all results were normalised so each country’s results had the same weighting or value. Such a system would, for example, result in Swaziland having the same impact on the results as India. The global results therefore need to be aggregated in such a way that they take into account the relative size of each country. As in 2005, in addition to the population size, the number of media in each country as well as (in the case of print) the circulation of the media must be taken into account to establish the weightings. Data on the number of national radio and television stations and newspapers in each country were checked and updated based on figures from 2005. Countries were then ranked separately according to their number of newspapers, radio and television channels and then grouped in media bands. Each band then determined a maximum and minimum number of media that should be monitored by each country. Population figures and the number of media alone do not allow for difference in media access. It may be the case for example that two countries have a similar numbers of newspapers, but their impact, in terms of the number of people who read them, may be dramatically different. To address this, within each band a weighting for radio, television and print media was then calculated. For radio and television this was based on how many people in the population were able to receive the channel. In most instances this figures was close to 100% of the national population. For print media the overall circulation figures for each country were used. The significant differences in numbers of people and media which may range from billions of people and thousands of media to thousands of people and only a handful of media, however, still presented a problem for the weighting system. Some countries like China and India with hundreds of millions of people and thousands of media would simply have overwhelmed the results of countries with much smaller populations and far fewer media. To address this element of the weighting challenge, a square root weighting system was applied. Square root weighting is an internationally applied system used most commonly by large international bodies in determining voting numbers of participants as a means of preventing large organisations from simply overwhelming the smaller ones. In an international mountaineering federation for example, if votes were handed out simply on the basis of those countries who had the most members, countries with hundreds of thousands of members would swamp those with only a few thousand members. Square root weighting for GMMP 2010 essentially involved taking the square root of each of the media weightings. The end result was a series of three weightings for each country - one each for print, radio and television. In producing the results, each country was examined to assess whether they had monitored the number of media required by their media band. Countries that monitored more media than required had their weighting altered downwards as a proportion of how many media they should have monitored in order to count less in the final results while those countries which did not manage to monitor sufficient media had their weightings proportionately raised. The weightings were used in all results where global and regional results were produced. Limitations As with the previous GMMPs, while every effort has been made to ensure accurate and reliable data a study of this nature necessarily has a number of limitations. The new weighting system put into place for GMMP 2005 and 2010 has gone some way in addressing the limitations of sample and data size of previous GMMP’s. Information utilised for the weightings was drawn from a number of sources. These included World Press Trends 2008, the MISA Southern African Media Directory 2007 as well as individual internet searches from at least three sources for each country. In addition, where possible, information on the precise number of media was also sourced from the participating country coordinators. Accordingly these figures have been used in the weighting system, on the assumption that their own inherent assumptions and limitations will not affect their overall accuracy and validity. In addition, in developing the weighting system it was found that, for a limited number of countries, data on media penetration or circulation figures were not available and therefore had to be generated based on the average for the particular band. As noted in previous GMMPs, an exact error of measurement cannot be determined for the data. Conventional content analysis practice sees different researchers coding the same material and then working out an error level based on the differences between the two results. This exercise was undertaken in South Africa based on data coded by MMA among a team of six highly skilled monitors (or three pairs) and yielded an accuracy rate of 97.7%. Again, as with previous GMMPs, logistical constraints prevented further tests so no overall figure 62 Annex 1. Methodological Notes is available. The high level of accuracy achieved in South Africa is indicative that the methodology is clear, however a certain small level of error must be assumed. It is clear that any impact of the limitations of GMMP 2009/10 is negligible and the overall results and conclusions are not materially affected. As was the case in 2005, the GMMP could not have taken place without the invaluable assistance of hundreds of volunteers across the globe. Its growth and ongoing success is a tribute to their dedication and commitment to media monitoring and promoting gender equality. The weighting system was updated and checked together with Professor L. Paul Fatti, Emeritus Professor of Statistics at the University of the Witwatersrand. Similarly the GMMP results would not have been possible without the tireless efforts of a whole team at MMA, but especially, Stuart Florence, Prinola Govenden, and Albert van Houten. MMA thanks its data-capturers, checkers and analysts. From WACC, thanks go to the ever patient, GMMP consumed, Sarah Macharia and Lilian Ndangam, and more recently eagle-eyed Dermot O’Connor. Finally the success of GMMP is also owed to a host of exceptionally committed and dedicated country and regional coordinators who made sure we received the data, answered all our questions and were patient with the results. William Bird Director and Ashoka Fellow at Media Monitoring Africa, South Africa Data Analyst and Member of GMMP Methodology Virtual Working Group 1. The full GMMP monitoring methodology is available at www.whomakesthenews.org 2 The matrix is an adaptation of the Gender and Media (GEM) classification system developed by Gender Links for the Southern Africa Gender and Media Baseline Study. 63 Annex 1. Methodological Notes 63 Politics and government: 1 Women in political power and decision-making 2 Women electoral candidates 3 Peace, negotiations, treaties 4 Other domestic politics, government, etc. 5 Global partnerships 6 Foreign/international politics, UN, peacekeeping 7 National defence, military spending, internal security, etc. 8 Other stories on politics (specify in ‘comments’) Economy: 9 Economic policies, strategies, modules, etc. 10 Economic indicators, stats, stock markets, etc. 11 Economic crisis, state bailouts of companies, company takeovers and mergers, etc. 12 Poverty, housing, social welfare, aid, etc. 13 Women’s participation in economic process 14 Other labour issues (strikes, trade unions, etc.) 15 Rural economy, agriculture, farming, land rights 16 Consumer issues, consumer protection, fraud… 17 Transport, traffic, roads… 18 Other stories on economy (specify in ‘comments’) Science and health: 19 Science, technology, research, discoveries… 20 Medicine, health, hygiene, safety, (not HIV/AIDS) 21 HIV and AIDS, incidence, policy, treatment, etc. 22 Other epidemics, viruses, contagions, Influenza, BSE, SARS 23 Birth control, fertility, sterilization, termination… 24 Environment, pollution, global warming, tourism 25 Other stories on science (specify in ‘comments’) Social and legal: 26 Development issues, sustainability, etc. 27 Education, childcare, nursery, university, literacy 28 Family relations, inter-generational conflict, parents 29 Human rights, women’s rights, minority rights, etc. 30 Religion, culture, tradition, controversies… 31 Migration, refugees, xenophobia, ethnic conflict… 32 Women’s movement, activism, demonstrations, etc 33 Changing gender relations (outside the home) 34 Family law, family codes, property law, inheritance… 35 Legal system, judiciary, legislation apart from family 36 Other stories on social/legal (specify in ‘comments’) Crime and violence: 37 Non-violent crime, bribery, theft, drugs, corruption 38 Violent crime, murder, abduction, assault, etc. 39 Gender violence, feminicide, harassment, rape, trafficking, FGM 40 Child abuse, sexual violence against children, neglect 41 War, civil war, terrorism, state-based violence 42 Riots, demonstrations, public disorder 43 Disaster, accident, famine, flood, plane crash, etc. 44 Other crime/violence (specify in ‘comments’) Celebrity, arts, media, sports 45 Celebrity news, births, marriages, royalty, etc. 46 Arts, entertainment, leisure, cinema, books, dance 47 Media, (including internet), portrayal of women/men 48 Beauty contests, models, fashion, cosmetic surgery 49 Sports, events, players, facilities, training, funding 50 Other celebrity/arts/media news (specify in ‘comments’) The Girl-child 51 News about the girl child including: cultural attitudes, practices, education, health, economic exploitation Other 52 Use only as a last resort & explain. .GMMP news stories classification system 64 Annex 2. Index of Tables and Charts 1. Key findings: 1995-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi 2. Media monitored for GMMP: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Topics in the news: 2005-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Topics in the news. Regional comparisons: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Female news subjects by medium: 1995-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Female news subjects by region: 1995-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Overall presence of women in the news: 1995-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Female news subjects in local, national and international stories: 1995-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. Sex of news subjects in different story topics: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10. Occupations of female news subjects: 2000-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11. Functions of female news subjects: 2005-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 12. Functions of news subjects, by sex, by occupation: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 13. Age of news subjects in newspapers, by sex. 2005-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 14. Age of news subjects on television, by sex: 2005-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 15. Age of news sources (people interviewed), by sex: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 16. News subjects portrayed as victims, by sex: 2005-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 17. News subjects portrayed as survivors, by sex: 2005-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 18. News subjects identified by family status, by sex: 2000-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 19. News subjects by sex, identified by family status, by sex of reporter: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . 16 20. News subjects’ functions and family status, by sex: 2005-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 21. News subjects quoted in newspapers: 2000-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 22. News subjects photographed in newspapers, by sex: 2000-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 23. Stories by female presenters and reporters: 1995-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 24. Stories by female presenters and reporters, by region: 2000-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 25. Stories presented on radio and television, by region, by sex of announcer/presenter: 2010. . . . 23 26. Stories presented on television by female announcers, by age of announcer/presenter: 2010. . . 23 27. Stories by female reporters, by region, by medium : 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 28. Stories by female reporters, by region: 2000-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 65 Annex 2. Index of Tables and Charts 29. Stories by female reporters, by major topics: 2000-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 30. Stories by female reporters, by scope: 1995-2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 31. Female news subjects, by sex of reporter: 2000-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 32. Stories by female television news reporters, by age of reporter: 2005-2010. . . . . . . . . . . . 25 33. Women’s centrality in the news: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 34. Stories were issues of gender equality or inequality are raised, by region: 2005-2010. . . . . . 30 35. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by sex of reporter: 2005-2010. . . . . . . 30 36. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by region, by sex of reporter: 2010. . . . 30 37. Stories where issues of gender (in)equality are raised, by region, by sex of news subject: 2010.. 30 38. Whether stories raise issues of gender (in)equality: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 39. Stories and gender stereotypes, by topic: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 40. Stories and gender stereotypes, by region: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 41. Gender stereotypes in reportage, by sex of reporter: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 42. Gender stereotypes in reportage, by sex of reporter, by region: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 43. Gender stereotypes in story sub-topics: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 44. News stories citing gender equality or human and women’s rights instruments: 2010.. . . . . 36 45. GMMP 2010 results on selected Millennium Development Goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 46. Participating countries and number of news websites monitored . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 47. Main topics in internet news: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 48. Main topics in Internet news by sex of subject: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 49. Portrayal of Internet news subjects as victims, by sex: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 50. Internet news subjects in photographs and video components, by sex: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . 42 51. Main topics in Internet news, by sex of reporter: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 52. Internet news stories reported, by sex of reporter: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 53. Internet news stories and gender stereotypes by topic: 2010.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 54. Internet news stories and gender stereotypes: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 55. Women’s centrality in internet news stories: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 56. GMMP case studies classification matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 66 Annex 3. National Results 1. Sex of presenters, reporters and news subjects PRESENTER REPORTER SUBJECT TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 12 60% 8 40% 8 29% 20 71% 5 25% 15 75% 68 Botswana 13 62% 8 38% 9 39% 14 61% 2 10% 18 90% 64 Burkina Faso 9 53% 8 47% 13 25% 38 75% 34 27% 90 73% 192 Burundi 1 3% 31 97% 13 27% 35 73% 8 23% 27 77% 115 Cameroon 24 62% 15 38% 7 54% 6 46% 2 13% 13 87% 67 Congo, Dem Rep 7 70% 3 30% 6 17% 29 83% 3 13% 20 87% 68 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 8 100% 5 56% 4 44% 1 33% 2 67% 20 Ethiopia 13 41% 19 59% 6 30% 14 70% 2 6% 29 94% 83 Ghana 12 100% 0 0% 9 47% 10 53% 4 19% 17 81% 52 Guinée Conakry 36 92% 3 8% 10 17% 50 83% 6 15% 34 85% 139 Kenya 15 47% 17 53% 25 27% 68 73% 3 11% 24 89% 152 Lesotho 4 40% 6 60% 5 50% 5 50% 3 17% 15 83% 38 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 15 56% 12 44% 17 43% 23 58% 11 33% 22 67% 100 Mauritania 3 43% 4 57% 4 13% 26 87% 5 19% 22 81% 64 Mauritius 3 21% 11 79% 14 45% 17 55% 5 56% 4 44% 54 Namibia 30 75% 10 25% 7 30% 16 70% 4 33% 8 67% 75 Niger 1 8% 11 92% 8 20% 33 80% 2 11% 16 89% 71 Nigeria 8 44% 10 56% 18 24% 57 76% 6 11% 48 89% 147 Senegal 4 14% 25 86% 17 20% 67 80% 7 22% 25 78% 145 South Africa 14 64% 8 36% 41 29% 98 71% 26 19% 111 81% 298 Sudan (south) 0 0% 18 100% 0 0% 16 100% 0 0% 6 100% 40 Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 14 25% 42 75% 0 0% 3 100% 59 Togo 0 0% 0 0% 7 64% 4 36% 0 0% 8 100% 19 Uganda 4 24% 13 76% 13 26% 37 74% 8 24% 26 76% 101 Zambia 0 0% 50 100% 12 32% 25 68% 1 13% 7 88% 95 Zimbabwe 9 100% 0 0% 13 38% 21 62% 4 33% 8 67% 55 Asia Bangladesh 60 35% 113 65% 12 16% 65 84% 20 24% 65 76% 335 China 172 51% 162 49% 215 48% 237 52% 101 20% 416 80% 1303 India 38 45% 47 55% 56 29% 135 71% 114 27% 307 73% 697 Japan 49 64% 28 36% 11 20% 44 80% 15 22% 53 78% 200 Kyrgyzstan 42 49% 43 51% 31 69% 14 31% 17 20% 66 80% 213 Malaysia 105 51% 99 49% 55 49% 57 51% 64 15% 352 85% 732 Nepal 22 25% 65 75% 0 0% 42 100% 32 16% 168 84% 329 Pakistan 23 92% 2 8% 2 11% 17 89% 23 26% 64 74% 131 Philippines 147 48% 157 52% 116 44% 146 56% 59 31% 129 69% 754 South Korea 21 38% 34 62% 22 18% 98 82% 5 25% 15 75% 195 Taiwan 187 83% 37 17% 152 48% 165 52% 69 19% 296 81% 906 Thailand 91 62% 56 38% 34 69% 15 31% 109 15% 610 85% 915 Vietnam 31 41% 45 59% 36 47% 40 53% 36 25% 107 75% 295 Caribbean Belize 5 36% 9 64% 5 33% 10 67% 20 48% 22 52% 71 Dominican Republic 5 3% 169 97% 20 28% 51 72% 28 23% 93 77% 366 Grenada 12 46% 14 54% 9 82% 2 18% 1 5% 21 95% 59 Guyana 9 69% 4 31% 12 80% 3 20% 18 33% 36 67% 82 Haiti 28 44% 35 56% 12 27% 33 73% 30 25% 91 75% 229 Jamaica 76 74% 27 26% 26 41% 37 59% 36 18% 165 82% 367 Puerto Rico 17 49% 18 51% 52 54% 44 46% 32 27% 88 73% 251 St Lucia 4 80% 1 20% 1 100% 0 0% 1 14% 6 86% 13 Note: ‘News subjects’ in the National Results Charts refers only to people who the news is about. It excludes people interviewed other than the person the story is about. Only in Chart 5 does ‘news subjects’ refer to all people in the news – those interviewed and those who the story is about. In the 2005 GMMP report, in all charts in the annex ‘news subjects’ refers to both people interviewed and those who the story is about.  Chart 5 therefore is the only one referring to ‘news subjects’ that is strictly comparable in the 2005 and 2010 reports. 67 Annex 3. National Results 67 1. Sex of presenters, reporters and news subjects PRESENTER REPORTER SUBJECT TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % Caribbean St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 7 100% 6 100% 0 0% 4 29% 10 71% 27 Suriname 7 30% 16 70% 3 14% 19 86% 5 29% 12 71% 62 Trinidad & Tobago 6 14% 37 86% 23 56% 18 44% 3 7% 41 93% 128 Europe Austria 16 35% 30 65% 33 38% 55 63% 36 19% 153 81% 323 Belarus 28 37% 48 63% 22 46% 26 54% 0 0% 1 100% 125 Belgium 59 30% 141 71% 51 29% 127 71% 95 26% 270 74% 743 Bosnia & Herzegovina 60 85% 11 15% 41 58% 30 42% 28 25% 85 75% 255 Bulgaria 12 67% 6 33% 23 74% 8 26% 40 53% 35 47% 124 Croatia 27 48% 29 52% 35 53% 31 47% 19 29% 46 71% 187 Cyprus 53 47% 60 53% 44 39% 69 61% 17 20% 69 80% 312 Czech Republic 46 57% 35 43% 65 49% 67 51% 57 18% 261 82% 531 Denmark 0 0% 61 100% 37 30% 85 70% 21 26% 59 74% 263 Estonia 63 39% 98 61% 54 45% 65 55% 22 15% 128 85% 430 Finland 31 39% 49 61% 49 40% 73 60% 22 27% 61 73% 285 France 129 50% 127 50% 113 47% 127 53% 63 26% 181 74% 740 Georgia 34 30% 79 70% 42 42% 58 58% 3 6% 50 94% 266 Germany 49 34% 97 66% 50 29% 120 71% 76 26% 218 74% 610 Greece 88 55% 71 45% 73 34% 139 66% 85 32% 183 68% 639 Hungary 35 38% 57 62% 30 38% 49 62% 59 24% 192 76% 422 Iceland 21 23% 69 77% 25 33% 51 67% 16 23% 54 77% 236 Ireland, Republic of 0 0% 0 0% 6 60% 4 40% 5 83% 1 17% 16 Italy 145 69% 66 31% 101 43% 136 57% 108 18% 479 82% 1035 Kosovo 35 83% 7 17% 16 18% 75 82% 12 14% 73 86% 218 Malta 79 75% 27 25% 33 37% 56 63% 9 16% 49 84% 253 Montenegro 20 91% 2 9% 7 58% 5 42% 1 6% 16 94% 51 Netherlands 4 27% 11 73% 19 22% 68 78% 24 27% 65 73% 191 Norway 40 69% 18 31% 28 30% 65 70% 41 31% 91 69% 283 Poland 15 33% 31 67% 62 28% 161 72% 72 28% 181 72% 522 Portugal 22 79% 6 21% 66 55% 53 45% 25 18% 111 82% 283 Romania 22 69% 10 31% 70 59% 49 41% 55 32% 119 68% 325 Spain 129 65% 71 36% 85 44% 108 56% 55 29% 137 71% 585 Sweden 33 47% 37 53% 86 52% 80 48% 48 32% 104 68% 388 Switzerland 28 49% 29 51% 41 37% 71 63% 24 20% 99 80% 292 Turkey 0 0% 5 100% 45 19% 188 81% 51 24% 162 76% 451 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 114 51% 111 49% 112 32% 236 68% 150 30% 353 70% 1076 Latin America Argentina 36 32% 76 68% 30 42% 42 58% 32 28% 82 72% 298 Bolivia 25 45% 31 55% 16 53% 14 47% 10 27% 27 73% 123 Brazil 21 47% 24 53% 84 45% 102 55% 137 29% 328 71% 696 Chile 0 0% 0 0% 6 26% 17 74% 26 30% 61 70% 110 Costa Rica 29 25% 86 75% 16 32% 34 68% 11 20% 45 80% 221 Ecuador 112 62% 70 38% 53 37% 92 63% 27 25% 80 75% 434 El Salvador 8 29% 20 71% 30 41% 43 59% 1 25% 3 75% 105 Guatemala 19 23% 65 77% 37 31% 83 69% 13 17% 63 83% 280 Mexico 4 8% 49 92% 39 41% 57 59% 27 30% 62 70% 238 Nicaragua 26 30% 62 70% 38 64% 21 36% 45 31% 98 69% 290 Paraguay 52 49% 55 51% 34 35% 62 65% 18 16% 93 84% 314 Peru 31 29% 77 71% 30 38% 48 62% 54 35% 102 65% 342 Uruguay 64 39% 99 61% 27 30% 64 70% 33 16% 174 84% 461 Middle East Egypt 7 54% 6 46% 2 67% 1 33% 6 38% 10 63% 32 Israel 63 44% 79 56% 63 27% 170 73% 43 15% 239 85% 657 Jordan 14 93% 1 7% 19 61% 12 39% 2 13% 14 88% 62 Lebanon 55 60% 37 40% 26 43% 34 57% 38 5% 694 95% 884 Tunisia 162 62% 99 38% 16 29% 40 71% 53 22% 183 78% 553 United Arab Emirates 0 0% 7 100% 14 35% 26 65% 6 10% 53 90% 106 North America Canada 45 40% 68 60% 76 42% 105 58% 67 30% 159 70% 520 United States of America 3 33% 6 67% 29 29% 71 71% 34 23% 112 77% 255 Pacific Australia 47 27% 130 73% 51 34% 98 66% 73 25% 221 75% 620 Fiji 16 30% 37 70% 21 75% 7 25% 7 25% 21 75% 109 New Zealand 39 36% 69 64% 47 46% 55 54% 72 23% 248 78% 530 Papua New Guinea 18 100% 0 0% 18 38% 30 63% 7 21% 27 79% 100 Tonga 22 59% 15 41% 11 61% 7 39% 1 10% 9 90% 65 68 Annex 3. National Results 68 2. News subjects in television, radio and newspapers TELEVISION RADIO PRINT TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 5 26% 14 74% 5 25% 15 75% Botswana 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 4 100% 1 11% 8 89% 2 10% 18 90% Burkina Faso 2 50% 2 50% 2 15% 11 85% 30 28% 77 72% 34 27% 90 73% Burundi 5 38% 8 62% 2 17% 10 83% 1 10% 9 90% 8 23% 27 77% Cameroon 0 0% 3 100% 2 17% 10 83% 0 0% 0 0% 2 13% 13 87% Congo, Dem Rep 0 0% 9 100% 2 29% 5 71% 1 14% 6 86% 3 13% 20 87% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% Ethiopia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 2 7% 28 93% 2 6% 29 94% Ghana 0 0% 2 100% 2 22% 7 78% 2 20% 8 80% 4 19% 17 81% Guinée Conakry 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 9 100% 3 13% 20 87% 6 15% 34 85% Kenya 3 33% 6 67% 0 0% 11 100% 0 0% 7 100% 3 11% 24 89% Lesotho 2 50% 2 50% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 9 100% 3 17% 15 83% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 0 0% 3 100% 1 100% 0 0% 10 34% 19 66% 11 33% 22 67% Mauritania 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 2 100% 5 26% 14 74% 5 19% 22 81% Mauritius 0 0% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 3 60% 2 40% 5 56% 4 44% Namibia 0 0% 0 0% 2 29% 5 71% 2 40% 3 60% 4 33% 8 67% Niger 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 1 6% 15 94% 2 11% 16 89% Nigeria 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 13 100% 5 14% 31 86% 6 11% 48 89% Senegal 4 25% 12 75% 1 25% 3 75% 2 17% 10 83% 7 22% 25 78% South Africa 3 9% 30 91% 0 0% 0 0% 23 22% 81 78% 26 19% 111 81% Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 6 100% Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 3 100% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 8 100% Uganda 0 0% 0 0% 3 27% 8 73% 5 22% 18 78% 8 24% 26 76% Zambia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 1 20% 4 80% 1 13% 7 88% Zimbabwe 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 36% 7 64% 4 33% 8 67% Asia Bangladesh 2 20% 8 80% 3 27% 8 73% 15 23% 49 77% 20 24% 65 76% China 38 20% 154 80% 22 19% 94 81% 41 20% 168 80% 101 20% 416 80% India 23 21% 85 79% 9 17% 44 83% 82 32% 178 68% 114 27% 307 73% Japan 9 23% 31 78% 0 0% 1 100% 6 22% 21 78% 15 22% 53 78% Kyrgyzstan 2 40% 3 60% 1 13% 7 88% 14 20% 56 80% 17 20% 66 80% Malaysia 35 12% 249 88% 13 20% 53 80% 16 24% 50 76% 64 15% 352 85% Nepal 4 12% 30 88% 15 21% 56 79% 13 14% 82 86% 32 16% 168 84% Pakistan 2 50% 2 50% 1 10% 9 90% 20 27% 53 73% 23 26% 64 74% Philippines 13 22% 47 78% 34 40% 52 60% 12 29% 30 71% 59 31% 129 69% South Korea 0 0% 1 100% 2 50% 2 50% 3 20% 12 80% 5 25% 15 75% Taiwan 33 27% 91 73% 9 9% 91 91% 27 19% 114 81% 69 19% 296 81% Thailand 52 20% 204 80% 2 7% 26 93% 55 13% 380 87% 109 15% 610 85% Vietnam 0 0% 2 100% 9 26% 26 74% 27 25% 79 75% 36 25% 107 75% Caribbean Belize 0 0% 0 0% 6 46% 7 54% 14 48% 15 52% 20 48% 22 52% Dominican Republic 0 0% 2 100% 20 24% 64 76% 8 23% 27 77% 28 23% 93 77% Grenada 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 2 100% 1 7% 14 93% 1 5% 21 95% Guyana 1 20% 4 80% 2 22% 7 78% 15 38% 25 63% 18 33% 36 67% Haiti 0 0% 16 100% 30 30% 69 70% 0 0% 6 100% 30 25% 91 75% Jamaica 12 17% 60 83% 9 14% 55 86% 15 23% 50 77% 36 18% 165 82% Puerto Rico 13 41% 19 59% 2 13% 13 87% 17 23% 56 77% 32 27% 88 73% St Lucia 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 1 14% 6 86% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 4 100% 1 100% 0 0% 3 33% 6 67% 4 29% 10 71% Suriname 1 20% 4 80% 2 40% 3 60% 2 29% 5 71% 5 29% 12 71% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 23 100% 3 14% 18 86% 3 7% 41 93% Europe Austria 6 20% 24 80% 0 0% 10 100% 30 20% 119 80% 36 19% 153 81% Belarus 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% Belgium 27 35% 51 65% 11 22% 40 78% 57 24% 179 76% 95 26% 270 74% Bosnia & Herzegovina 7 23% 24 77% 4 24% 13 76% 17 26% 48 74% 28 25% 85 75% 69 Annex 3. National Results 69 2. News subjects in television, radio and newspapers TELEVISION RADIO PRINT TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Europe Bulgaria 4 44% 5 56% 3 18% 14 82% 33 67% 16 33% 40 53% 35 47% Croatia 11 38% 18 62% 2 40% 3 60% 6 19% 25 81% 19 29% 46 71% Cyprus 8 17% 38 83% 0 0% 10 100% 9 30% 21 70% 17 20% 69 80% Czech Republic 20 26% 57 74% 3 7% 42 93% 34 17% 162 83% 57 18% 261 82% Denmark 2 11% 16 89% 0 0% 0 0% 19 31% 43 69% 21 26% 59 74% Estonia 3 10% 27 90% 4 8% 46 92% 15 21% 55 79% 22 15% 128 85% Finland 4 31% 9 69% 1 25% 3 75% 17 26% 49 74% 22 27% 61 73% France 18 39% 28 61% 23 26% 66 74% 22 20% 87 80% 63 26% 181 74% Georgia 1 7% 13 93% 1 4% 23 96% 1 7% 14 93% 3 6% 50 94% Germany 34 30% 78 70% 6 23% 20 77% 36 23% 120 77% 76 26% 218 74% Greece 41 38% 68 62% 5 19% 22 81% 39 30% 93 70% 85 32% 183 68% Hungary 9 26% 26 74% 5 19% 21 81% 45 24% 145 76% 59 24% 192 76% Iceland 6 26% 17 74% 6 23% 20 77% 4 19% 17 81% 16 23% 54 77% Ireland, Republic of 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 5 83% 1 17% Italy 41 22% 143 78% 10 10% 92 90% 57 19% 244 81% 108 18% 479 82% Kosovo 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 0 0% 12 16% 63 84% 12 14% 73 86% Malta 4 11% 33 89% 1 13% 7 88% 4 31% 9 69% 9 16% 49 84% Montenegro 1 7% 13 93% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 6% 16 94% Netherlands 0 0% 4 100% 2 22% 7 78% 22 29% 54 71% 24 27% 65 73% Norway 10 26% 29 74% 1 11% 8 89% 30 36% 54 64% 41 31% 91 69% Poland 6 43% 8 57% 12 26% 34 74% 54 28% 139 72% 72 28% 181 72% Portugal 10 22% 36 78% 1 5% 19 95% 14 20% 56 80% 25 18% 111 82% Romania 4 27% 11 73% 7 50% 7 50% 44 30% 101 70% 55 32% 119 68% Spain 21 34% 41 66% 14 26% 39 74% 20 26% 57 74% 55 29% 137 71% Sweden 5 19% 21 81% 0 0% 7 100% 43 36% 76 64% 48 32% 104 68% Switzerland 6 18% 28 82% 3 14% 18 86% 15 22% 53 78% 24 20% 99 80% Turkey 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 50 24% 159 76% 51 24% 162 76% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 48 31% 107 69% 41 25% 120 75% 61 33% 126 67% 150 30% 353 70% Latin America Argentina 11 21% 41 79% 9 38% 15 63% 12 32% 26 68% 32 28% 82 72% Bolivia 8 35% 15 65% 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 8 100% 10 27% 27 73% Brazil 11 46% 13 54% 2 20% 8 80% 124 29% 307 71% 137 29% 328 71% Chile 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 26 30% 61 70% 26 30% 61 70% Costa Rica 3 25% 9 75% 1 7% 14 93% 7 24% 22 76% 11 20% 45 80% Ecuador 8 22% 29 78% 0 0% 6 100% 19 30% 45 70% 27 25% 80 75% El Salvador 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 1 25% 3 75% Guatemala 6 26% 17 74% 3 7% 39 93% 4 36% 7 64% 13 17% 63 83% Mexico 0 0% 0 0% 6 18% 27 82% 21 38% 35 63% 27 30% 62 70% Nicaragua 16 33% 33 67% 22 32% 47 68% 7 28% 18 72% 45 31% 98 69% Paraguay 1 20% 4 80% 5 28% 13 72% 12 14% 76 86% 18 16% 93 84% Peru 15 31% 33 69% 13 26% 37 74% 26 45% 32 55% 54 35% 102 65% Uruguay 30 19% 131 81% 2 11% 16 89% 1 4% 27 96% 33 16% 174 84% Middle East Egypt 5 36% 9 64% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 6 38% 10 63% Israel 9 15% 52 85% 18 12% 129 88% 16 22% 58 78% 43 15% 239 85% Jordan 1 33% 2 67% 1 11% 8 89% 0 0% 4 100% 2 13% 14 88% Lebanon 17 6% 292 94% 7 4% 152 96% 14 5% 250 95% 38 5% 694 95% Tunisia 25 27% 68 73% 28 20% 109 80% 0 0% 6 100% 53 22% 183 78% United Arab Emirates 2 22% 7 78% 0 0% 0 0% 4 8% 46 92% 6 10% 53 90% North America Canada 21 48% 23 52% 3 11% 25 89% 43 28% 111 72% 67 30% 159 70% United States of America 2 18% 9 82% 0 0% 0 0% 32 24% 103 76% 34 23% 112 77% Pacific Australia 28 32% 60 68% 13 21% 48 79% 32 22% 113 78% 73 25% 221 75% Fiji 2 18% 9 82% 1 14% 6 86% 4 40% 6 60% 7 25% 21 75% New Zealand 17 13% 113 87% 11 28% 28 72% 44 29% 107 71% 72 23% 248 78% Papua New Guinea 2 40% 3 60% 1 17% 5 83% 4 17% 19 83% 7 21% 27 79% Tonga 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 1 17% 5 83% 1 10% 9 90% 70 Annex 3. National Results 70 3. News subjects in major topic areas Politics and Government Economy Science and Health Social and Legal FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 1 25% 3 75% 1 33% 2 67% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% Botswana 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% Burkina Faso 3 11% 25 89% 2 15% 11 85% 3 21% 11 79% 22 48% 24 52% Burundi 3 25% 9 75% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 3 100% 4 40% 6 60% Cameroon 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 1 100% 0 0% Congo, Dem Rep 1 8% 11 92% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 3 100% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Ethiopia 1 6% 15 94% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 3 100% Ghana 1 33% 2 67% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 2 100% 1 17% 5 83% Guinée Conakry 2 7% 26 93% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 3 60% 2 40% Kenya 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% 1 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 5 100% Lesotho 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 1 100% 1 33% 2 67% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 2 15% 11 85% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 2 100% 0 0% Mauritania 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% 2 100% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 3 100% Mauritius 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Namibia 1 20% 4 80% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% Niger 1 11% 8 89% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% Nigeria 1 7% 13 93% 2 13% 13 87% 0 0% 1 100% 3 15% 17 85% Senegal 2 13% 13 87% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 5 83% 1 17% South Africa 4 24% 13 76% 6 18% 27 82% 1 25% 3 75% 1 8% 11 92% Sudan (south) 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Tanzania 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Togo 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Uganda 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 17% 5 83% Zambia 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Zimbabwe 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Asia Bangladesh 7 35% 13 65% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 1 100% 3 17% 15 83% China 30 14% 179 86% 8 16% 41 84% 5 19% 21 81% 24 39% 38 61% India 40 23% 133 77% 4 16% 21 84% 4 67% 2 33% 18 38% 30 63% Japan 4 15% 22 85% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 1 33% 2 67% Kyrgyzstan 8 17% 38 83% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 1 25% 3 75% Malaysia 9 10% 77 90% 3 5% 53 95% 1 9% 10 91% 9 14% 55 86% Nepal 10 9% 103 91% 2 10% 18 90% 5 45% 6 55% 2 20% 8 80% Pakistan 1 4% 26 96% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 3 25% 9 75% Philippines 23 35% 42 65% 4 33% 8 67% 2 50% 2 50% 2 33% 4 67% South Korea 3 25% 9 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Taiwan 20 16% 104 84% 10 20% 39 80% 2 17% 10 83% 17 31% 38 69% Thailand 5 2% 226 98% 18 15% 100 85% 5 28% 13 72% 7 9% 68 91% Vietnam 2 7% 25 93% 4 11% 32 89% 4 25% 12 75% 6 46% 7 54% Caribbean Belize 0 0% 2 100% 3 33% 6 67% 3 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% Dominican Republic 7 19% 29 81% 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% 2 100% 7 39% 11 61% Grenada 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% Guyana 1 17% 5 83% 4 57% 3 43% 0 0% 3 100% 4 67% 2 33% Haiti 18 23% 59 77% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 10 59% 7 41% Jamaica 0 0% 11 100% 8 28% 21 72% 1 17% 5 83% 6 46% 7 54% Puerto Rico 3 12% 22 88% 2 13% 14 88% 7 78% 2 22% 5 24% 16 76% St Lucia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 1 33% 2 67% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% Suriname 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 57% 3 43% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 4 100% Europe Austria 11 17% 55 83% 0 0% 4 100% 6 32% 13 68% 1 7% 13 93% Belarus 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Belgium 22 17% 110 83% 5 21% 19 79% 2 33% 4 67% 11 35% 20 65% Bosnia & Herzegovina 13 25% 38 75% 3 38% 5 63% 1 50% 1 50% 4 29% 10 71% 71 Annex 3. National Results 71 Crime and Violence Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports The Girl-child Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Benin 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 5 25% 15 75% Botswana 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 2 11% 17 89% Burkina Faso 4 80% 1 20% 0 0% 18 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 34 27% 90 73% Burundi 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 8 23% 27 77% Cameroon 0 0% 4 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 13% 13 87% Congo, Dem Rep 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 3 13% 20 87% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 33% 2 67% Ethiopia 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 6% 29 94% Ghana 0 0% 4 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0 4 19% 17 81% Guinée Conakry 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 6 16% 32 84% Kenya 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 3 11% 24 89% Lesotho 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 3 17% 15 83% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 3 33% 6 67% 3 60% 2 40% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 11 33% 22 67% Mauritania 1 50% 1 50% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 5 19% 22 81% Mauritius 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0 5 56% 4 44% Namibia 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 4 33% 8 67% Niger 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 11% 16 89% Nigeria 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 11% 48 89% Senegal 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 7 22% 25 78% South Africa 9 21% 34 79% 5 18% 23 82% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 26 19% 111 81% Sudan (south) 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 6 100% Tanzania 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 3 100% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 8 100% Uganda 5 29% 12 71% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 7 21% 26 79% Zambia 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 13% 7 88% Zimbabwe 2 33% 4 67% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 4 33% 8 67% Bangladesh 6 16% 32 84% 3 50% 3 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 20 24% 65 76% China 21 20% 86 80% 12 20% 49 80% 1 100% 0 0% 0 2 101 20% 414 80% India 43 32% 93 68% 4 13% 28 88% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 114 27% 307 73% Japan 8 35% 15 65% 2 17% 10 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 15 22% 53 78% Kyrgyzstan 0 0% 6 100% 6 25% 18 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 17 20% 66 80% Malaysia 26 21% 100 79% 14 21% 53 79% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4 62 15% 348 85% Nepal 9 47% 10 53% 4 15% 23 85% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 32 16% 168 84% Pakistan 17 40% 25 60% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 23 26% 64 74% Philippines 6 12% 46 88% 22 45% 27 55% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 59 31% 129 69% South Korea 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 5 28% 13 72% Taiwan 8 8% 88 92% 7 32% 15 68% 4 67% 2 33% 1 0 68 19% 296 81% Thailand 36 19% 156 81% 38 45% 47 55% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 109 15% 610 85% Vietnam 14 40% 21 60% 6 38% 10 63% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 36 25% 107 75% Belize 11 44% 14 56% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 20 48% 22 52% Dominican Republic 12 23% 41 77% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 28 23% 93 77% Grenada 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 12 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 1 5% 20 95% Guyana 6 22% 21 78% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 2 17 33% 34 67% Haiti 1 11% 8 89% 0 0% 16 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1 29 24% 90 76% Jamaica 17 13% 117 87% 3 50% 3 50% 1 100% 0 0% 0 1 36 18% 164 82% Puerto Rico 5 20% 20 80% 9 39% 14 61% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 32 27% 88 73% St Lucia 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 14% 6 86% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 4 29% 10 71% Suriname 0 0% 3 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 5 31% 11 69% Trinidad & Tobago 1 5% 21 95% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 3 7% 41 93% Austria 14 19% 60 81% 4 33% 8 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 36 19% 153 81% Belarus 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 1 100% Belgium 40 39% 62 61% 14 21% 53 79% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0 95 26% 270 74% Bosnia & Herzegovina 4 14% 24 86% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 28 25% 85 75% 72 Annex 3. National Results 72 3. News subjects in major topic areas Politics and Government Economy Science and Health Social and Legal FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Europe Bulgaria 7 27% 19 73% 3 60% 2 40% 8 80% 2 20% 4 80% 1 20% Croatia 7 21% 26 79% 0 0% 2 100% 5 63% 3 38% 1 33% 2 67% Cyprus 4 12% 29 88% 0 0% 1 100% 1 20% 4 80% 3 38% 5 63% Czech Republic 18 10% 170 90% 1 6% 16 94% 0 0% 1 100% 11 33% 22 67% Denmark 3 13% 21 88% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% Estonia 5 9% 49 91% 4 20% 16 80% 0 0% 1 100% 7 58% 5 42% Finland 7 25% 21 75% 0 0% 2 100% 4 40% 6 60% 1 17% 5 83% France 17 20% 68 80% 8 27% 22 73% 9 45% 11 55% 11 69% 5 31% Georgia 1 4% 22 96% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% Germany 33 23% 112 77% 6 15% 34 85% 10 43% 13 57% 1 8% 11 92% Greece 36 27% 95 73% 3 12% 23 88% 9 56% 7 44% 8 33% 16 67% Hungary 19 16% 100 84% 1 6% 16 94% 9 43% 12 57% 1 7% 14 93% Iceland 3 33% 6 67% 5 25% 15 75% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% Ireland, Republic of 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Italy 41 14% 246 86% 1 11% 8 89% 5 25% 15 75% 9 15% 52 85% Kosovo 7 10% 62 90% 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 4 100% Malta 3 25% 9 75% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 2 40% 3 60% Montenegro 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% Netherlands 7 26% 20 74% 1 25% 3 75% 4 44% 5 56% 4 27% 11 73% Norway 14 32% 30 68% 5 33% 10 67% 5 63% 3 38% 4 50% 4 50% Poland 11 15% 60 85% 5 31% 11 69% 6 38% 10 63% 11 44% 14 56% Portugal 5 17% 24 83% 1 17% 5 83% 1 20% 4 80% 10 38% 16 62% Romania 10 17% 48 83% 4 22% 14 78% 5 31% 11 69% 2 22% 7 78% Spain 15 23% 49 77% 7 47% 8 53% 3 33% 6 67% 4 50% 4 50% Sweden 6 30% 14 70% 9 45% 11 55% 5 24% 16 76% 2 9% 20 91% Switzerland 9 20% 36 80% 5 24% 16 76% 1 25% 3 75% 3 60% 2 40% Turkey 11 17% 54 83% 0 0% 4 100% 2 50% 2 50% 4 14% 24 86% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 30 18% 141 82% 3 21% 11 79% 3 27% 8 73% 33 49% 34 51% Latin America Argentina 13 35% 24 65% 8 42% 11 58% 1 25% 3 75% 2 14% 12 86% Bolivia 6 30% 14 70% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% Brazil 30 15% 175 85% 13 27% 35 73% 36 51% 35 49% 31 34% 60 66% Chile 6 16% 32 84% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 4 33% 8 67% Costa Rica 3 16% 16 84% 0 0% 2 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Ecuador 0 0% 10 100% 5 26% 14 74% 2 67% 1 33% 6 24% 19 76% El Salvador 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Guatemala 1 7% 14 93% 0 0% 2 100% 2 67% 1 33% 3 100% 0 0% Mexico 2 11% 17 89% 3 20% 12 80% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 12 100% Nicaragua 6 30% 14 70% 2 25% 6 75% 8 44% 10 56% 6 27% 16 73% Paraguay 0 0% 31 100% 3 38% 5 63% 3 33% 6 67% 4 40% 6 60% Peru 0 0% 6 100% 3 75% 1 25% 2 29% 5 71% 8 50% 8 50% Uruguay 11 10% 99 90% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 1 100% 3 50% 3 50% Middle East Egypt 1 50% 1 50% 1 20% 4 80% 1 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% Israel 9 7% 116 93% 3 15% 17 85% 3 14% 19 86% 8 28% 21 72% Jordan 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% Lebanon 35 5% 636 95% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 8 100% 1 5% 18 95% Tunisia 23 16% 121 84% 0 0% 18 100% 0 0% 1 100% 9 53% 8 47% United Arab Emirates 1 5% 20 95% 0 0% 11 100% 0 0% 6 100% 2 50% 2 50% North America Canada 18 25% 53 75% 4 80% 1 20% 2 13% 13 87% 13 39% 20 61% United States of America 14 33% 28 67% 2 67% 1 33% 2 25% 6 75% 4 31% 9 69% Pacific Australia 11 23% 37 77% 2 20% 8 80% 3 60% 2 40% 13 20% 53 80% Fiji 0 0% 7 100% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% New Zealand 24 22% 87 78% 4 17% 20 83% 6 38% 10 63% 10 29% 24 71% Papua New Guinea 1 11% 8 89% 0 0% 4 100% 1 100% 0 0% 3 38% 5 63% Tonga 0 0% 5 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 73 Annex 3. National Results 73 Crime and Violence Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports The Girl-child Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Bulgaria 16 67% 8 33% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 40 53% 35 47% Croatia 5 38% 8 62% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 18 28% 46 72% Cyprus 4 14% 25 86% 5 50% 5 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 17 20% 69 80% Czech Republic 19 32% 41 68% 7 50% 7 50% 0 0% 0 0% 1 4 56 18% 257 82% Denmark 7 39% 11 61% 10 31% 22 69% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 21 27% 58 73% Estonia 3 9% 32 91% 3 11% 25 89% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 22 15% 128 85% Finland 6 29% 15 71% 3 20% 12 80% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 21 26% 61 74% France 8 13% 52 87% 7 24% 22 76% 0 0% 0 0% 3 1 60 25% 180 75% Georgia 1 5% 18 95% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 3 6% 50 94% Germany 17 44% 22 56% 9 27% 24 73% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 76 26% 216 74% Greece 7 44% 9 56% 20 41% 29 59% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4 83 32% 179 68% Hungary 16 44% 20 56% 11 28% 29 73% 0 0% 0 0% 2 1 57 23% 191 77% Iceland 4 17% 20 83% 4 31% 9 69% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 16 23% 54 77% Ireland, Republic of 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 5 83% 1 17% Italy 42 25% 124 75% 7 17% 34 83% 0 0% 0 0% 3 0 105 18% 479 82% Kosovo 0 0% 2 100% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 12 14% 73 86% Malta 2 11% 17 89% 1 5% 18 95% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 9 16% 49 84% Montenegro 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 6% 16 94% Netherlands 2 22% 7 78% 6 24% 19 76% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 24 27% 65 73% Norway 5 14% 32 86% 8 40% 12 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 41 31% 91 69% Poland 28 30% 64 70% 8 30% 19 70% 3 60% 2 40% 0 1 72 29% 180 71% Portugal 7 13% 45 87% 1 6% 17 94% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 25 18% 111 82% Romania 6 35% 11 65% 28 51% 27 49% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 55 32% 118 68% Spain 20 32% 42 68% 4 13% 27 87% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0 55 29% 137 71% Sweden 12 46% 14 54% 14 33% 29 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 48 32% 104 68% Switzerland 2 7% 28 93% 4 22% 14 78% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 24 20% 99 80% Turkey 24 37% 41 63% 7 24% 22 76% 0 0% 0 0% 3 15 48 25% 147 75% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 37 30% 87 70% 25 30% 59 70% 0 0% 0 0% 19 13 131 28% 340 72% Argentina 3 43% 4 57% 3 11% 25 89% 0 0% 0 0% 2 3 30 28% 79 72% Bolivia 4 31% 9 69% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 10 27% 27 73% Brazil 27 54% 23 46% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 137 29% 328 71% Chile 12 44% 15 56% 2 33% 4 67% 1 100% 0 0% 1 0 25 29% 61 71% Costa Rica 4 15% 22 85% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 1 8 15% 44 85% Ecuador 14 29% 34 71% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 27 25% 80 75% El Salvador 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 25% 3 75% Guatemala 4 11% 34 89% 3 21% 11 79% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 13 17% 62 83% Mexico 7 39% 11 61% 15 65% 8 35% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 27 30% 62 70% Nicaragua 20 31% 45 69% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 45 31% 98 69% Paraguay 7 13% 45 87% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 17 15% 93 85% Peru 17 27% 47 73% 21 38% 35 63% 0 0% 0 0% 3 0 51 33% 102 67% Uruguay 10 24% 32 76% 5 13% 34 87% 0 0% 0 0% 2 2 31 15% 172 85% Egypt 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 6 40% 9 60% Israel 15 21% 55 79% 5 36% 9 64% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 43 15% 237 85% Jordan 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 13% 14 88% Lebanon 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 22 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 37 5% 694 95% Tunisia 0 0% 13 100% 20 49% 21 51% 1 100% 0 0% 0 1 53 23% 182 77% United Arab Emirates 3 19% 13 81% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 10% 53 90% Canada 23 28% 59 72% 7 41% 10 59% 0 0% 0 0% 0 3 67 30% 156 70% United States of America 7 10% 64 90% 4 50% 4 50% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 34 23% 112 77% Australia 36 35% 67 65% 6 10% 53 90% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0 73 25% 221 75% Fiji 2 22% 7 78% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 7 25% 21 75% New Zealand 23 46% 27 54% 4 5% 80 95% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 71 22% 248 78% Papua New Guinea 0 0% 6 100% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 7 21% 26 79% Tonga 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 74 Annex 3. National Results 74 4. News subjects in major occupational groups Not Stated Politician Government employee Education, Health FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 2 50% 2 50% 1 100% 0 0% Botswana 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 7 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% Burkina Faso 1 50% 1 50% 8 22% 29 78% 1 9% 10 91% 0 0% 9 100% Burundi 1 33% 2 67% 2 14% 12 86% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 1 100% Cameroon 0 0% 0 0% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% Congo, Dem Rep 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 12 92% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Ethiopia 0 0% 0 0% 1 6% 17 94% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% Ghana 0 0% 0 0% 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% Guinée Conakry 0 0% 1 100% 3 10% 27 90% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% Kenya 1 50% 1 50% 2 17% 10 83% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% Lesotho 1 33% 2 67% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 2 67% 1 33% 2 18% 9 82% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% Mauritania 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 9 100% 2 40% 3 60% 1 100% 0 0% Mauritius 0 0% 3 100% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Namibia 0 0% 0 0% 2 29% 5 71% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% Niger 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% Nigeria 0 0% 2 100% 3 18% 14 82% 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 1 100% Senegal 0 0% 0 0% 2 13% 14 88% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% South Africa 4 40% 6 60% 5 28% 13 72% 1 11% 8 89% 1 50% 1 50% Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Uganda 5 71% 2 29% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% Zambia 0 0% 0 0% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Zimbabwe 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% Asia Bangladesh 4 67% 2 33% 10 20% 41 80% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% China 27 45% 33 55% 7 6% 116 94% 7 10% 65 90% 11 38% 18 62% India 9 35% 17 65% 38 24% 122 76% 6 17% 29 83% 2 67% 1 33% Japan 2 29% 5 71% 1 5% 19 95% 0 0% 0 0% 7 70% 3 30% Kyrgyzstan 2 33% 4 67% 4 17% 19 83% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 1 100% Malaysia 15 43% 20 57% 16 9% 163 91% 0 0% 9 100% 2 18% 9 82% Nepal 0 0% 0 0% 11 10% 102 90% 3 12% 23 88% 0 0% 2 100% Pakistan 1 50% 1 50% 2 8% 24 92% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% Philippines 0 0% 0 0% 21 38% 35 63% 4 19% 17 81% 2 11% 16 89% South Korea 1 100% 0 0% 1 13% 7 88% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% Taiwan 2 33% 4 67% 20 12% 151 88% 0 0% 2 100% 7 41% 10 59% Thailand 10 42% 14 58% 12 5% 249 95% 9 10% 84 90% 4 13% 27 87% Vietnam 0 0% 0 0% 5 13% 33 87% 8 16% 41 84% 0 0% 2 100% Caribbean Belize 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% Dominican Republic 3 43% 4 57% 2 6% 30 94% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 9 100% Grenada 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Guyana 1 14% 6 86% 1 9% 10 91% 2 67% 1 33% 2 40% 3 60% Haiti 3 50% 3 50% 25 29% 62 71% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Jamaica 2 13% 13 87% 3 8% 34 92% 0 0% 3 100% 3 43% 4 57% Puerto Rico 2 29% 5 71% 7 14% 43 86% 0 0% 4 100% 5 71% 2 29% St Lucia 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 1 100% 1 20% 4 80% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Suriname 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% Europe Austria 9 31% 20 69% 11 17% 53 83% 1 100% 0 0% 2 22% 7 78% Belarus 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Belgium 12 46% 14 54% 31 22% 112 78% 0 0% 1 100% 3 43% 4 57% Bosnia & Herzegovina 0 0% 1 100% 13 23% 44 77% 2 40% 3 60% 1 50% 1 50% 75 Annex 3. National Results 75 Business, Law Celeberity Sportsperson Activist, NGO Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 2 29% 5 71% 5 25% 15 75% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% 2 10% 18 90% 4 22% 14 78% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 9 100% 8 62% 5 38% 12 57% 9 43% 34 27% 90 73% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 1 20% 4 80% 8 23% 27 77% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 2 13% 13 87% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 33% 4 67% 3 13% 20 87% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 4 100% 2 6% 29 94% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 5 100% 4 19% 17 81% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 6 15% 34 85% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 10 100% 3 11% 24 89% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 3 100% 3 17% 15 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 5 45% 6 55% 11 33% 22 67% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 2 29% 5 71% 5 19% 22 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 5 56% 4 44% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 4 33% 8 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 2 11% 16 89% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 2 13% 14 88% 6 11% 48 89% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 3 33% 6 67% 7 22% 25 78% 2 8% 22 92% 3 25% 9 75% 1 5% 18 95% 0 0% 0 0% 9 21% 34 79% 26 19% 111 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 7% 13 93% 8 24% 26 76% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 1 13% 7 88% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% 4 33% 8 67% 2 67% 1 33% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 3 19% 13 81% 20 24% 65 76% 4 14% 25 86% 7 33% 14 67% 4 17% 20 83% 0 0% 1 100% 34 22% 124 78% 101 20% 416 80% 4 10% 36 90% 6 67% 3 33% 1 4% 23 96% 4 100% 0 0% 44 37% 76 63% 114 27% 307 73% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 5 100% 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% 0 0% 3 21% 11 79% 15 22% 53 78% 0 0% 7 100% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 6 100% 10 38% 16 62% 17 20% 66 80% 1 4% 26 96% 8 89% 1 11% 7 10% 66 90% 0 0% 2 100% 15 21% 56 79% 64 15% 352 85% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 20% 16 80% 1 17% 5 83% 13 42% 18 58% 32 16% 168 84% 0 0% 4 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 17 35% 31 65% 23 26% 64 74% 1 100% 0 0% 18 56% 14 44% 1 9% 10 91% 0 0% 1 100% 12 25% 36 75% 59 31% 129 69% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 13% 7 88% 5 25% 15 75% 4 12% 29 88% 5 71% 2 29% 0 0% 4 100% 2 33% 4 67% 29 24% 90 76% 69 19% 296 81% 12 18% 55 82% 10 59% 7 41% 1 17% 5 83% 1 9% 10 91% 50 24% 159 76% 109 15% 610 85% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 4 100% 21 53% 19 48% 36 25% 107 75% 4 33% 8 67% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 12 63% 7 37% 20 48% 22 52% 4 57% 3 43% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 2 25% 6 75% 17 31% 38 69% 28 23% 93 77% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 17% 5 83% 1 5% 21 95% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 8 40% 12 60% 18 33% 36 67% 1 25% 3 75% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 13 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 30 25% 91 75% 8 47% 9 53% 2 33% 4 67% 1 100% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 15 13% 97 87% 36 18% 165 82% 3 27% 8 73% 5 38% 8 62% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 1 100% 9 43% 12 57% 32 27% 88 73% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 1 14% 6 86% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 3 100% 4 29% 10 71% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 5 29% 12 71% 1 11% 8 89% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 6% 17 94% 3 7% 41 93% 0 0% 17 100% 1 14% 6 86% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 0 0% 10 19% 44 81% 36 19% 153 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 2 18% 9 82% 9 24% 29 76% 5 22% 18 78% 0 0% 2 100% 33 29% 81 71% 95 26% 270 74% 1 25% 3 75% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 4 100% 2 29% 5 71% 7 25% 21 75% 28 25% 85 75% 76 Annex 3. National Results 76 4. News subjects in major occupational groups Not Stated Politician Government employee Education, Health FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Europe Bulgaria 12 86% 2 14% 5 25% 15 75% 1 100% 0 0% 3 60% 2 40% Croatia 2 40% 3 60% 7 20% 28 80% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Cyprus 2 13% 14 88% 3 8% 37 93% 3 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% Czech Republic 9 45% 11 55% 24 16% 123 84% 1 7% 13 93% 6 26% 17 74% Denmark 1 50% 1 50% 3 21% 11 79% 2 40% 3 60% 1 100% 0 0% Estonia 0 0% 2 100% 7 15% 39 85% 3 20% 12 80% 1 13% 7 88% Finland 7 54% 6 46% 8 29% 20 71% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% France 3 60% 2 40% 20 17% 98 83% 1 25% 3 75% 6 46% 7 54% Georgia 1 100% 0 0% 1 4% 24 96% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 1 100% Germany 8 47% 9 53% 27 20% 108 80% 1 33% 2 67% 4 57% 3 43% Greece 2 40% 3 60% 42 27% 115 73% 4 31% 9 69% 3 33% 6 67% Hungary 3 38% 5 63% 22 16% 118 84% 0 0% 3 100% 3 25% 9 75% Iceland 0 0% 5 100% 8 42% 11 58% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% Ireland, Republic of 2 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Italy 19 37% 33 63% 37 11% 285 89% 0 0% 6 100% 1 17% 5 83% Kosovo 0 0% 0 0% 9 13% 63 88% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% Malta 4 80% 1 20% 0 0% 15 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% Montenegro 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% Netherlands 0 0% 3 100% 9 23% 30 77% 1 17% 5 83% 2 40% 3 60% Norway 0 0% 1 100% 17 29% 41 71% 3 60% 2 40% 5 83% 1 17% Poland 18 64% 10 36% 18 20% 74 80% 10 53% 9 47% 2 40% 3 60% Portugal 9 53% 8 47% 10 24% 31 76% 1 9% 10 91% 1 50% 1 50% Romania 8 62% 5 38% 9 16% 49 84% 0 0% 6 100% 2 50% 2 50% Spain 14 67% 7 33% 19 25% 57 75% 1 50% 1 50% 2 50% 2 50% Sweden 8 32% 17 68% 6 19% 26 81% 1 50% 1 50% 1 100% 0 0% Switzerland 3 30% 7 70% 9 19% 39 81% 2 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% Turkey 18 69% 8 31% 2 3% 56 97% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 35 37% 60 63% 18 18% 82 82% 4 57% 3 43% 15 71% 6 29% Latin America Argentina 3 60% 2 40% 22 42% 31 58% 0 0% 1 100% 1 20% 4 80% Bolivia 0 0% 0 0% 6 35% 11 65% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% Brazil 12 41% 17 59% 26 14% 154 86% 4 17% 20 83% 9 32% 19 68% Chile 10 67% 5 33% 4 11% 31 89% 0 0% 1 100% 2 67% 1 33% Costa Rica 1 20% 4 80% 7 30% 16 70% 0 0% 6 100% 1 100% 0 0% Ecuador 7 58% 5 42% 1 5% 20 95% 1 17% 5 83% 3 75% 1 25% El Salvador 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Guatemala 1 5% 19 95% 0 0% 18 100% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% Mexico 2 40% 3 60% 2 7% 26 93% 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 0 0% Nicaragua 11 33% 22 67% 3 12% 22 88% 2 22% 7 78% 1 100% 0 0% Paraguay 0 0% 0 0% 7 19% 30 81% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% Peru 6 40% 9 60% 3 16% 16 84% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Uruguay 4 24% 13 76% 9 9% 95 91% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 2 100% Middle East Egypt 0 0% 0 0% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% Israel 13 43% 17 57% 3 3% 112 97% 2 14% 12 86% 3 30% 7 70% Jordan 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Lebanon 1 25% 3 75% 31 5% 535 95% 1 4% 24 96% 2 25% 6 75% Tunisia 0 0% 2 100% 24 15% 136 85% 3 50% 3 50% 0 0% 0 0% United Arab Emirates 1 100% 0 0% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% North America Canada 13 32% 28 68% 13 23% 43 77% 3 60% 2 40% 2 15% 11 85% United States of America 4 44% 5 56% 8 31% 18 69% 0 0% 1 100% 7 41% 10 59% Pacific Australia 21 48% 23 52% 17 21% 64 79% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 4 100% Fiji 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% New Zealand 17 63% 10 37% 19 16% 100 84% 3 27% 8 73% 4 67% 2 33% Papua New Guinea 0 0% 0 0% 1 10% 9 90% 1 25% 3 75% 1 100% 0 0% Tonga 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 77 Annex 3. National Results 77 Business, Law Celeberity Sportsperson Activist, NGO Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 3 60% 2 40% 3 50% 3 50% 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 12 55% 10 45% 40 53% 35 47% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 8 44% 10 56% 19 29% 46 71% 0 0% 3 100% 2 40% 3 60% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 5 38% 8 62% 17 20% 69 80% 3 21% 11 79% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 13 14% 81 86% 57 18% 261 82% 0 0% 3 100% 7 54% 6 46% 1 9% 10 91% 0 0% 0 0% 6 19% 25 81% 21 26% 59 74% 2 14% 12 86% 3 13% 21 88% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 0 0% 3 10% 28 90% 22 15% 128 85% 0 0% 2 100% 3 27% 8 73% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 3 14% 19 86% 22 27% 61 73% 3 23% 10 77% 6 33% 12 67% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 3 100% 24 39% 37 61% 63 26% 181 74% 0 0% 12 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 3 6% 50 94% 1 4% 26 96% 9 36% 16 64% 0 0% 9 100% 6 75% 2 25% 20 32% 43 68% 76 26% 218 74% 1 33% 2 67% 17 59% 12 41% 4 22% 14 78% 1 50% 1 50% 11 34% 21 66% 85 32% 183 68% 1 13% 7 88% 3 20% 12 80% 8 50% 8 50% 0 0% 0 0% 19 39% 30 61% 59 24% 192 76% 1 7% 14 93% 1 100% 0 0% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 1 100% 4 20% 16 80% 16 23% 54 77% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 7 18% 32 82% 5 28% 13 72% 1 13% 7 88% 3 60% 2 40% 35 27% 96 73% 108 18% 479 82% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 33% 4 67% 12 14% 73 86% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 17 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 29% 10 71% 9 16% 49 84% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 1 6% 16 94% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 2 100% 1 33% 2 67% 9 53% 8 47% 24 27% 65 73% 0 0% 5 100% 3 23% 10 77% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 1 100% 11 28% 29 73% 41 31% 91 69% 0 0% 12 100% 5 33% 10 67% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 2 100% 18 24% 56 76% 72 28% 181 72% 0 0% 14 100% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 16 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 11% 25 89% 25 18% 111 82% 3 18% 14 82% 16 46% 19 54% 7 78% 2 22% 1 33% 2 67% 9 31% 20 69% 55 32% 119 68% 2 13% 14 88% 2 17% 10 83% 1 6% 15 94% 0 0% 0 0% 14 31% 31 69% 55 29% 137 71% 3 25% 9 75% 9 50% 9 50% 2 10% 18 90% 2 100% 0 0% 16 40% 24 60% 48 32% 104 68% 1 13% 7 88% 4 36% 7 64% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 11% 33 89% 24 20% 99 80% 5 23% 17 77% 5 31% 11 69% 1 13% 7 88% 0 0% 2 100% 20 25% 61 75% 51 24% 162 76% 4 36% 7 64% 13 37% 22 63% 2 7% 25 93% 1 50% 1 50% 58 28% 147 72% 150 30% 353 70% 0 0% 5 100% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 22 100% 0 0% 5 100% 4 27% 11 73% 32 28% 82 72% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 25% 9 75% 10 27% 27 73% 7 13% 49 88% 21 68% 10 32% 8 73% 3 27% 2 25% 6 75% 48 49% 50 51% 137 29% 328 71% 2 25% 6 75% 1 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 6 30% 14 70% 26 30% 61 70% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 8% 11 92% 11 20% 45 80% 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 13 26% 37 74% 27 25% 80 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 2 40% 3 60% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 7 32% 15 68% 13 17% 63 83% 0 0% 14 100% 11 85% 2 15% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 9 47% 10 53% 27 30% 62 70% 0 0% 1 100% 1 50% 1 50% 2 22% 7 78% 2 40% 3 60% 23 40% 35 60% 45 31% 98 69% 2 14% 12 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 100% 8 16% 41 84% 18 16% 93 84% 6 38% 10 63% 9 47% 10 53% 5 14% 31 86% 1 100% 0 0% 24 50% 24 50% 54 35% 102 65% 1 20% 4 80% 3 43% 4 57% 1 4% 26 96% 0 0% 0 0% 14 37% 24 63% 33 16% 174 84% 0 0% 2 100% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 6 38% 10 63% 1 7% 14 93% 5 63% 3 38% 0 0% 1 100% 4 67% 2 33% 12 14% 71 86% 43 15% 239 85% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 10% 9 90% 2 13% 14 88% 2 10% 19 90% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 22 100% 0 0% 10 100% 1 1% 75 99% 38 5% 694 95% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 7 100% 3 19% 13 81% 1 100% 0 0% 22 52% 20 48% 53 22% 183 78% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4% 46 96% 6 10% 53 90% 1 11% 8 89% 2 29% 5 71% 1 50% 1 50% 2 100% 0 0% 30 33% 61 67% 67 30% 159 70% 1 11% 8 89% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 5 100% 1 100% 0 0% 11 15% 63 85% 34 23% 112 77% 0 0% 15 100% 5 45% 6 55% 1 2% 43 98% 0 0% 1 100% 28 32% 60 68% 73 25% 221 75% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 2 20% 8 80% 7 25% 21 75% 4 20% 16 80% 1 20% 4 80% 2 3% 71 97% 3 50% 3 50% 19 36% 34 64% 72 23% 248 78% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 1 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 3 25% 9 75% 7 21% 27 79% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 1 10% 9 90% 78 Annex 3. National Results 78 5. Function of news subjects Do not know Subject Spokesperson Expert or commentator FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 1 17% 5 83% 5 25% 15 75% 6 17% 30 83% 0 0% 7 100% Botswana 1 50% 1 50% 2 10% 18 90% 1 7% 14 93% 3 30% 7 70% Burkina Faso 0 0% 5 100% 34 27% 90 73% 5 26% 14 74% 4 25% 12 75% Burundi 1 50% 1 50% 8 23% 27 77% 12 24% 38 76% 2 25% 6 75% Cameroon 0 0% 1 100% 2 13% 13 87% 3 27% 8 73% 0 0% 0 0% Congo, Dem Rep 0 0% 1 100% 3 13% 20 87% 2 10% 19 90% 2 20% 8 80% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Ethiopia 0 0% 0 0% 2 6% 29 94% 2 4% 46 96% 1 11% 8 89% Ghana 0 0% 0 0% 4 19% 17 81% 2 22% 7 78% 1 9% 10 91% Guinée Conakry 1 5% 21 95% 6 15% 34 85% 12 22% 42 78% 0 0% 5 100% Kenya 0 0% 2 100% 3 11% 24 89% 7 12% 53 88% 8 15% 44 85% Lesotho 0 0% 0 0% 3 17% 15 83% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 0 0% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 2 100% 0 0% 11 33% 22 67% 4 12% 30 88% 1 13% 7 88% Mauritania 1 20% 4 80% 5 19% 22 81% 0 0% 13 100% 1 50% 1 50% Mauritius 0 0% 0 0% 5 56% 4 44% 1 13% 7 88% 11 28% 29 73% Namibia 2 25% 6 75% 4 33% 8 67% 4 31% 9 69% 5 45% 6 55% Niger 3 18% 14 82% 2 11% 16 89% 4 40% 6 60% 0 0% 2 100% Nigeria 0 0% 2 100% 6 11% 48 89% 8 12% 57 88% 2 17% 10 83% Senegal 3 60% 2 40% 7 22% 25 78% 12 17% 57 83% 5 33% 10 67% South Africa 9 50% 9 50% 26 19% 111 81% 19 18% 87 82% 13 19% 57 81% Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 2 7% 26 93% 2 13% 13 87% Tanzania 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 3 100% 9 12% 67 88% 5 25% 15 75% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 8 100% 2 10% 19 90% Uganda 0 0% 4 100% 8 24% 26 76% 15 28% 38 72% 5 31% 11 69% Zambia 1 20% 4 80% 1 13% 7 88% 3 8% 36 92% 1 4% 22 96% Zimbabwe 0 0% 0 0% 4 33% 8 67% 11 18% 51 82% 8 42% 11 58% Asia Bangladesh 1 20% 4 80% 20 24% 65 76% 38 23% 130 77% 6 9% 58 91% China 1 100% 0 0% 101 20% 416 80% 6 21% 22 79% 4 7% 54 93% India 2 7% 27 93% 114 27% 307 73% 26 13% 168 87% 19 18% 89 82% Japan 1 50% 1 50% 15 22% 53 78% 7 10% 63 90% 1 11% 8 89% Kyrgyzstan 0 0% 0 0% 17 20% 66 80% 1 5% 20 95% 19 26% 55 74% Malaysia 3 30% 7 70% 64 15% 352 85% 8 8% 96 92% 9 14% 56 86% Nepal 0 0% 0 0% 32 16% 168 84% 8 7% 101 93% 4 16% 21 84% Pakistan 1 100% 0 0% 23 26% 64 74% 7 12% 50 88% 10 19% 43 81% Philippines 9 53% 8 47% 59 31% 129 69% 29 27% 80 73% 7 13% 45 87% South Korea 2 25% 6 75% 5 25% 15 75% 4 18% 18 82% 10 33% 20 67% Taiwan 0 0% 0 0% 69 19% 296 81% 35 18% 163 82% 6 16% 32 84% 79 Annex 3. National Results 79 Personal experience Eye witness Popular opinion Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 4 13 18% 61 82% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 1 25% 3 75% 1 3 8 15% 44 85% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 45 27% 122 73% 3 50% 3 50% 5 25% 15 75% 1 33% 2 67% 0 2 32 26% 92 74% 0 0% 0 0% 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 7 21% 26 79% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 8 14% 49 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 3 60% 2 40% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 7% 85 93% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 1 2 7 17% 35 83% 6 46% 7 54% 1 9% 10 91% 7 35% 13 65% 0 0 33 20% 132 80% 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 1 100% 2 29% 5 71% 0 0 22 14% 133 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 21% 22 79% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 21 26% 61 74% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 4 7 14% 42 86% 7 44% 9 56% 0 0% 1 100% 1 13% 7 88% 0 0 25 30% 57 70% 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 16 35% 30 65% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 1 13 25% 39 75% 1 20% 4 80% 3 75% 1 25% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 21 15% 122 85% 0 0% 2 100% 1 25% 3 75% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0 29 22% 101 78% 7 32% 15 68% 11 34% 21 66% 1 20% 4 80% 1 10 86 22% 304 78% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 4 8% 46 92% 3 30% 7 70% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 19 16% 101 84% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 4 10% 37 90% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2 100% 5 28% 13 72% 0 3 34 26% 95 74% 3 15% 17 85% 1 100% 0 0% 1 8% 11 92% 0 0 11 10% 97 90% 2 50% 2 50% 1 50% 1 50% 5 71% 2 29% 0 3 31 29% 75 71% 16 31% 36 69% 2 10% 18 90% 0 0% 9 100% 0 3 83 21% 320 79% 20 32% 42 68% 2 17% 10 83% 5 31% 11 69% 0 0 139 20% 555 80% 16 31% 35 69% 2 12% 15 88% 6 55% 5 45% 7 24 185 22% 646 78% 4 31% 9 69% 4 22% 14 78% 4 40% 6 60% 1 12 36 19% 154 81% 7 25% 21 75% 1 25% 3 75% 4 44% 5 56% 0 0 49 22% 170 78% 2 13% 14 88% 5 36% 9 64% 0 0% 1 100% 1 3 91 15% 535 85% 4 16% 21 84% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 50 14% 314 86% 1 7% 13 93% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 27 42 19% 175 81% 13 48% 14 52% 2 17% 10 83% 5 38% 8 62% 5 10 124 30% 294 70% 5 38% 8 62% 1 25% 3 75% 1 17% 5 83% 0 5 28 27% 75 73% 27 36% 49 64% 1 13% 7 88% 1 13% 7 88% 1 4 139 20% 554 80% 80 Annex 3. National Results 80 5. Function of news subjects Do not know Subject Spokesperson Expert or commentator FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Thailand 1 11% 8 89% 109 15% 610 85% 40 13% 277 87% 8 24% 25 76% Vietnam 1 50% 1 50% 36 25% 107 75% 2 9% 20 91% 2 11% 17 89% Caribbean Belize 1 100% 0 0% 20 48% 22 52% 2 20% 8 80% 5 50% 5 50% Dominican Republic 3 25% 9 75% 28 23% 93 77% 8 10% 71 90% 12 26% 35 74% Grenada 0 0% 0 0% 1 5% 21 95% 5 19% 21 81% 0 0% 5 100% Guyana 0 0% 2 100% 18 33% 36 67% 7 37% 12 63% 1 20% 4 80% Haiti 10 25% 30 75% 30 25% 91 75% 9 18% 42 82% 8 22% 29 78% Jamaica 1 100% 0 0% 36 18% 165 82% 14 20% 56 80% 17 63% 10 37% Puerto Rico 1 20% 4 80% 32 27% 88 73% 17 23% 58 77% 8 36% 14 64% St Lucia 3 43% 4 57% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 3 100% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 0 0% 4 29% 10 71% 4 44% 5 56% 0 0% 0 0% Suriname 1 50% 1 50% 5 29% 12 71% 6 26% 17 74% 5 42% 7 58% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 0 0% 3 7% 41 93% 4 31% 9 69% 1 9% 10 91% Europe Austria 2 33% 4 67% 36 19% 153 81% 13 25% 40 75% 12 15% 67 85% Belarus 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 8 16% 41 84% 25 29% 62 71% Belgium 2 67% 1 33% 95 26% 270 74% 20 19% 84 81% 38 27% 103 73% Bosnia & Herzegovina 1 25% 3 75% 28 25% 85 75% 19 15% 111 85% 27 35% 51 65% Bulgaria 0 0% 0 0% 40 53% 35 47% 11 69% 5 31% 4 33% 8 67% Croatia 1 50% 1 50% 19 29% 46 71% 26 28% 68 72% 5 10% 45 90% Cyprus 5 25% 15 75% 17 20% 69 80% 2 5% 42 95% 30 14% 190 86% Czech Republic 11 29% 27 71% 57 18% 261 82% 26 33% 53 67% 13 16% 67 84% Denmark 2 50% 2 50% 21 26% 59 74% 44 30% 103 70% 16 28% 41 72% Estonia 1 17% 5 83% 22 15% 128 85% 49 40% 73 60% 39 33% 79 67% Finland 0 0% 0 0% 22 27% 61 73% 31 27% 84 73% 27 29% 65 71% France 0 0% 0 0% 63 26% 181 74% 22 24% 69 76% 30 23% 103 77% Georgia 0 0% 2 100% 3 6% 50 94% 21 20% 83 80% 0 0% 27 100% Germany 7 29% 17 71% 76 26% 218 74% 61 18% 281 82% 9 14% 54 86% Greece 0 0% 8 100% 85 32% 183 68% 32 17% 155 83% 24 28% 62 72% Hungary 0 0% 6 100% 59 24% 192 76% 9 16% 46 84% 15 25% 46 75% Iceland 0 0% 0 0% 16 23% 54 77% 13 28% 34 72% 8 29% 20 71% Ireland, Republic of 0 0% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% Italy 0 0% 5 100% 108 18% 479 82% 18 17% 90 83% 15 12% 108 88% Kosovo 0 0% 2 100% 12 14% 73 86% 7 24% 22 76% 4 11% 33 89% Malta 1 33% 2 67% 9 16% 49 84% 17 12% 122 88% 4 31% 9 69% Montenegro 0 0% 0 0% 1 6% 16 94% 4 27% 11 73% 1 50% 1 50% Netherlands 0 0% 4 100% 24 27% 65 73% 5 21% 19 79% 9 23% 30 77% Norway 0 0% 2 100% 41 31% 91 69% 27 33% 56 67% 10 19% 44 81% Poland 0 0% 4 100% 72 28% 181 72% 41 29% 102 71% 53 27% 140 73% 81 Annex 3. National Results 81 Personal experience Eye witness Popular opinion Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 2 15% 11 85% 4 50% 4 50% 10 38% 16 62% 0 0 174 15% 951 85% 4 40% 6 60% 1 33% 2 67% 4 40% 6 60% 0 0 50 24% 159 76% 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 1 100% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0 32 46% 38 54% 30 38% 49 62% 6 30% 14 70% 0 0% 5 100% 0 2 87 24% 276 76% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 11% 47 89% 4 44% 5 56% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 32 34% 61 66% 3 16% 16 84% 2 10% 19 90% 0 0% 0 0% 1 5 62 21% 227 79% 6 67% 3 33% 4 57% 3 43% 0 0% 2 100% 0 1 78 25% 239 75% 14 58% 10 42% 4 50% 4 50% 5 50% 5 50% 9 29 81 31% 183 69% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 24% 19 76% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 9 38% 15 63% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 20 32% 43 68% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 8 12% 60 88% 30 47% 34 53% 1 14% 6 86% 6 86% 1 14% 3 3 100 25% 305 75% 16 67% 8 33% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 1 51 31% 113 69% 21 26% 59 74% 10 48% 11 52% 6 60% 4 40% 12 69 192 27% 532 73% 3 23% 10 77% 0 0% 6 100% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0 80 23% 272 77% 0 0% 2 100% 4 67% 2 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 59 53% 52 47% 20 43% 27 57% 2 25% 6 75% 5 71% 2 29% 1 1 78 29% 195 71% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 0 0% 5 25% 15 75% 2 0 61 15% 337 85% 14 37% 24 63% 8 31% 18 69% 4 67% 2 33% 1 4 133 23% 452 77% 9 23% 30 77% 3 50% 3 50% 7 70% 3 30% 0 0 102 30% 241 70% 9 56% 7 44% 1 20% 4 80% 5 63% 3 38% 0 0 126 30% 299 70% 21 46% 25 54% 5 50% 5 50% 7 58% 5 42% 2 3 113 32% 245 68% 22 33% 45 67% 26 32% 55 68% 16 52% 15 48% 7 2 179 28% 468 72% 9 64% 5 36% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 34 17% 172 83% 11 39% 17 61% 3 20% 12 80% 11 42% 15 58% 1 5 178 22% 614 78% 28 26% 78 74% 1 14% 6 86% 5 38% 8 62% 6 9 175 26% 500 74% 21 49% 22 51% 0 0% 1 100% 7 70% 3 30% 2 12 111 26% 316 74% 3 38% 5 63% 1 25% 3 75% 3 60% 2 40% 5 6 44 27% 118 73% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 75% 2 25% 19 44% 24 56% 16 31% 36 69% 2 67% 1 33% 0 5 178 19% 743 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 23 15% 131 85% 1 20% 4 80% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 6 24 34 15% 188 85% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 1 0 7 18% 33 83% 15 75% 5 25% 1 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 5 9 55 31% 124 69% 19 61% 12 39% 0 0% 1 100% 7 50% 7 50% 1 0 104 33% 213 67% 22 35% 41 65% 12 80% 3 20% 7 54% 6 46% 2 14 207 30% 477 70% 82 Annex 3. National Results 82 5. Function of news subjects Do not know Subject Spokesperson Expert or commentator FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Portugal 0 0% 5 100% 25 18% 111 82% 19 15% 110 85% 8 17% 39 83% Romania 8 73% 3 27% 55 32% 119 68% 7 22% 25 78% 10 16% 51 84% Spain 3 20% 12 80% 55 29% 137 71% 36 20% 141 80% 7 14% 42 86% Sweden 4 67% 2 33% 48 32% 104 68% 40 27% 106 73% 11 24% 35 76% Switzerland 2 33% 4 67% 24 20% 99 80% 16 20% 63 80% 24 31% 54 69% Turkey 0 0% 10 100% 51 24% 162 76% 11 13% 77 88% 6 21% 22 79% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 7 78% 2 22% 150 30% 353 70% 39 26% 111 74% 54 26% 151 74% Latin America Argentina 0 0% 6 100% 32 28% 82 72% 18 29% 45 71% 8 24% 26 76% Bolivia 0 0% 5 100% 10 27% 27 73% 10 16% 51 84% 2 9% 20 91% Brazil 21 30% 49 70% 137 29% 328 71% 40 31% 88 69% 26 29% 63 71% Chile 1 17% 5 83% 26 30% 61 70% 7 20% 28 80% 4 8% 46 92% Costa Rica 1 100% 0 0% 11 20% 45 80% 19 22% 68 78% 8 26% 23 74% Ecuador 0 0% 3 100% 27 25% 80 75% 31 17% 155 83% 11 15% 60 85% El Salvador 2 67% 1 33% 1 25% 3 75% 23 25% 69 75% 5 17% 25 83% Guatemala 4 40% 6 60% 13 17% 63 83% 23 32% 50 68% 7 19% 30 81% Mexico 0 0% 6 100% 27 30% 62 70% 17 13% 114 87% 13 36% 23 64% Nicaragua 3 27% 8 73% 45 31% 98 69% 18 25% 55 75% 7 25% 21 75% Paraguay 1 17% 5 83% 18 16% 93 84% 11 12% 83 88% 3 19% 13 81% Peru 3 38% 5 63% 54 35% 102 65% 15 19% 62 81% 2 5% 35 95% Uruguay 3 43% 4 57% 33 16% 174 84% 8 9% 80 91% 2 15% 11 85% Middle East Egypt 0 0% 0 0% 6 38% 10 63% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 1 100% Israel 1 13% 7 88% 43 15% 239 85% 19 17% 96 83% 12 9% 124 91% Jordan 0 0% 1 100% 2 13% 14 88% 1 10% 9 90% 3 30% 7 70% Lebanon 0 0% 2 100% 38 5% 694 95% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 2 100% Tunisia 12 44% 15 56% 53 22% 183 78% 6 9% 64 91% 31 52% 29 48% United Arab Emirates 1 33% 2 67% 6 10% 53 90% 4 8% 45 92% 8 15% 46 85% North America Canada 2 40% 3 60% 67 30% 159 70% 43 28% 112 72% 37 29% 90 71% United States of America 3 30% 7 70% 34 23% 112 77% 17 26% 49 74% 19 24% 59 76% Pacific Australia 1 25% 3 75% 73 25% 221 75% 47 23% 154 77% 7 14% 44 86% Fiji 3 60% 2 40% 7 25% 21 75% 9 18% 40 82% 6 24% 19 76% New Zealand 0 0% 0 0% 72 23% 248 78% 28 23% 93 77% 9 20% 35 80% Papua New Guinea 1 100% 0 0% 7 21% 27 79% 1 4% 26 96% 5 15% 29 85% Tonga 0 0% 1 100% 1 10% 9 90% 7 18% 31 82% 0 0% 1 100% 83 Annex 3. National Results 83 Personal experience Eye witness Popular opinion Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 25 52% 23 48% 5 71% 2 29% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0 82 22% 291 78% 17 45% 21 55% 3 33% 6 67% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0 100 30% 230 70% 24 35% 45 65% 12 41% 17 59% 11 35% 20 65% 2 6 148 26% 414 74% 26 47% 29 53% 1 33% 2 67% 2 29% 5 71% 0 3 132 32% 283 68% 9 30% 21 70% 4 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 3 80 25% 242 75% 3 14% 18 86% 1 6% 17 94% 41 67% 20 33% 1 29 113 26% 326 74% 44 48% 47 52% 7 47% 8 53% 19 56% 15 44% 2 3 320 32% 687 68% 7 44% 9 56% 7 47% 8 53% 3 43% 4 57% 2 4 75 29% 180 71% 16 64% 9 36% 4 80% 1 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 42 27% 113 73% 26 41% 38 59% 18 47% 20 53% 25 57% 19 43% 0 1 293 33% 605 67% 2 33% 4 67% 3 50% 3 50% 0 0% 0 0% 3 4 43 23% 147 77% 12 40% 18 60% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 51 25% 155 75% 37 41% 54 59% 4 27% 11 73% 12 36% 21 64% 3 8 122 24% 384 76% 30 54% 26 46% 8 57% 6 43% 9 60% 6 40% 2 5 78 36% 136 64% 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 2 100% 1 3 50 24% 162 76% 3 14% 19 86% 0 0% 0 0% 3 60% 2 40% 0 2 63 22% 226 78% 4 29% 10 71% 6 38% 10 63% 3 38% 5 63% 0 0 86 29% 207 71% 9 35% 17 65% 0 0% 0 0% 4 80% 1 20% 1 6 46 18% 212 82% 2 20% 8 80% 13 39% 20 61% 2 100% 0 0% 1 7 91 28% 232 72% 10 28% 26 72% 7 54% 6 46% 5 29% 12 71% 0 2 68 18% 313 82% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 4 7 32% 15 68% 20 34% 38 66% 7 44% 9 56% 6 40% 9 60% 0 24 108 17% 522 83% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 12 6 16% 32 84% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 7 30% 16 70% 0 0 45 6% 724 94% 2 50% 2 50% 5 71% 2 29% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 109 27% 295 73% 2 20% 8 80% 1 25% 3 75% 1 11% 8 89% 4 30 23 12% 165 88% 43 36% 77 64% 7 37% 12 63% 7 35% 13 65% 6 16 206 31% 466 69% 14 39% 22 61% 7 32% 15 68% 0 0% 1 100% 8 16 94 26% 265 74% 18 37% 31 63% 4 50% 4 50% 8 29% 20 71% 0 2 158 25% 477 75% 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 4 100% 1 100% 0 0% 2 5 29 24% 91 76% 7 41% 10 59% 4 50% 4 50% 9 82% 2 18% 0 0 129 25% 392 75% 0 0% 0 0% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 2 100% 1 0 15 14% 89 86% 0 0% 1 100% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 9 16% 47 84% 84 Annex 3. National Results 84 6. News subjects who are victims VICTIM NOT A VICTIM TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 1 100% 0 0% 4 22% 14 78% 5 26% 14 74% Botswana 0 0% 6 100% 2 14% 12 86% 2 10% 18 90% Burkina Faso 0 0% 0 0% 34 27% 90 73% 34 27% 90 73% Burundi 0 0% 7 100% 8 29% 20 71% 8 23% 27 77% Cameroon 0 0% 3 100% 2 17% 10 83% 2 13% 13 87% Congo, Dem Rep 2 29% 5 71% 1 6% 15 94% 3 13% 20 87% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 1 33% 2 67% Ethiopia 0 0% 1 100% 2 7% 28 93% 2 6% 29 94% Ghana 2 40% 3 60% 2 13% 14 88% 4 19% 17 81% Guinée Conakry 0 0% 0 0% 6 15% 34 85% 6 15% 34 85% Kenya 1 33% 2 67% 2 8% 22 92% 3 11% 24 89% Lesotho 1 33% 2 67% 2 13% 13 87% 3 17% 15 83% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 2 50% 2 50% 8 29% 20 71% 10 31% 22 69% Mauritania 1 50% 1 50% 4 16% 21 84% 5 19% 22 81% Mauritius 2 100% 0 0% 3 43% 4 57% 5 56% 4 44% Namibia 0 0% 0 0% 4 33% 8 67% 4 33% 8 67% Niger 1 100% 0 0% 1 6% 16 94% 2 11% 16 89% Nigeria 1 13% 7 88% 3 7% 40 93% 4 8% 47 92% Senegal 0 0% 0 0% 7 22% 25 78% 7 22% 25 78% South Africa 3 18% 14 82% 22 19% 95 81% 25 19% 109 81% Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 6 100% Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 8 100% Uganda 4 24% 13 76% 4 25% 12 75% 8 24% 25 76% Zambia 0 0% 0 0% 1 13% 7 88% 1 13% 7 88% Zimbabwe 1 50% 1 50% 3 30% 7 70% 4 33% 8 67% Asia Bangladesh 4 18% 18 82% 15 25% 44 75% 19 23% 62 77% China 23 38% 38 62% 78 17% 378 83% 101 20% 416 80% India 48 40% 71 60% 63 21% 231 79% 111 27% 302 73% Japan 7 64% 4 36% 8 14% 49 86% 15 22% 53 78% Kyrgyzstan 0 0% 2 100% 17 21% 64 79% 17 20% 66 80% Malaysia 15 48% 16 52% 48 13% 334 87% 63 15% 350 85% Nepal 6 60% 4 40% 26 14% 164 86% 32 16% 168 84% Pakistan 9 43% 12 57% 13 20% 51 80% 22 26% 63 74% Philippines 12 26% 35 74% 45 34% 86 66% 57 32% 121 68% South Korea 0 0% 3 100% 5 31% 11 69% 5 26% 14 74% Taiwan 11 25% 33 75% 58 18% 263 82% 69 19% 296 81% Thailand 17 47% 19 53% 92 13% 591 87% 109 15% 610 85% Vietnam 3 43% 4 57% 33 24% 103 76% 36 25% 107 75% Caribbean Belize 11 65% 6 35% 9 36% 16 64% 20 48% 22 52% Dominican Republic 3 13% 20 87% 25 26% 72 74% 28 23% 92 77% Grenada 0 0% 2 100% 1 5% 18 95% 1 5% 20 95% Guyana 4 36% 7 64% 14 33% 29 67% 18 33% 36 67% Haiti 1 13% 7 88% 29 26% 83 74% 30 25% 90 75% Jamaica 13 18% 58 82% 23 18% 106 82% 36 18% 164 82% Puerto Rico 4 36% 7 64% 28 26% 81 74% 32 27% 88 73% St Lucia 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 1 17% 5 83% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 4 100% 4 40% 6 60% 4 29% 10 71% Suriname 2 40% 3 60% 3 27% 8 73% 5 31% 11 69% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 9 100% 3 9% 30 91% 3 7% 39 93% Europe Austria 13 36% 23 64% 22 15% 129 85% 35 19% 152 81% Belarus 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% Belgium 30 52% 28 48% 64 21% 241 79% 94 26% 269 74% Bosnia & Herzegovina 9 39% 14 61% 19 21% 71 79% 28 25% 85 75% 85 Annex 3. National Results 85 6. News subjects who are victims VICTIM NOT A VICTIM TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % Bulgaria 13 72% 5 28% 26 46% 30 54% 39 53% 35 47% Croatia 6 55% 5 45% 13 24% 41 76% 19 29% 46 71% Cyprus 4 19% 17 81% 13 20% 52 80% 17 20% 69 80% Czech Republic 3 27% 8 73% 54 18% 253 82% 57 18% 261 82% Denmark 5 50% 5 50% 16 23% 54 77% 21 26% 59 74% Estonia 0 0% 5 100% 22 15% 120 85% 22 15% 125 85% Finland 8 35% 15 65% 14 23% 46 77% 22 27% 61 73% France 11 52% 10 48% 51 23% 171 77% 62 26% 181 74% Georgia 1 25% 3 75% 2 4% 47 96% 3 6% 50 94% Germany 20 59% 14 41% 56 22% 204 78% 76 26% 218 74% Greece 8 73% 3 27% 77 30% 180 70% 85 32% 183 68% Hungary 18 51% 17 49% 40 19% 175 81% 58 23% 192 77% Iceland 2 18% 9 82% 14 24% 45 76% 16 23% 54 77% Ireland, Republic of 3 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 4 80% 1 20% Italy 34 46% 40 54% 72 14% 438 86% 106 18% 478 82% Kosovo 0 0% 1 100% 12 14% 71 86% 12 14% 72 86% Malta 5 36% 9 64% 2 5% 38 95% 7 13% 47 87% Montenegro 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 15 100% 1 6% 16 94% Netherlands 1 13% 7 88% 23 28% 58 72% 24 27% 65 73% Norway 6 46% 7 54% 35 29% 84 71% 41 31% 91 69% Poland 18 34% 35 66% 52 27% 143 73% 70 28% 178 72% Portugal 8 53% 7 47% 17 14% 104 86% 25 18% 111 82% Romania 5 50% 5 50% 50 30% 114 70% 55 32% 119 68% Spain 14 56% 11 44% 41 25% 126 75% 55 29% 137 71% Sweden 6 24% 19 76% 42 33% 84 67% 48 32% 103 68% Switzerland 6 29% 15 71% 18 18% 83 82% 24 20% 98 80% Turkey 24 55% 20 45% 21 13% 140 87% 45 22% 160 78% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 57 37% 98 63% 92 27% 249 73% 149 30% 347 70% Latin America Argentina 4 50% 4 50% 28 26% 78 74% 32 28% 82 72% Bolivia 2 40% 3 60% 7 24% 22 76% 9 26% 25 74% Brazil 43 59% 30 41% 93 24% 298 76% 136 29% 328 71% Chile 4 40% 6 60% 21 28% 54 72% 25 29% 60 71% Costa Rica 3 19% 13 81% 8 20% 32 80% 11 20% 45 80% Ecuador 13 50% 13 50% 14 17% 67 83% 27 25% 80 75% El Salvador 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 1 25% 3 75% Guatemala 2 9% 21 91% 11 21% 42 79% 13 17% 63 83% Mexico 8 47% 9 53% 19 26% 53 74% 27 30% 62 70% Nicaragua 23 38% 38 62% 20 25% 60 75% 43 30% 98 70% Paraguay 3 43% 4 57% 15 14% 89 86% 18 16% 93 84% Peru 9 28% 23 72% 45 37% 78 63% 54 35% 101 65% Uruguay 5 36% 9 64% 28 15% 165 85% 33 16% 174 84% Middle East Egypt 1 100% 0 0% 5 33% 10 67% 6 38% 10 63% Israel 6 17% 29 83% 36 15% 205 85% 42 15% 234 85% Jordan 0 0% 0 0% 2 13% 14 88% 2 13% 14 88% Lebanon 1 13% 7 88% 37 5% 687 95% 38 5% 694 95% Tunisia 0 0% 2 100% 53 23% 176 77% 53 23% 178 77% United Arab Emirates 1 50% 1 50% 5 9% 52 91% 6 10% 53 90% North America Canada 22 31% 50 69% 41 28% 104 72% 63 29% 154 71% United States of America 10 29% 24 71% 20 19% 86 81% 30 21% 110 79% Pacific Australia 26 46% 31 54% 47 20% 190 80% 73 25% 221 75% Fiji 3 23% 10 77% 4 27% 11 73% 7 25% 21 75% New Zealand 14 54% 12 46% 58 20% 236 80% 72 23% 248 78% Papua New Guinea 3 43% 4 57% 4 15% 23 85% 7 21% 27 79% Tonga 0 0% 0 0% 1 10% 9 90% 1 10% 9 90% 86 Annex 3. National Results 86 7. News subjects mentioned by family status FEMALE STATUS MENTIONED MALE STATUS MENTIONED TOTAL NO YES NO YES REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Africa Benin 3 60% 2 40% 14 93% 1 7% 20 Botswana 2 100% 0 0% 18 100% 0 0% 20 Burkina Faso 27 79% 7 21% 90 100% 0 0% 124 Burundi 8 100% 0 0% 25 93% 2 7% 35 Cameroon 2 100% 0 0% 10 77% 3 23% 15 Congo, Dem Rep 2 67% 1 33% 20 100% 0 0% 23 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 3 Ethiopia 2 100% 0 0% 29 100% 0 0% 31 Ghana 3 75% 1 25% 15 88% 2 12% 21 Guinée Conakry 6 100% 0 0% 34 100% 0 0% 40 Kenya 3 100% 0 0% 23 96% 1 4% 27 Lesotho 2 67% 1 33% 14 93% 1 7% 18 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 7 64% 4 36% 20 91% 2 9% 33 Mauritania 3 60% 2 40% 21 95% 1 5% 27 Mauritius 5 100% 0 0% 3 75% 1 25% 9 Namibia 3 75% 1 25% 6 75% 2 25% 12 Niger 1 50% 1 50% 16 100% 0 0% 18 Nigeria 3 50% 3 50% 41 85% 7 15% 54 Senegal 6 86% 1 14% 24 96% 1 4% 32 South Africa 21 81% 5 19% 96 86% 15 14% 137 Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 6 Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 3 Togo 0 0% 0 0% 5 63% 3 38% 8 Uganda 3 38% 5 63% 20 77% 6 23% 34 Zambia 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 8 Zimbabwe 3 75% 1 25% 8 100% 0 0% 12 Asia Bangladesh 14 70% 6 30% 60 92% 5 8% 85 China 84 83% 17 17% 405 97% 11 3% 517 India 68 60% 45 40% 279 91% 28 9% 420 Japan 12 80% 3 20% 48 91% 5 9% 68 Kyrgyzstan 16 94% 1 6% 65 98% 1 2% 83 Malaysia 36 56% 28 44% 325 92% 27 8% 416 Nepal 23 72% 9 28% 163 97% 5 3% 200 Pakistan 18 78% 5 22% 58 91% 6 9% 87 Philippines 44 75% 15 25% 113 88% 15 12% 187 South Korea 4 80% 1 20% 13 87% 2 13% 20 Taiwan 55 80% 14 20% 282 95% 14 5% 365 Thailand 108 99% 1 1% 606 99% 4 1% 719 Vietnam 36 100% 0 0% 107 100% 0 0% 143 Caribbean Belize 6 30% 14 70% 18 82% 4 18% 42 Dominican Republic 23 82% 5 18% 87 94% 6 6% 121 Grenada 0 0% 1 100% 18 86% 3 14% 22 Guyana 12 67% 6 33% 27 75% 9 25% 54 Haiti 28 97% 1 3% 86 95% 5 5% 120 Jamaica 29 81% 7 19% 154 94% 10 6% 200 Puerto Rico 30 94% 2 6% 84 95% 4 5% 120 St Lucia 1 100% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 7 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 3 75% 1 25% 7 70% 3 30% 14 Suriname 5 100% 0 0% 12 100% 0 0% 17 Trinidad & Tobago 1 33% 2 67% 33 80% 8 20% 44 Europe Austria 33 92% 3 8% 139 91% 14 9% 189 Belarus 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 Belgium 66 69% 29 31% 234 87% 36 13% 365 Bosnia & Herzegovina 23 82% 5 18% 83 98% 2 2% 113 87 Annex 3. National Results 87 7. News subjects mentioned by family status FEMALE STATUS MENTIONED MALE STATUS MENTIONED TOTAL NO YES NO YES REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Bulgaria 27 68% 13 33% 32 91% 3 9% 75 Croatia 16 84% 3 16% 42 91% 4 9% 65 Cyprus 16 94% 1 6% 68 99% 1 1% 86 Czech Republic 50 88% 7 12% 255 98% 6 2% 318 Denmark 15 71% 6 29% 53 90% 6 10% 80 Estonia 18 82% 4 18% 120 94% 8 6% 150 Finland 16 73% 6 27% 49 80% 12 20% 83 France 32 52% 29 48% 134 75% 44 25% 239 Georgia 1 33% 2 67% 49 100% 0 0% 52 Germany 64 84% 12 16% 201 92% 17 8% 294 Greece 78 92% 7 8% 181 99% 2 1% 268 Hungary 43 73% 16 27% 181 94% 11 6% 251 Iceland 15 94% 1 6% 49 91% 5 9% 70 Ireland, Republic of 2 40% 3 60% 1 100% 0 0% 6 Italy 97 90% 11 10% 469 98% 10 2% 587 Kosovo 12 100% 0 0% 73 100% 0 0% 85 Malta 2 22% 7 78% 44 90% 5 10% 58 Montenegro 0 0% 1 100% 16 100% 0 0% 17 Netherlands 20 83% 4 17% 63 97% 2 3% 89 Norway 35 85% 6 15% 83 91% 8 9% 132 Poland 55 76% 17 24% 172 95% 9 5% 253 Portugal 21 84% 4 16% 103 93% 8 7% 136 Romania 42 76% 13 24% 107 90% 12 10% 174 Spain 39 71% 16 29% 127 93% 10 7% 192 Sweden 39 81% 9 19% 96 92% 8 8% 152 Switzerland 19 79% 5 21% 89 91% 9 9% 122 Turkey 37 73% 14 27% 145 90% 17 10% 213 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 90 60% 60 40% 283 81% 67 19% 500 Latin America Argentina 27 84% 5 16% 80 98% 2 2% 114 Bolivia 9 90% 1 10% 26 96% 1 4% 37 Brazil 122 89% 15 11% 314 96% 14 4% 465 Chile 12 46% 14 54% 53 87% 8 13% 87 Costa Rica 10 91% 1 9% 43 96% 2 4% 56 Ecuador 19 70% 8 30% 72 90% 8 10% 107 El Salvador 0 0% 1 100% 3 100% 0 0% 4 Guatemala 10 77% 3 23% 57 90% 6 10% 76 Mexico 19 70% 8 30% 58 94% 4 6% 89 Nicaragua 24 53% 21 47% 73 74% 25 26% 143 Paraguay 12 67% 6 33% 86 92% 7 8% 111 Peru 47 87% 7 13% 86 84% 16 16% 156 Uruguay 25 76% 8 24% 169 97% 5 3% 207 Middle East Egypt 6 100% 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 16 Israel 30 70% 13 30% 210 88% 29 12% 282 Jordan 2 100% 0 0% 14 100% 0 0% 16 Lebanon 37 97% 1 3% 687 99% 7 1% 732 Tunisia 31 58% 22 42% 183 100% 0 0% 236 United Arab Emirates 5 83% 1 17% 49 92% 4 8% 59 North America Canada 49 73% 18 27% 124 78% 35 22% 226 United States of America 25 74% 9 26% 101 90% 11 10% 146 Pacific Australia 33 45% 40 55% 175 79% 46 21% 294 Fiji 5 71% 2 29% 19 95% 1 5% 27 New Zealand 53 74% 19 26% 236 95% 12 5% 320 Papua New Guinea 5 71% 2 29% 26 96% 1 4% 34 Tonga 0 0% 1 100% 6 67% 3 33% 10 88 Annex 3. National Results 88 8. News subjects quoted in newspapers QUOTED NOT QUOTED TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Africa Benin 1 14% 6 86% 4 33% 8 67% 19 Botswana 0 0% 5 100% 1 25% 3 75% 9 Burkina Faso 14 42% 19 58% 16 22% 58 78% 107 Burundi 0 0% 5 100% 1 20% 4 80% 10 Cameroon 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Congo, Dem Rep 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 7 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 Ethiopia 1 11% 8 89% 1 5% 20 95% 30 Ghana 1 20% 4 80% 1 20% 4 80% 10 Guinée Conakry 1 4% 23 96% 2 50% 2 50% 28 Kenya 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 2 100% 7 Lesotho 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 0 0% 9 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 5 45% 6 55% 5 28% 13 72% 29 Mauritania 1 14% 6 86% 4 33% 8 67% 19 Mauritius 1 33% 2 67% 2 100% 0 0% 5 Namibia 1 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 5 Niger 1 7% 13 93% 0 0% 2 100% 16 Nigeria 3 17% 15 83% 2 11% 16 89% 36 Senegal 1 10% 9 90% 1 50% 1 50% 12 South Africa 11 21% 42 79% 12 24% 39 76% 104 Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 4 Tanzania 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 3 Togo 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 3 Uganda 1 13% 7 88% 4 27% 11 73% 23 Zambia 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 3 100% 5 Zimbabwe 2 50% 2 50% 2 29% 5 71% 11 Asia Bangladesh 5 25% 15 75% 10 23% 34 77% 64 China 12 29% 30 71% 29 17% 138 83% 209 India 25 37% 42 63% 53 28% 136 72% 256 Japan 1 11% 8 89% 5 28% 13 72% 27 Kyrgyzstan 1 10% 9 90% 13 22% 47 78% 70 Malaysia 4 19% 17 81% 11 28% 28 72% 60 Nepal 0 0% 4 100% 13 14% 78 86% 95 Pakistan 5 56% 4 44% 15 23% 49 77% 73 Philippines 1 14% 6 86% 9 31% 20 69% 36 South Korea 5 28% 13 72% 0 0% 2 100% 20 Taiwan 6 19% 25 81% 21 19% 89 81% 141 Thailand 28 12% 209 88% 27 14% 169 86% 433 Vietnam 26 25% 78 75% 1 50% 1 50% 106 Caribbean Belize 2 100% 0 0% 12 44% 15 56% 29 Dominican Republic 7 29% 17 71% 1 9% 10 91% 35 Grenada 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 9 100% 15 Guyana 3 30% 7 70% 12 40% 18 60% 40 Haiti 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 5 100% 6 Jamaica 6 30% 14 70% 9 20% 36 80% 65 Puerto Rico 9 27% 24 73% 8 20% 32 80% 73 St Lucia 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 1 100% 3 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 3 33% 6 67% 1 20% 4 80% 14 Suriname 0 0% 4 100% 2 67% 1 33% 7 Trinidad & Tobago 2 29% 5 71% 1 7% 13 93% 21 Europe Austria 12 34% 23 66% 18 16% 96 84% 149 Belarus 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 Belgium 21 34% 41 66% 36 21% 138 79% 236 Bosnia & Herzegovina 7 23% 24 77% 10 29% 24 71% 65 89 Annex 3. National Results 89 8. News subjects quoted in newspapers QUOTED NOT QUOTED TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Bulgaria 4 80% 1 20% 29 66% 15 34% 49 Croatia 1 5% 20 95% 5 50% 5 50% 31 Cyprus 3 33% 6 67% 6 29% 15 71% 30 Czech Republic 16 24% 52 76% 18 14% 111 86% 197 Denmark 7 35% 13 65% 12 29% 30 71% 62 Estonia 3 27% 8 73% 12 20% 47 80% 70 Finland 7 32% 15 68% 10 23% 34 77% 66 France 14 19% 61 81% 8 24% 26 76% 109 Georgia 0 0% 5 100% 1 10% 9 90% 15 Germany 12 24% 39 76% 24 23% 81 77% 156 Greece 20 32% 42 68% 20 27% 54 73% 136 Hungary 13 39% 20 61% 32 20% 125 80% 190 Iceland 1 33% 2 67% 3 17% 15 83% 21 Ireland, Republic of 1 50% 1 50% 4 100% 0 0% 6 Italy 29 22% 102 78% 28 16% 143 84% 302 Kosovo 11 15% 60 85% 1 25% 3 75% 75 Malta 2 29% 5 71% 2 33% 4 67% 13 Montenegro 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Netherlands 6 24% 19 76% 16 31% 35 69% 76 Norway 15 32% 32 68% 15 41% 22 59% 84 Poland 13 25% 40 75% 41 29% 99 71% 193 Portugal 14 33% 28 67% 4 11% 31 89% 77 Romania 16 33% 32 67% 28 29% 69 71% 145 Spain 10 23% 34 77% 10 30% 23 70% 77 Sweden 27 42% 37 58% 16 30% 38 70% 118 Switzerland 5 28% 13 72% 10 20% 40 80% 68 Turkey 8 35% 15 65% 36 21% 138 79% 197 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 34 37% 57 63% 27 28% 68 72% 186 Latin America Argentina 11 35% 20 65% 1 14% 6 86% 38 Bolivia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 100% 8 Brazil 50 35% 91 65% 73 25% 216 75% 430 Chile 11 23% 37 77% 15 38% 24 62% 87 Costa Rica 1 8% 11 92% 6 35% 11 65% 29 Ecuador 3 38% 5 63% 16 29% 40 71% 64 El Salvador 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% 4 Guatemala 4 40% 6 60% 0 0% 0 0% 10 Mexico 16 39% 25 61% 5 33% 10 67% 56 Nicaragua 2 25% 6 75% 5 29% 12 71% 25 Paraguay 10 20% 40 80% 2 5% 36 95% 88 Peru 23 49% 24 51% 1 11% 8 89% 56 Uruguay 0 0% 17 100% 1 9% 10 91% 28 Middle East Egypt 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 5 100% 9 Israel 7 23% 24 77% 9 21% 34 79% 74 Jordan 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 4 Lebanon 4 4% 104 96% 10 6% 146 94% 264 Tunisia 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 5 100% 6 United Arab Emirates 2 17% 10 83% 2 5% 36 95% 50 North America Canada 14 31% 31 69% 29 27% 80 73% 154 United States of America 20 38% 33 62% 12 15% 69 85% 134 Pacific Australia 7 23% 24 77% 25 22% 89 78% 145 Fiji 3 75% 1 25% 1 17% 5 83% 10 New Zealand 11 24% 34 76% 33 31% 73 69% 151 Papua New Guinea 3 19% 13 81% 1 14% 6 86% 23 Tonga 0 0% 0 0% 1 17% 5 83% 6 90 Annex 3. National Results 90 9. News subjects appearing in newspaper photographs PHOTOGRAPH NO PHOTOGRAPH TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Africa Benin 1 14% 6 86% 4 33% 8 67% 19 Botswana 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 5 100% 9 Burkina Faso 23 31% 51 69% 5 26% 14 74% 93 Burundi 0 0% 3 100% 1 14% 6 86% 10 Cameroon 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Congo, Dem Rep 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 3 100% 7 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 Ethiopia 0 0% 4 100% 2 8% 24 92% 30 Ghana 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 6 100% 10 Guinée Conakry 0 0% 8 100% 3 15% 17 85% 28 Kenya 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 5 100% 7 Lesotho 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 5 100% 9 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 1 13% 7 88% 9 43% 12 57% 29 Mauritania 1 17% 5 83% 4 31% 9 69% 19 Mauritius 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 1 100% 5 Namibia 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 2 100% 5 Niger 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% 6 100% 16 Nigeria 1 50% 1 50% 4 12% 30 88% 36 Senegal 1 17% 5 83% 1 17% 5 83% 12 South Africa 6 18% 28 82% 17 24% 53 76% 104 Sudan (south) 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 4 Tanzania 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 3 Togo 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 Uganda 2 17% 10 83% 3 27% 8 73% 23 Zambia 0 0% 2 100% 1 33% 2 67% 5 Zimbabwe 3 60% 2 40% 1 17% 5 83% 11 Asia Bangladesh 4 27% 11 73% 11 22% 38 78% 64 China 10 42% 14 58% 31 17% 152 83% 207 India 27 32% 57 68% 55 32% 117 68% 256 Japan 2 22% 7 78% 4 22% 14 78% 27 Kyrgyzstan 5 17% 24 83% 9 22% 32 78% 70 Malaysia 6 26% 17 74% 9 23% 30 77% 62 Nepal 4 31% 9 69% 9 11% 72 89% 94 Pakistan 1 25% 3 75% 19 28% 50 72% 73 Philippines 6 43% 8 57% 5 22% 18 78% 37 South Korea 4 50% 4 50% 1 8% 11 92% 20 Taiwan 12 25% 36 75% 15 16% 78 84% 141 Thailand 10 32% 21 68% 45 11% 359 89% 435 Vietnam 3 27% 8 73% 24 25% 71 75% 106 Caribbean Belize 6 46% 7 54% 4 67% 2 33% 19 Dominican Republic 1 17% 5 83% 7 24% 22 76% 35 Grenada 0 0% 6 100% 1 11% 8 89% 15 Guyana 6 50% 6 50% 9 32% 19 68% 40 Haiti 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 5 100% 6 Jamaica 4 22% 14 78% 9 20% 35 80% 62 Puerto Rico 5 19% 22 81% 12 26% 34 74% 73 St Lucia 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 3 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 1 20% 4 80% 3 33% 6 67% 14 Suriname 1 33% 2 67% 1 25% 3 75% 7 Trinidad & Tobago 2 25% 6 75% 1 8% 12 92% 21 Europe Austria 9 27% 24 73% 21 18% 95 82% 149 Belarus 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 Belgium 18 24% 57 76% 36 24% 113 76% 224 Bosnia & Herzegovina 5 26% 14 74% 11 28% 29 73% 59 91 Annex 3. National Results 91 9. News subjects appearing in newspaper photographs PHOTOGRAPH NO PHOTOGRAPH TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N Bulgaria 10 63% 6 38% 23 70% 10 30% 49 Croatia 3 15% 17 85% 3 27% 8 73% 31 Cyprus 6 43% 8 57% 3 20% 12 80% 29 Czech Republic 4 18% 18 82% 30 17% 145 83% 197 Denmark 15 31% 34 69% 4 31% 9 69% 62 Estonia 8 28% 21 72% 7 17% 34 83% 70 Finland 7 21% 27 79% 10 31% 22 69% 66 France 3 10% 27 90% 17 24% 54 76% 101 Georgia 1 8% 12 92% 0 0% 2 100% 15 Germany 9 28% 23 72% 27 22% 97 78% 156 Greece 18 40% 27 60% 20 24% 63 76% 128 Hungary 22 43% 29 57% 21 15% 116 85% 188 Iceland 2 22% 7 78% 2 17% 10 83% 21 Ireland, Republic of 3 100% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% 6 Italy 17 20% 68 80% 38 18% 175 82% 298 Kosovo 9 16% 48 84% 3 17% 15 83% 75 Malta 0 0% 2 100% 4 36% 7 64% 13 Montenegro 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Netherlands 14 44% 18 56% 8 18% 36 82% 76 Norway 15 31% 34 69% 15 43% 20 57% 84 Poland 22 40% 33 60% 30 23% 99 77% 184 Portugal 6 21% 22 79% 11 24% 35 76% 74 Romania 15 37% 26 63% 29 28% 75 72% 145 Spain 8 31% 18 69% 12 24% 39 76% 77 Sweden 25 43% 33 57% 18 30% 43 70% 119 Switzerland 9 53% 8 47% 6 12% 44 88% 67 Turkey 23 42% 32 58% 26 17% 130 83% 211 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 34 40% 51 60% 24 26% 70 74% 179 Latin America Argentina 8 42% 11 58% 4 22% 14 78% 37 Bolivia 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 8 Brazil 41 45% 50 55% 83 24% 257 76% 431 Chile 16 37% 27 63% 10 24% 31 76% 84 Costa Rica 0 0% 2 100% 7 27% 19 73% 28 Ecuador 3 23% 10 77% 15 30% 35 70% 63 El Salvador 0 0% 1 100% 1 33% 2 67% 4 Guatemala 1 17% 5 83% 3 60% 2 40% 11 Mexico 14 58% 10 42% 7 23% 24 77% 55 Nicaragua 1 33% 2 67% 6 27% 16 73% 25 Paraguay 1 7% 14 93% 11 15% 62 85% 88 Peru 25 56% 20 44% 1 8% 12 92% 58 Uruguay 1 5% 20 95% 0 0% 7 100% 28 Middle East Egypt 2 67% 1 33% 1 17% 5 83% 9 Israel 6 23% 20 77% 10 21% 37 79% 73 Jordan 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 4 Lebanon 4 7% 51 93% 10 5% 199 95% 264 Tunisia 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 1 100% 6 United Arab Emirates 0 0% 16 100% 4 12% 29 88% 49 North America Canada 9 27% 24 73% 34 28% 87 72% 154 United States of America 12 36% 21 64% 18 18% 80 82% 131 Pacific Australia 11 28% 29 73% 21 20% 84 80% 145 Fiji 2 100% 0 0% 1 14% 6 86% 9 New Zealand 9 31% 20 69% 35 29% 87 71% 151 Papua New Guinea 2 29% 5 71% 1 7% 14 93% 22 Tonga 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 6 92 Annex 3. National Results 92 10. Presenters and reporters in television, radio and newspapers TELEVISION RADIO Presenter Reporter Presenter Reporter FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 12 100% 0 0% 6 50% 6 50% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 3 100% Botswana 2 67% 1 33% 2 33% 4 67% 11 61% 7 39% 0 0% 0 0% Burkina Faso 9 100% 0 0% 5 45% 6 55% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 0 0% Burundi 0 0% 14 100% 4 27% 11 73% 1 6% 17 94% 2 15% 11 85% Cameroon 10 91% 1 9% 7 54% 6 46% 14 50% 14 50% 0 0% 0 0% Congo, Dem Rep 0 0% 2 100% 1 10% 9 90% 7 88% 1 13% 3 50% 3 50% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 6 100% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 2 100% 1 50% 1 50% Ethiopia 13 87% 2 13% 4 36% 7 64% 0 0% 17 100% 1 13% 7 88% Ghana 0 0% 0 0% 4 67% 2 33% 12 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% Guinée Conakry 19 86% 3 14% 3 18% 14 82% 17 100% 0 0% 1 13% 7 88% Kenya 12 43% 16 57% 13 45% 16 55% 3 75% 1 25% 3 75% 1 25% Lesotho 4 80% 1 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 9 69% 4 31% 6 86% 1 14% 6 43% 8 57% 0 0% 0 0% Mauritania 3 100% 0 0% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 4 100% Mauritius 0 0% 4 100% 2 50% 2 50% 3 30% 7 70% 1 50% 1 50% Namibia 23 92% 2 8% 5 38% 8 62% 7 47% 8 53% 0 0% 0 0% Niger 1 9% 10 91% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 1 100% 2 40% 3 60% Nigeria 7 47% 8 53% 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 2 67% 7 44% 9 56% Senegal 0 0% 0 0% 3 20% 12 80% 4 14% 25 86% 11 39% 17 61% South Africa 9 53% 8 47% 3 30% 7 70% 5 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 13 100% 0 0% 18 100% 0 0% 0 0% Tanzania 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Togo 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 75% 2 25% Uganda 0 0% 5 100% 1 25% 3 75% 4 33% 8 67% 0 0% 0 0% Zambia 0 0% 12 100% 4 57% 3 43% 0 0% 38 100% 2 67% 1 33% Zimbabwe 0 0% 0 0% 9 43% 12 57% 9 100% 0 0% 3 38% 5 63% Asia Bangladesh 36 36% 64 64% 5 16% 26 84% 24 33% 49 67% 4 50% 4 50% China 67 67% 33 33% 125 48% 135 52% 105 45% 129 55% 29 58% 21 42% India 23 45% 28 55% 27 43% 36 57% 15 44% 19 56% 0 0% 42 100% Japan 29 73% 11 28% 10 31% 22 69% 20 54% 17 46% 0 0% 2 100% Kyrgyzstan 28 47% 31 53% 13 76% 4 24% 14 54% 12 46% 6 100% 0 0% Malaysia 76 50% 76 50% 39 57% 30 43% 29 56% 23 44% 0 0% 0 0% Nepal 10 33% 20 67% 0 0% 2 100% 12 21% 45 79% 0 0% 10 100% Pakistan 2 50% 2 50% 1 10% 9 90% 21 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Philippines 105 58% 76 42% 57 51% 54 49% 42 34% 81 66% 26 34% 51 66% South Korea 9 45% 11 55% 4 18% 18 82% 12 34% 23 66% 5 25% 15 75% Taiwan 103 90% 12 10% 82 57% 63 43% 84 77% 25 23% 28 61% 18 39% Thailand 82 61% 53 39% 30 71% 12 29% 9 75% 3 25% 3 60% 2 40% Vietnam 16 48% 17 52% 17 61% 11 39% 15 35% 28 65% 2 25% 6 75% Caribbean Belize 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 36% 9 64% 0 0% 2 100% Dominican Republic 5 56% 4 44% 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 165 100% 0 0% 0 0% Grenada 12 100% 0 0% 6 86% 1 14% 0 0% 14 100% 3 75% 1 25% Guyana 2 33% 4 67% 8 89% 1 11% 7 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% Haiti 5 36% 9 64% 7 70% 3 30% 23 47% 26 53% 5 17% 25 83% Jamaica 58 89% 7 11% 14 40% 21 60% 18 47% 20 53% 7 70% 3 30% Puerto Rico 17 61% 11 39% 12 41% 17 59% 0 0% 7 100% 4 31% 9 69% St Lucia 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% Suriname 6 60% 4 40% 1 33% 2 67% 1 8% 12 92% 1 10% 9 90% Trinidad & Tobago 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 14% 37 86% 1 100% 0 0% Europe Austria 6 19% 25 81% 12 41% 17 59% 10 67% 5 33% 2 67% 1 33% Belarus 16 43% 21 57% 6 43% 8 57% 12 31% 27 69% 4 50% 4 50% Belgium 34 28% 86 72% 26 29% 64 71% 25 31% 55 69% 8 44% 10 56% Bosnia & Herzegovina 36 100% 0 0% 17 63% 10 37% 24 69% 11 31% 15 56% 12 44% 93 Annex 3. National Results 93 NEWSPAPER TOTAL Reporter FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 2 15% 11 85% 20 42% 28 58% Botswana 7 41% 10 59% 22 50% 22 50% Burkina Faso 8 20% 32 80% 22 32% 46 68% Burundi 7 35% 13 65% 14 18% 66 83% Cameroon 0 0% 0 0% 31 60% 21 40% Congo, Dem Rep 2 11% 17 89% 13 29% 32 71% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 2 100% 0 0% 5 29% 12 71% Ethiopia 1 100% 0 0% 19 37% 33 63% Ghana 4 44% 5 56% 21 68% 10 32% Guinée Conakry 6 17% 29 83% 46 46% 53 54% Kenya 9 15% 51 85% 40 32% 85 68% Lesotho 5 50% 5 50% 9 45% 11 55% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 11 33% 22 67% 32 48% 35 52% Mauritania 2 11% 16 89% 7 19% 30 81% Mauritius 11 44% 14 56% 17 38% 28 62% Namibia 2 20% 8 80% 37 59% 26 41% Niger 3 12% 23 88% 9 17% 44 83% Nigeria 11 19% 48 81% 26 28% 67 72% Senegal 3 7% 38 93% 21 19% 92 81% South Africa 37 29% 91 71% 55 34% 106 66% Sudan (south) 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 34 100% Tanzania 14 25% 42 75% 14 25% 42 75% Togo 1 33% 2 67% 7 64% 4 36% Uganda 12 26% 34 74% 17 25% 50 75% Zambia 6 22% 21 78% 12 14% 75 86% Zimbabwe 1 20% 4 80% 22 51% 21 49% Asia Bangladesh 3 8% 35 92% 72 29% 178 71% China 61 43% 81 57% 387 49% 399 51% India 29 34% 57 66% 94 34% 182 66% Japan 1 5% 20 95% 60 45% 72 55% Kyrgyzstan 12 55% 10 45% 73 56% 57 44% Malaysia 16 37% 27 63% 160 51% 156 49% Nepal 0 0% 30 100% 22 17% 107 83% Pakistan 1 11% 8 89% 25 57% 19 43% Philippines 33 45% 41 55% 263 46% 303 54% South Korea 13 17% 65 83% 43 25% 132 75% Taiwan 42 33% 84 67% 339 63% 202 37% Thailand 1 50% 1 50% 125 64% 71 36% Vietnam 17 43% 23 58% 67 44% 85 56% Caribbean Belize 5 38% 8 62% 10 34% 19 66% Dominican Republic 17 25% 50 75% 25 10% 220 90% Grenada 0 0% 0 0% 21 57% 16 43% Guyana 4 80% 1 20% 21 75% 7 25% Haiti 0 0% 5 100% 40 37% 68 63% Jamaica 5 28% 13 72% 102 61% 64 39% Puerto Rico 36 67% 18 33% 69 53% 62 47% St Lucia 0 0% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 0 0% 6 46% 7 54% Suriname 1 11% 8 89% 10 22% 35 78% Trinidad & Tobago 22 55% 18 45% 29 35% 55 65% Europe Austria 19 34% 37 66% 49 37% 85 63% Belarus 12 46% 14 54% 50 40% 74 60% Belgium 17 24% 53 76% 110 29% 268 71% Bosnia & Herzegovina 9 53% 8 47% 101 71% 41 29% 94 Annex 3. National Results 94 10. Presenters and reporters in television, radio and newspapers TELEVISION RADIO Presenter Reporter Presenter Reporter FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Bulgaria 6 75% 2 25% 5 71% 2 29% 6 60% 4 40% 5 83% 1 17% Croatia 26 52% 24 48% 13 52% 12 48% 1 17% 5 83% 1 20% 4 80% Cyprus 29 36% 51 64% 29 35% 55 65% 24 73% 9 27% 2 67% 1 33% Czech Republic 24 60% 16 40% 22 41% 32 59% 22 54% 19 46% 8 44% 10 56% Denmark 0 0% 37 100% 6 40% 9 60% 0 0% 24 100% 4 57% 3 43% Estonia 29 57% 22 43% 18 35% 33 65% 34 31% 76 69% 4 50% 4 50% Finland 23 43% 31 57% 13 50% 13 50% 8 31% 18 69% 5 31% 11 69% France 25 37% 43 63% 26 37% 45 63% 104 55% 84 45% 58 53% 51 47% Georgia 33 47% 37 53% 20 56% 16 44% 1 2% 42 98% 5 18% 23 82% Germany 30 31% 66 69% 18 29% 44 71% 19 38% 31 62% 2 14% 12 86% Greece 59 49% 62 51% 43 41% 63 59% 29 76% 9 24% 3 18% 14 82% Hungary 25 42% 35 58% 18 49% 19 51% 10 31% 22 69% 3 60% 2 40% Iceland 10 24% 31 76% 10 26% 28 74% 11 22% 38 78% 12 52% 11 48% Ireland, Republic of 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Italy 88 57% 66 43% 62 52% 58 48% 57 100% 0 0% 13 34% 25 66% Kosovo 11 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 24 77% 7 23% 0 0% 5 100% Malta 54 83% 11 17% 19 37% 32 63% 25 61% 16 39% 13 62% 8 38% Montenegro 14 88% 2 13% 7 58% 5 42% 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Netherlands 0 0% 1 100% 5 83% 1 17% 4 29% 10 71% 1 100% 0 0% Norway 22 55% 18 45% 8 32% 17 68% 18 100% 0 0% 7 58% 5 42% Poland 0 0% 2 100% 16 25% 48 75% 15 34% 29 66% 22 38% 36 62% Portugal 0 0% 6 100% 30 52% 28 48% 22 100% 0 0% 2 25% 6 75% Romania 16 100% 0 0% 8 38% 13 62% 6 38% 10 63% 3 60% 2 40% Spain 34 46% 40 54% 51 62% 31 38% 95 75% 31 25% 23 32% 48 68% Sweden 12 24% 37 76% 28 74% 10 26% 21 100% 0 0% 12 67% 6 33% Switzerland 17 55% 14 45% 13 38% 21 62% 11 42% 15 58% 4 40% 6 60% Turkey 0 0% 5 100% 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 47 48% 51 52% 24 30% 55 70% 67 53% 60 47% 42 36% 74 64% Latin America Argentina 16 42% 22 58% 2 17% 10 83% 20 27% 54 73% 9 43% 12 57% Bolivia 17 45% 21 55% 4 57% 3 43% 8 44% 10 56% 6 55% 5 45% Brazil 20 48% 22 52% 9 38% 15 63% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% Chile 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Costa Rica 1 10% 9 90% 12 32% 25 68% 28 27% 77 73% 0 0% 0 0% Ecuador 93 74% 33 26% 33 33% 67 67% 19 34% 37 66% 14 45% 17 55% El Salvador 8 73% 3 27% 6 21% 23 79% 0 0% 17 100% 5 45% 6 55% Guatemala 0 0% 58 100% 13 31% 29 69% 19 73% 7 27% 14 29% 35 71% Mexico 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 8% 49 92% 4 57% 3 43% Nicaragua 26 68% 12 32% 17 61% 11 39% 0 0% 50 100% 6 75% 2 25% Paraguay 12 24% 37 76% 27 43% 36 57% 40 69% 18 31% 6 22% 21 78% Peru 16 34% 31 66% 14 40% 21 60% 15 25% 46 75% 3 20% 12 80% Uruguay 54 47% 62 53% 20 31% 44 69% 10 21% 37 79% 3 25% 9 75% Middle East Egypt 7 54% 6 46% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Israel 24 86% 4 14% 15 21% 55 79% 39 34% 75 66% 26 25% 76 75% Jordan 0 0% 1 100% 5 56% 4 44% 14 100% 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% Lebanon 13 30% 30 70% 19 46% 22 54% 42 86% 7 14% 4 67% 2 33% Tunisia 47 61% 30 39% 5 16% 26 84% 115 63% 69 38% 1 10% 9 90% United Arab Emirates 0 0% 7 100% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% North America Canada 13 30% 30 70% 28 45% 34 55% 32 46% 38 54% 6 29% 15 71% United States of America 3 33% 6 67% 2 14% 12 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Pacific Australia 24 22% 85 78% 14 25% 43 75% 23 34% 45 66% 5 42% 7 58% Fiji 10 26% 28 74% 7 64% 4 36% 6 40% 9 60% 0 0% 0 0% New Zealand 18 25% 55 75% 17 40% 25 60% 21 60% 14 40% 3 50% 3 50% Papua New Guinea 3 100% 0 0% 5 71% 2 29% 15 100% 0 0% 2 33% 4 67% Tonga 0 0% 10 100% 5 100% 0 0% 22 81% 5 19% 0 0% 0 0% 95 Annex 3. National Results 95 NEWSPAPER TOTAL Reporter FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % Bulgaria 13 72% 5 28% 35 71% 14 29% Croatia 21 58% 15 42% 62 51% 60 49% Cyprus 13 50% 13 50% 97 43% 129 57% Czech Republic 35 58% 25 42% 111 52% 102 48% Denmark 27 27% 73 73% 37 20% 146 80% Estonia 32 53% 28 47% 117 42% 163 58% Finland 31 39% 49 61% 80 40% 122 60% France 29 48% 31 52% 242 49% 254 51% Georgia 17 47% 19 53% 76 36% 137 64% Germany 30 32% 64 68% 99 31% 217 69% Greece 27 30% 62 70% 161 43% 210 57% Hungary 9 24% 28 76% 65 38% 106 62% Iceland 3 20% 12 80% 46 28% 120 72% Ireland, Republic of 6 60% 4 40% 6 60% 4 40% Italy 26 33% 53 67% 246 55% 202 45% Kosovo 16 19% 70 81% 51 38% 82 62% Malta 1 6% 16 94% 112 57% 83 43% Montenegro 0 0% 0 0% 27 79% 7 21% Netherlands 13 16% 67 84% 23 23% 79 77% Norway 13 23% 43 77% 68 45% 83 55% Poland 24 24% 77 76% 77 29% 192 71% Portugal 34 64% 19 36% 88 60% 59 40% Romania 59 63% 34 37% 92 61% 59 39% Spain 11 28% 29 73% 214 54% 179 46% Sweden 46 42% 64 58% 119 50% 117 50% Switzerland 24 35% 44 65% 69 41% 100 59% Turkey 42 18% 187 82% 45 19% 193 81% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 46 30% 107 70% 226 39% 347 61% Latin America Argentina 19 49% 20 51% 66 36% 118 64% Bolivia 6 50% 6 50% 41 48% 45 52% Brazil 75 46% 87 54% 105 45% 126 55% Chile 6 26% 17 74% 6 26% 17 74% Costa Rica 4 31% 9 69% 45 27% 120 73% Ecuador 6 43% 8 57% 165 50% 162 50% El Salvador 19 58% 14 42% 38 38% 63 62% Guatemala 10 34% 19 66% 56 27% 148 73% Mexico 35 39% 54 61% 43 29% 106 71% Nicaragua 15 65% 8 35% 64 44% 83 56% Paraguay 1 17% 5 83% 86 42% 117 58% Peru 13 46% 15 54% 61 33% 125 67% Uruguay 4 27% 11 73% 91 36% 163 64% Middle East Egypt 1 50% 1 50% 9 56% 7 44% Israel 22 36% 39 64% 126 34% 249 66% Jordan 7 47% 8 53% 33 72% 13 28% Lebanon 3 23% 10 77% 81 53% 71 47% Tunisia 10 67% 5 33% 178 56% 139 44% United Arab Emirates 13 37% 22 63% 14 30% 33 70% North America Canada 42 43% 56 57% 121 41% 173 59% United States of America 27 31% 59 69% 32 29% 77 71% Pacific Australia 32 40% 48 60% 98 30% 228 70% Fiji 14 82% 3 18% 37 46% 44 54% New Zealand 27 50% 27 50% 86 41% 124 59% Papua New Guinea 11 31% 24 69% 36 55% 30 45% Tonga 6 46% 7 54% 33 60% 22 40% 96 Annex 3. National Results 96 11. Reporters in major topic areas Politics and Government Economy Science and Health Social and Legal FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 0 0% 6 100% 2 33% 4 67% 4 80% 1 20% 2 40% 3 60% Botswana 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 3 33% 6 67% Burkina Faso 2 22% 7 78% 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 9 100% 5 36% 9 64% Burundi 4 29% 10 71% 0 0% 7 100% 2 29% 5 71% 5 33% 10 67% Cameroon 6 67% 3 33% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% Congo, Dem Rep 2 14% 12 86% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 3 38% 5 63% Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Ethiopia 3 33% 6 67% 2 29% 5 71% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Ghana 0 0% 0 0% 3 60% 2 40% 1 50% 1 50% 3 43% 4 57% Guinée Conakry 5 19% 22 81% 3 33% 6 67% 0 0% 2 100% 2 11% 16 89% Kenya 8 36% 14 64% 1 13% 7 88% 2 29% 5 71% 9 23% 31 78% Lesotho 0 0% 1 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Madagascar 5 29% 12 71% 3 75% 1 25% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% Mauritania 1 8% 12 92% 0 0% 2 100% 2 50% 2 50% 1 33% 2 67% Mauritius 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 3 100% 1 50% 1 50% 4 57% 3 43% Namibia 1 25% 3 75% 4 50% 4 50% 0 0% 1 100% 2 20% 8 80% Niger 0 0% 8 100% 5 26% 14 74% 0 0% 2 100% 3 60% 2 40% Nigeria 3 25% 9 75% 2 14% 12 86% 6 55% 5 45% 5 19% 22 81% Senegal 3 13% 20 87% 9 38% 15 63% 4 57% 3 43% 1 7% 14 93% South Africa 5 33% 10 67% 10 26% 28 74% 2 33% 4 67% 3 17% 15 83% Sudan (south) 0 0% 11 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% Tanzania 6 27% 16 73% 0 0% 11 100% 0 0% 5 100% 3 30% 7 70% Togo 3 43% 4 57% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Uganda 3 38% 5 63% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 2 100% 2 14% 12 86% Zambia 1 9% 10 91% 5 71% 2 29% 0 0% 0 0% 2 29% 5 71% Zimbabwe 6 46% 7 54% 3 30% 7 70% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2 100% Asia Bangladesh 1 8% 12 92% 4 25% 12 75% 2 29% 5 71% 2 12% 15 88% China 77 49% 80 51% 55 49% 58 51% 26 50% 26 50% 33 56% 26 44% India 21 30% 49 70% 2 11% 16 89% 2 15% 11 85% 7 32% 15 68% Japan 3 14% 18 86% 0 0% 2 100% 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 2 100% Kyrgyzstan 5 38% 8 62% 6 60% 4 40% 7 88% 1 13% 6 100% 0 0% Malaysia 10 36% 18 64% 7 35% 13 65% 4 44% 5 56% 18 72% 7 28% Nepal 0 0% 15 100% 0 0% 12 100% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 4 100% Pakistan 1 13% 7 88% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 1 33% 2 67% Philippines 25 46% 29 54% 21 38% 35 63% 9 50% 9 50% 6 40% 9 60% South Korea 7 17% 34 83% 4 20% 16 80% 3 27% 8 73% 4 18% 18 82% Taiwan 24 36% 42 64% 47 53% 41 47% 12 55% 10 45% 29 55% 24 45% Thailand 11 58% 8 42% 8 80% 2 20% 2 50% 2 50% 3 60% 2 40% Vietnam 7 54% 6 46% 11 55% 9 45% 3 25% 9 75% 4 50% 4 50% Caribbean Belize 1 100% 0 0% 1 25% 3 75% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2 100% Dominican Republic 2 29% 5 71% 8 40% 12 60% 4 40% 6 60% 2 50% 2 50% Grenada 2 100% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% Guyana 2 67% 1 33% 3 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 80% 1 20% Haiti 3 27% 8 73% 0 0% 3 100% 1 20% 4 80% 2 18% 9 82% Jamaica 3 43% 4 57% 4 27% 11 73% 4 44% 5 56% 0 0% 8 100% Puerto Rico 10 53% 9 47% 11 73% 4 27% 9 90% 1 10% 11 69% 5 31% St Lucia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% St. Vincent and The Grenadines 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% Suriname 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 5 100% Trinidad & Tobago 3 50% 3 50% 4 80% 1 20% 2 50% 2 50% 1 17% 5 83% Europe Austria 8 28% 21 72% 1 17% 5 83% 6 55% 5 45% 6 55% 5 45% Belarus 3 60% 2 40% 9 50% 9 50% 6 60% 4 40% 3 38% 5 63% Belgium 10 19% 44 81% 3 20% 12 80% 9 50% 9 50% 9 43% 12 57% Bosnia & Herzegovina 10 53% 9 47% 9 75% 3 25% 5 71% 2 29% 12 71% 5 29% Bulgaria 6 50% 6 50% 6 100% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 3 75% 1 25% 97 Annex 3. National Results 97 Crime and Violence Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports The Girl-child Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 8 30% 19 70% 0 0% 2 100% 3 75% 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 9 39% 14 61% 4 100% 0 0% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 13 25% 38 75% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 13 28% 34 72% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 7 54% 6 46% 1 17% 5 83% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 17% 29 83% 0 0% 0 0% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 5 56% 4 44% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 30% 14 70% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 9 47% 10 53% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 2 10 17% 48 83% 5 31% 11 69% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 25 27% 68 73% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 5 50% 5 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 0 0% 3 38% 5 63% 3 60% 2 40% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 17 43% 23 58% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 3 4 15% 23 85% 5 63% 3 38% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1 13 45% 16 55% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 7 30% 16 70% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 8 20% 33 80% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 5 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 18 24% 57 76% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 1 17 20% 66 80% 19 42% 26 58% 2 13% 14 88% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 41 30% 97 70% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 16 100% 5 63% 3 38% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 14 25% 42 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 0 4 50% 4 50% 4 25% 12 75% 2 40% 3 60% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 12 24% 37 76% 2 25% 6 75% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 2 11 32% 23 68% 3 60% 2 40% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 13 38% 21 62% 3 20% 12 80% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 12 16% 65 84% 11 31% 24 69% 12 36% 21 64% 0 0% 0 0% 1 2 214 48% 235 52% 19 36% 34 64% 5 33% 10 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 56 29% 135 71% 6 38% 10 63% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 11 20% 44 80% 2 100% 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 31 69% 14 31% 14 52% 13 48% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 55 50% 56 50% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0 0% 42 100% 0 0% 3 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 11% 17 89% 30 38% 49 62% 23 68% 11 32% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4 114 45% 142 55% 3 23% 10 77% 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% 1 100% 0 2 22 19% 96 81% 21 40% 31 60% 15 52% 14 48% 2 50% 2 50% 2 1 150 48% 164 52% 8 89% 1 11% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 34 69% 15 31% 7 41% 10 59% 4 67% 2 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 36 47% 40 53% 1 25% 3 75% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0 5 33% 10 67% 2 8% 24 92% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 20 28% 51 72% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 9 82% 2 18% 2 67% 1 33% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 12 80% 3 20% 0 0% 4 100% 6 55% 5 45% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 12 27% 33 73% 13 62% 8 38% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 1 26 42% 36 58% 5 23% 17 77% 3 27% 8 73% 1 100% 0 0% 2 0 50 53% 44 47% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 1 2 2 11% 17 89% 12 75% 4 25% 1 25% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 23 56% 18 44% 10 45% 12 55% 2 25% 6 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 33 38% 54 62% 0 0% 4 100% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 22 46% 26 54% 10 22% 35 78% 4 24% 13 76% 4 67% 2 33% 2 0 49 28% 127 72% 4 44% 5 56% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 41 58% 30 42% 6 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 23 74% 8 26% 98 Annex 3. National Results 98 11. Reporters in major topic areas Politics and Government Economy Science and Health Social and Legal FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Croatia 8 53% 7 47% 7 44% 9 56% 11 92% 1 8% 2 40% 3 60% Cyprus 14 40% 21 60% 4 25% 12 75% 7 58% 5 42% 4 50% 4 50% Czech Republic 34 56% 27 44% 9 47% 10 53% 4 67% 2 33% 4 57% 3 43% Denmark 13 33% 26 67% 5 56% 4 44% 3 21% 11 79% 3 21% 11 79% Estonia 7 44% 9 56% 18 42% 25 58% 5 36% 9 64% 7 70% 3 30% Finland 7 37% 12 63% 11 39% 17 61% 17 49% 18 51% 1 14% 6 86% France 23 38% 38 62% 25 54% 21 46% 24 69% 11 31% 13 59% 9 41% Georgia 13 39% 20 61% 5 36% 9 64% 3 43% 4 57% 9 50% 9 50% Germany 30 35% 55 65% 10 25% 30 75% 5 50% 5 50% 3 60% 2 40% Greece 19 29% 47 71% 13 28% 34 72% 10 38% 16 62% 10 43% 13 57% Hungary 10 42% 14 58% 4 24% 13 76% 7 39% 11 61% 3 60% 2 40% Iceland 1 14% 6 86% 13 42% 18 58% 3 50% 3 50% 2 33% 4 67% Ireland, Republic of 2 67% 1 33% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 67% 1 33% Italy 17 27% 46 73% 8 50% 8 50% 15 68% 7 32% 12 32% 26 68% Kosovo 9 13% 63 88% 3 43% 4 57% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 2 100% Malta 5 24% 16 76% 11 41% 16 59% 2 50% 2 50% 2 33% 4 67% Montenegro 1 25% 3 75% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% Netherlands 0 0% 33 100% 1 20% 4 80% 7 37% 12 63% 2 33% 4 67% Norway 4 22% 14 78% 7 35% 13 65% 6 40% 9 60% 2 25% 6 75% Poland 11 18% 50 82% 9 50% 9 50% 13 42% 18 58% 6 18% 27 82% Portugal 9 47% 10 53% 11 58% 8 42% 7 64% 4 36% 21 78% 6 22% Romania 8 32% 17 68% 16 67% 8 33% 9 69% 4 31% 11 79% 3 21% Spain 9 25% 27 75% 18 58% 13 42% 12 60% 8 40% 8 47% 9 53% Sweden 9 38% 15 63% 17 53% 15 47% 15 54% 13 46% 10 45% 12 55% Switzerland 17 40% 26 60% 3 20% 12 80% 5 31% 11 69% 2 33% 4 67% Turkey 20 21% 75 79% 2 33% 4 67% 1 9% 10 91% 5 26% 14 74% United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 15 15% 85 85% 12 27% 32 73% 12 48% 13 52% 21 46% 25 54% Latin America Argentina 13 50% 13 50% 9 36% 16 64% 2 40% 3 60% 3 43% 4 57% Bolivia 4 67% 2 33% 0 0% 4 100% 2 40% 3 60% 5 83% 1 17% Brazil 19 36% 34 64% 12 43% 16 57% 20 54% 17 46% 23 51% 22 49% Chile 1 20% 4 80% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 3 100% 2 50% 2 50% Costa Rica 3 60% 2 40% 5 63% 3 38% 2 67% 1 33% 1 25% 3 75% Ecuador 10 38% 16 62% 7 24% 22 76% 8 50% 8 50% 17 59% 12 41% El Salvador 3 38% 5 63% 13 52% 12 48% 1 33% 2 67% 5 83% 1 17% Guatemala 10 38% 16 62% 11 50% 11 50% 4 40% 6 60% 3 23% 10 77% Mexico 13 68% 6 32% 9 27% 24 73% 2 25% 6 75% 10 67% 5 33% Nicaragua 11 85% 2 15% 3 43% 4 57% 4 44% 5 56% 7 88% 1 13% Paraguay 5 31% 11 69% 10 45% 12 55% 3 60% 2 40% 4 50% 4 50% Peru 3 60% 2 40% 3 27% 8 73% 3 33% 6 67% 4 50% 4 50% Uruguay 10 29% 25 71% 1 13% 7 88% 0 0% 1 100% 3 43% 4 57% Middle East Egypt 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Israel 27 28% 70 72% 7 39% 11 61% 11 34% 21 66% 6 18% 28 82% Jordan 11 61% 7 39% 1 100% 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 2 40% 3 60% Lebanon 24 48% 26 52% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 2 100% 1 25% 3 75% Tunisia 1 7% 13 93% 2 22% 7 78% 5 100% 0 0% 4 33% 8 67% United Arab Emirates 1 17% 5 83% 1 14% 6 86% 7 50% 7 50% 1 20% 4 80% North America Canada 14 33% 28 67% 12 46% 14 54% 15 58% 11 42% 7 39% 11 61% United States of America 6 24% 19 76% 3 23% 10 77% 4 22% 14 78% 2 22% 7 78% Pacific Australia 6 23% 20 77% 7 29% 17 71% 6 67% 3 33% 11 37% 19 63% Fiji 1 100% 0 0% 6 75% 2 25% 2 100% 0 0% 8 80% 2 20% New Zealand 14 47% 16 53% 11 65% 6 35% 5 45% 6 55% 7 47% 8 53% Papua New Guinea 4 36% 7 64% 0 0% 7 100% 1 17% 5 83% 6 50% 6 50% Tonga 0 0% 2 100% 3 75% 1 25% 1 50% 1 50% 5 83% 1 17% 99 Annex 3. National Results 99 Crime and Violence Celebrity, Arts and Media, Sports The Girl-child Other TOTAL FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % 7 58% 5 42% 0 0% 5 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 35 54% 30 46% 7 33% 14 67% 8 38% 13 62% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 44 39% 69 61% 9 33% 18 67% 3 38% 5 63% 0 0% 0 0% 2 2 63 49% 65 51% 8 44% 10 56% 5 19% 22 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 37 31% 84 69% 6 38% 10 63% 10 53% 9 47% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 53 45% 65 55% 6 38% 10 63% 6 38% 10 63% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 48 40% 73 60% 14 35% 26 65% 12 40% 18 60% 0 0% 0 0% 2 4 111 47% 123 53% 6 32% 13 68% 6 75% 2 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 42 42% 57 58% 1 10% 9 90% 1 6% 16 94% 0 0% 0 0% 0 3 50 30% 117 70% 6 46% 7 54% 11 37% 19 63% 0 0% 0 0% 4 3 69 34% 136 66% 3 33% 6 67% 3 50% 3 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 30 38% 49 62% 4 27% 11 73% 2 18% 9 82% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 25 33% 51 67% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0 6 60% 4 40% 33 43% 44 57% 12 75% 4 25% 0 0% 0 0% 4 1 97 42% 135 58% 1 50% 1 50% 2 67% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 16 18% 75 82% 7 50% 7 50% 6 35% 11 65% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 33 37% 56 63% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 7 58% 5 42% 3 38% 5 63% 6 38% 10 63% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 19 22% 68 78% 9 39% 14 61% 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 28 30% 65 70% 17 31% 38 69% 6 35% 11 65% 0 0% 2 100% 0 6 62 29% 155 71% 16 57% 12 43% 2 13% 13 87% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 66 55% 53 45% 8 53% 7 47% 18 67% 9 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 70 59% 48 41% 22 40% 33 60% 14 44% 18 56% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0 85 44% 108 56% 20 59% 14 41% 15 58% 11 42% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 86 52% 80 48% 4 25% 12 75% 10 63% 6 38% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 41 37% 71 63% 3 6% 48 94% 6 33% 12 67% 0 0% 0 0% 8 25 37 19% 163 82% 21 30% 48 70% 24 48% 26 52% 0 0% 0 0% 7 7 105 31% 229 69% 1 25% 3 75% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 1 100% 1 0 29 41% 42 59% 5 71% 2 29% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 16 53% 14 47% 9 41% 13 59% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 84 45% 102 55% 1 20% 4 80% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 6 26% 17 74% 3 14% 18 86% 1 14% 6 86% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1 15 31% 33 69% 11 30% 26 70% 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 53 37% 91 63% 8 26% 23 74% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 30 41% 43 59% 6 19% 26 81% 3 19% 13 81% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 37 31% 82 69% 2 14% 12 86% 3 43% 4 57% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 39 41% 57 59% 13 59% 9 41% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 38 64% 21 36% 12 33% 24 67% 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 34 36% 61 64% 9 35% 17 65% 7 41% 10 59% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1 29 38% 47 62% 6 29% 15 71% 5 36% 9 64% 0 0% 0 0% 2 3 25 29% 61 71% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 2 67% 1 33% 6 18% 27 82% 3 30% 7 70% 0 0% 0 0% 3 6 60 27% 164 73% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0 19 61% 12 39% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 26 43% 34 57% 2 33% 4 67% 2 20% 8 80% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 16 29% 40 71% 3 50% 3 50% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 14 36% 25 64% 17 37% 29 63% 10 45% 12 55% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 75 42% 105 58% 9 41% 13 59% 4 44% 5 56% 1 33% 2 67% 0 1 29 29% 70 71% 17 55% 14 45% 3 12% 23 88% 0 0% 1 100% 1 1 50 34% 97 66% 3 75% 1 25% 1 33% 2 67% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 21 75% 7 25% 5 56% 4 44% 5 25% 15 75% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 47 46% 55 54% 4 67% 2 33% 3 60% 2 40% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 18 38% 29 62% 1 33% 2 67% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 11 61% 7 39% 100 Annex 3. National Results 100 12. Topics in stories where women are central to the news Politicsand Government Economy Scienceand Health Socialand Legal Crimeand Violence Celebrity,Arts andMedia, Sports TheGirl-child Other TOTAL REGION COUNTRY Africa Benin 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 6 Botswana 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 Burkina Faso 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 6 Burundi 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 5 Cameroon 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Congo, Dem Rep 3 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 8 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 1 3 2 0 3 0 0 9 Ethiopia 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 Ghana 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 Guinée Conakry 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 Kenya 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 5 Lesotho 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liberia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Madagascar 1 1 2 2 5 2 1 0 14 Mauritania 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 6 Mauritius 2 0 0 1 7 1 0 1 12 Namibia 1 2 2 4 1 0 0 0 10 Niger 1 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 9 Nigeria 3 3 1 3 0 0 1 0 11 Senegal 4 1 0 8 5 2 1 0 21 South Africa 1 2 3 1 4 4 0 0 15 Sudan (south) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tanzania 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 Togo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Uganda 0 0 2 3 5 1 0 1 12 Zambia 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 Zimbabwe 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 Asia Bangladesh 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 0 7 China 7 1 0 6 2 6 1 0 23 India 28 4 3 10 23 3 1 0 72 Japan 6 0 0 1 7 7 0 1 22 Kyrgyzstan 2 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 7 Malaysia 5 1 1 8 9 4 0 0 28 Nepal 2 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 14 Pakistan 3 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 9 Philippines 24 4 3 5 12 25 0 0 73 South Korea 3 3 1 4 0 3 1 0 15 Taiwan 7 0 1 5 2 3 1 0 19 Thailand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vietnam 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 Caribbean Belize 0 1 2 1 5 1 1 0 11 Dominican Republic 5 2 4 5 9 1 0 0 26 Grenada 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Guyana 1 2 1 2 3 2 0 0 11 Haiti 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 Jamaica 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 7 Puerto Rico 1 0 4 2 4 4 1 0 16 St Lucia 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 2 1 0 4 2 0 0 0 9 Suriname 0 0 0 1 1 4 0 1 7 Trinidad & Tobago 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Europe Austria 0 0 0 3 3 2 0 0 8 Belarus 2 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 7 Belgium 6 2 2 9 14 6 1 0 40 Bosnia & Herzegovina 12 5 3 9 8 5 0 0 42 101 Annex 3. National Results 101 12. Topics in stories where women are central to the news Politicsand Government Economy Scienceand Health Socialand Legal Crimeand Violence Celebrity,Arts andMedia, Sports TheGirl-child Other TOTAL REGION COUNTRY Bulgaria 0 3 3 0 4 1 0 0 11 Croatia 3 0 1 0 8 1 0 1 14 Cyprus 0 0 1 1 3 3 0 0 8 Czech Republic 1 0 2 3 5 1 0 1 13 Denmark 2 0 0 2 0 6 0 0 10 Estonia 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 Finland 5 0 2 3 6 1 0 1 18 France 3 6 10 10 5 5 0 1 40 Georgia 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 Germany 26 2 4 1 10 2 0 0 45 Greece 25 2 8 4 4 12 0 3 58 Hungary 2 1 0 0 8 3 0 2 16 Iceland 1 6 0 1 3 5 0 0 16 Ireland, Republic of 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Italy 6 1 1 7 25 5 0 3 48 Kosovo 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 Malta 3 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 9 Montenegro 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Netherlands 7 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 17 Norway 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 5 Poland 4 1 3 4 11 4 0 0 27 Portugal 2 0 1 1 6 0 0 0 10 Romania 1 1 2 1 2 10 0 0 17 Spain 2 0 4 8 14 3 0 0 31 Sweden 0 4 4 2 6 4 0 0 20 Switzerland 3 2 3 3 1 3 0 0 15 Turkey 1 0 3 1 18 2 0 0 25 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 12 4 2 16 23 6 0 0 63 Latin America Argentina 7 1 2 5 5 4 1 1 26 Bolivia 5 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 10 Brazil 75 25 24 41 26 1 0 0 192 Chile 4 1 2 1 4 0 1 1 14 Costa Rica 1 1 3 1 7 1 0 2 16 Ecuador 1 0 3 6 10 0 0 0 20 El Salvador 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 5 Guatemala 2 1 1 4 5 3 0 0 16 Mexico 2 3 1 2 7 12 0 0 27 Nicaragua 3 3 4 3 16 0 0 0 29 Paraguay 3 2 0 1 5 0 0 1 12 Peru 1 2 4 9 13 19 0 2 50 Uruguay 2 1 0 4 3 2 0 2 14 Middle East Egypt 3 1 1 2 1 3 0 0 11 Israel 3 2 2 4 3 3 0 0 17 Jordan 6 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 10 Lebanon 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tunisia 10 1 1 5 0 3 1 0 21 United Arab Emirates 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 5 North America Canada 3 2 2 0 11 2 0 0 20 United States of America 12 2 6 3 11 5 4 0 43 Pacific Australia 9 2 2 8 21 3 1 0 46 Fiji 0 2 0 4 1 3 0 0 10 New Zealand 1 0 3 2 6 1 0 0 13 Papua New Guinea 1 1 1 0 1 4 0 0 8 Tonga 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 102 Annex 3. National Results 102 13. Sex of reporter in stories with female and male news subjects FEMALE REPORTER NEWS SUBJECT MALE REPORTER NEWS SUBJECT FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % Africa Benin 2 67% 1 33% 3 17% 15 83% 21 Botswana 2 33% 4 67% 0 0% 6 100% 12 Burkina Faso 19 40% 28 60% 23 26% 67 74% 137 Burundi 1 20% 4 80% 10 26% 29 74% 44 Cameroon 1 10% 9 90% 1 14% 6 86% 17 Congo, Dem Rep 2 22% 7 78% 2 13% 14 88% 25 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% 3 Ethiopia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 100% 1 Ghana 3 23% 10 77% 1 20% 4 80% 18 Guinée Conakry 3 23% 10 77% 5 24% 16 76% 34 Kenya 3 14% 18 86% 5 19% 22 81% 48 Lesotho 1 14% 6 86% 2 18% 9 82% 18 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 6 55% 5 45% 2 13% 14 88% 27 Mauritania 2 33% 4 67% 3 13% 21 88% 30 Mauritius 2 100% 0 0% 4 44% 5 56% 11 Namibia 2 33% 4 67% 1 17% 5 83% 12 Niger 1 100% 0 0% 1 9% 10 91% 12 Nigeria 2 20% 8 80% 4 9% 39 91% 53 Senegal 1 25% 3 75% 7 25% 21 75% 32 South Africa 18 28% 47 72% 23 16% 118 84% 206 Sudan (south) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 7 100% 7 Tanzania 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 3 Togo 0 0% 4 100% 0 0% 4 100% 8 Uganda 4 33% 8 67% 3 12% 22 88% 37 Zambia 0 0% 0 0% 1 13% 7 88% 8 Zimbabwe 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 2 100% 3 Asia Bangladesh 1 11% 8 89% 6 22% 21 78% 36 China 81 18% 375 82% 99 16% 527 84% 1 082 India 22 19% 93 81% 45 20% 181 80% 341 Japan 6 19% 25 81% 22 30% 52 70% 105 Kyrgyzstan 11 30% 26 70% 6 18% 27 82% 70 Malaysia 47 16% 249 84% 29 11% 232 89% 557 Nepal 4 14% 24 86% 22 18% 97 82% 147 Pakistan 3 21% 11 79% 1 5% 19 95% 34 Philippines 33 35% 62 65% 25 24% 81 76% 201 South Korea 0 0% 4 100% 4 24% 13 76% 21 Taiwan 84 23% 282 77% 48 18% 216 82% 630 Thailand 46 23% 157 77% 8 7% 106 93% 317 Vietnam 18 27% 48 73% 23 28% 60 72% 149 Caribbean Belize 5 42% 7 58% 9 56% 7 44% 28 Dominican Republic 0 0% 5 100% 48 24% 156 76% 209 Grenada 0 0% 7 100% 0 0% 2 100% 9 Guyana 6 38% 10 63% 0 0% 4 100% 20 Haiti 19 26% 54 74% 26 23% 87 77% 186 Jamaica 20 17% 101 83% 9 15% 53 85% 183 Puerto Rico 23 35% 43 65% 7 15% 39 85% 112 St Lucia 0 0% 2 100% 0 0% 2 100% 4 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 4 100% 5 Suriname 0 0% 2 100% 4 33% 8 67% 14 Trinidad & Tobago 1 6% 15 94% 2 7% 26 93% 44 Europe Austria 6 12% 45 88% 17 18% 77 82% 145 Belarus 0 0% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 1 Belgium 35 32% 74 68% 82 27% 223 73% 414 Bosnia & Herzegovina 12 23% 40 77% 5 15% 28 85% 85 103 Annex 3. National Results 103 13. Sex of reporter in stories with female and male news subjects FEMALE REPORTER NEWS SUBJECT MALE REPORTER NEWS SUBJECT FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N % Bulgaria 23 53% 20 47% 3 30% 7 70% 53 Croatia 17 35% 31 65% 13 36% 23 64% 84 Cyprus 6 12% 44 88% 17 21% 65 79% 132 Czech Republic 36 16% 190 84% 35 18% 165 83% 426 Denmark 12 50% 12 50% 15 20% 59 80% 98 Estonia 12 19% 52 81% 6 11% 51 89% 121 Finland 9 28% 23 72% 15 28% 39 72% 86 France 58 37% 100 63% 43 28% 112 72% 313 Georgia 1 7% 14 93% 2 6% 31 94% 48 Germany 29 28% 75 72% 58 25% 177 75% 339 Greece 49 34% 97 66% 77 33% 154 67% 377 Hungary 15 19% 63 81% 30 20% 121 80% 229 Iceland 5 23% 17 77% 15 22% 52 78% 89 Ireland, Republic of 1 50% 1 50% 4 100% 0 0% 6 Italy 73 19% 305 81% 64 17% 323 83% 765 Kosovo 1 6% 15 94% 9 17% 44 83% 69 Malta 5 13% 35 88% 4 10% 38 90% 82 Montenegro 1 5% 18 95% 1 17% 5 83% 25 Netherlands 1 17% 5 83% 21 36% 37 64% 64 Norway 16 27% 43 73% 46 33% 92 67% 197 Poland 13 25% 38 75% 29 24% 90 76% 170 Portugal 17 20% 69 80% 12 15% 67 85% 165 Romania 31 29% 75 71% 18 25% 53 75% 177 Spain 51 32% 108 68% 45 29% 110 71% 314 Sweden 21 31% 46 69% 31 30% 74 70% 172 Switzerland 13 21% 50 79% 14 16% 76 84% 153 Turkey 11 31% 24 69% 34 17% 161 83% 230 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 101 32% 217 68% 142 28% 373 72% 833 Latin America Argentina 15 36% 27 64% 28 24% 87 76% 157 Bolivia 15 33% 30 67% 13 32% 28 68% 86 Brazil 48 33% 97 67% 37 20% 152 80% 334 Chile 2 29% 5 71% 4 24% 13 76% 24 Costa Rica 2 20% 8 80% 9 23% 30 77% 49 Ecuador 10 17% 48 83% 11 23% 37 77% 106 El Salvador 0 0% 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 2 Guatemala 3 6% 46 94% 12 19% 50 81% 111 Mexico 3 9% 32 91% 14 31% 31 69% 80 Nicaragua 19 31% 43 69% 42 35% 77 65% 181 Paraguay 8 22% 28 78% 3 12% 22 88% 61 Peru 21 32% 45 68% 31 30% 72 70% 169 Uruguay 26 20% 103 80% 34 16% 181 84% 344 Middle East Egypt 4 67% 2 33% 2 20% 8 80% 16 Israel 18 15% 100 85% 41 16% 223 84% 382 Jordan 2 18% 9 82% 0 0% 1 100% 12 Lebanon 12 4% 258 96% 18 7% 238 93% 526 Tunisia 56 25% 164 75% 22 21% 81 79% 323 United Arab Emirates 0 0% 10 100% 3 15% 17 85% 30 North America Canada 28 30% 64 70% 41 30% 96 70% 229 United States of America 11 26% 31 74% 13 25% 40 75% 95 Pacific Australia 27 27% 72 73% 60 23% 197 77% 356 Fiji 4 33% 8 67% 3 19% 13 81% 28 New Zealand 34 24% 106 76% 36 15% 209 85% 385 Papua New Guinea 4 22% 14 78% 3 25% 9 75% 30 Tonga 0 0% 3 100% 1 25% 3 75% 7 104 Annex 3. National Results 104 14. Stories that clearly challenge or reinforce stereotypes Reinforces stereotypes Challenges stereotypes Neither challenges nor reinforces stereotypes TOTAL REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N Africa Benin 34 94% 2 6% 0 0% 36 Botswana 64 90% 4 6% 3 4% 71 Burkina Faso 1 2% 1 2% 54 96% 56 Burundi 48 71% 5 7% 15 22% 68 Cameroon 40 98% 1 2% 0 0% 41 Congo, Dem Rep 31 46% 12 18% 24 36% 67 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 0 0% 21 88% 3 13% 24 Ethiopia 4 5% 1 1% 68 93% 73 Ghana 35 97% 0 0% 1 3% 36 Guinée Conakry 93 100% 0 0% 0 0% 93 Kenya 65 76% 5 6% 15 18% 85 Lesotho 20 100% 0 0% 0 0% 20 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 18 27% 3 5% 45 68% 66 Mauritania 16 53% 4 13% 10 33% 30 Mauritius 35 73% 11 23% 2 4% 48 Namibia 37 97% 1 3% 0 0% 38 Niger 20 43% 3 6% 24 51% 47 Nigeria 101 96% 4 4% 0 0% 105 Senegal 91 91% 3 3% 6 6% 100 South Africa 99 59% 7 4% 63 37% 169 Sudan (south) 29 97% 1 3% 0 0% 30 Tanzania 76 96% 1 1% 2 3% 79 Togo 5 38% 0 0% 8 62% 13 Uganda 31 78% 6 15% 3 8% 40 Zambia 36 60% 0 0% 24 40% 60 Zimbabwe 97 97% 1 1% 2 2% 100 Asia Bangladesh 49 16% 3 1% 247 83% 299 China 13 3% 6 1% 434 96% 453 India 261 63% 37 9% 117 28% 415 Japan 108 96% 1 1% 4 4% 113 Kyrgyzstan 125 97% 1 1% 3 2% 129 Malaysia 164 60% 8 3% 103 37% 275 Nepal 3 2% 1 1% 183 98% 187 Pakistan 73 90% 4 5% 4 5% 81 Philippines 415 76% 101 18% 33 6% 549 South Korea 72 46% 28 18% 58 37% 158 Taiwan 6 2% 4 1% 340 97% 350 Thailand 434 100% 0 0% 0 0% 434 Vietnam 0 0% 0 0% 131 100% 131 Caribbean Belize 30 71% 2 5% 10 24% 42 Dominican Republic 80 56% 9 6% 55 38% 144 Grenada 2 5% 0 0% 37 95% 39 Guyana 38 79% 0 0% 10 21% 48 Haiti 6 9% 3 4% 60 87% 69 Jamaica 39 24% 14 9% 107 67% 160 Puerto Rico 83 59% 5 4% 53 38% 141 St Lucia 3 38% 0 0% 5 63% 8 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 21 84% 4 16% 0 0% 25 Suriname 47 92% 2 4% 2 4% 51 Trinidad & Tobago 84 99% 0 0% 1 1% 85 Europe Austria 102 73% 7 5% 31 22% 140 Belarus 120 96% 1 1% 4 3% 125 Belgium 167 53% 16 5% 133 42% 316 Bosnia & Herzegovina 129 94% 5 4% 3 2% 137 105 Annex 3. National Results 105 14. Stories that clearly challenge or reinforce stereotypes Reinforces stereotypes Challenges stereotypes Neither challenges nor reinforces stereotypes TOTAL REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N Bulgaria 45 69% 16 25% 4 6% 65 Croatia 49 49% 7 7% 45 45% 101 Cyprus 73 46% 2 1% 82 52% 157 Czech Republic 60 39% 4 3% 90 58% 154 Denmark 11 7% 4 3% 137 90% 152 Estonia 346 100% 0 0% 1 0% 347 Finland 158 99% 1 1% 0 0% 159 France 268 70% 17 4% 98 26% 383 Georgia 204 86% 4 2% 28 12% 236 Germany 28 9% 4 1% 273 90% 305 Greece 205 69% 17 6% 77 26% 299 Hungary 18 11% 5 3% 138 86% 161 Iceland 53 39% 17 13% 65 48% 135 Ireland, Republic of 1 13% 1 13% 6 75% 8 Italy 45 14% 18 6% 248 80% 311 Kosovo 162 100% 0 0% 0 0% 162 Malta 156 78% 4 2% 40 20% 200 Montenegro 18 82% 0 0% 4 18% 22 Netherlands 106 82% 2 2% 21 16% 129 Norway 26 28% 4 4% 62 67% 92 Poland 156 49% 16 5% 146 46% 318 Portugal 2 1% 5 4% 130 95% 137 Romania 105 63% 8 5% 53 32% 166 Spain 261 84% 27 9% 22 7% 310 Sweden 113 63% 13 7% 53 30% 179 Switzerland 103 69% 9 6% 38 25% 150 Turkey 114 58% 10 5% 72 37% 196 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 124 29% 9 2% 299 69% 432 Latin America Argentina 107 64% 10 6% 49 30% 166 Bolivia 59 74% 10 13% 11 14% 80 Brazil 24 9% 54 20% 196 72% 274 Chile 14 23% 11 18% 37 60% 62 Costa Rica 57 38% 11 7% 84 55% 152 Ecuador 21 9% 3 1% 204 89% 228 El Salvador 53 54% 9 9% 36 37% 98 Guatemala 108 65% 7 4% 51 31% 166 Mexico 139 66% 23 11% 50 24% 212 Nicaragua 94 86% 9 8% 6 6% 109 Paraguay 84 66% 7 6% 36 28% 127 Peru 69 49% 23 16% 49 35% 141 Uruguay 214 97% 6 3% 0 0% 220 Middle East Egypt 12 46% 10 38% 4 15% 26 Israel 264 89% 9 3% 25 8% 298 Jordan 23 44% 27 52% 2 4% 52 Lebanon 184 100% 0 0% 0 0% 184 Tunisia 157 62% 8 3% 89 35% 254 United Arab Emirates 80 98% 0 0% 2 2% 82 North America Canada 209 75% 12 4% 56 20% 277 United States of America 86 52% 21 13% 58 35% 165 Pacific Australia 6 2% 3 1% 254 97% 263 Fiji 60 75% 8 10% 12 15% 80 New Zealand 14 8% 5 3% 161 89% 180 Papua New Guinea 19 24% 8 10% 52 66% 79 Tonga 64 100% 0 0% 0 0% 64 106 Annex 3. National Results 106 15. Stories that highlight gender equality or inequality Does not highlight issues concerning inequality Clearly highlights issues concerning inequality Do not know, cannot decide TOTAL REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N Africa Benin 34 94% 2 6% 0 0% 36 Botswana 61 85% 8 11% 3 4% 72 Burkina Faso 54 95% 0 0% 3 5% 57 Burundi 65 90% 6 8% 1 1% 72 Cameroon 40 98% 1 2% 0 0% 41 Congo, Dem Rep 50 69% 7 10% 15 21% 72 Congo, Rep (Brazzaville) 3 10% 17 55% 11 35% 31 Ethiopia 71 97% 1 1% 1 1% 73 Ghana 35 95% 0 0% 2 5% 37 Guinée Conakry 91 98% 0 0% 2 2% 93 Kenya 80 93% 5 6% 1 1% 86 Lesotho 20 100% 0 0% 0 0% 20 Liberia 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 Madagascar 63 94% 1 1% 3 4% 67 Mauritania 27 84% 5 16% 0 0% 32 Mauritius 33 67% 15 31% 1 2% 49 Namibia 34 83% 4 10% 3 7% 41 Niger 52 93% 2 4% 2 4% 56 Nigeria 100 95% 3 3% 2 2% 105 Senegal 97 94% 5 5% 1 1% 103 South Africa 162 91% 7 4% 9 5% 178 Sudan (south) 29 94% 1 3% 1 3% 31 Tanzania 76 96% 1 1% 2 3% 79 Togo 10 77% 2 15% 1 8% 13 Uganda 49 89% 5 9% 1 2% 55 Zambia 58 71% 2 2% 22 27% 82 Zimbabwe 99 99% 1 1% 0 0% 100 Asia Bangladesh 295 97% 3 1% 6 2% 304 China 454 100% 0 0% 1 0% 455 India 374 87% 25 6% 29 7% 428 Japan 112 99% 1 1% 0 0% 113 Kyrgyzstan 128 98% 2 2% 0 0% 130 Malaysia 258 92% 12 4% 10 4% 280 Nepal 185 98% 4 2% 0 0% 189 Pakistan 78 95% 3 4% 1 1% 82 Philippines 491 86% 46 8% 33 6% 570 South Korea 125 77% 6 4% 32 20% 163 Taiwan 348 99% 1 0% 3 1% 352 Thailand 434 98% 0 0% 8 2% 442 Vietnam 130 98% 1 1% 1 1% 132 Caribbean Belize 41 93% 1 2% 2 5% 44 Dominican Republic 109 73% 31 21% 10 7% 150 Grenada 39 100% 0 0% 0 0% 39 Guyana 39 81% 9 19% 0 0% 48 Haiti 69 86% 5 6% 6 8% 80 Jamaica 157 95% 2 1% 6 4% 165 Puerto Rico 115 81% 10 7% 17 12% 142 St Lucia 5 50% 1 10% 4 40% 10 St. Vincent and The Grenadines 24 96% 1 4% 0 0% 25 Suriname 48 94% 1 2% 2 4% 51 Trinidad & Tobago 83 97% 3 3% 0 0% 86 Europe Austria 138 97% 3 2% 2 1% 143 Belarus 125 100% 0 0% 0 0% 125 Belgium 303 94% 15 5% 5 2% 323 Bosnia & Herzegovina 134 96% 4 3% 1 1% 139 107 Annex 3. National Results 107 15. Stories that highlight gender equality or inequality Does not highlight issues concerning inequality Clearly highlights issues concerning inequality Do not know, cannot decide TOTAL REGION COUNTRY N % N % N % N Bulgaria 49 75% 15 23% 1 2% 65 Croatia 96 94% 3 3% 3 3% 102 Cyprus 157 99% 1 1% 0 0% 158 Czech Republic 151 93% 1 1% 10 6% 162 Denmark 154 100% 0 0% 0 0% 154 Estonia 347 100% 0 0% 1 0% 348 Finland 153 96% 6 4% 0 0% 159 France 349 87% 27 7% 25 6% 401 Georgia 231 96% 3 1% 7 3% 241 Germany 302 90% 1 0% 33 10% 336 Greece 288 94% 11 4% 9 3% 308 Hungary 156 96% 5 3% 2 1% 163 Iceland 131 96% 4 3% 1 1% 136 Ireland, Republic of 7 64% 0 0% 4 36% 11 Italy 300 96% 11 4% 1 0% 312 Kosovo 162 100% 0 0% 0 0% 162 Malta 198 99% 1 1% 1 1% 200 Montenegro 24 96% 0 0% 1 4% 25 Netherlands 130 95% 0 0% 7 5% 137 Norway 89 88% 5 5% 7 7% 101 Poland 279 82% 7 2% 55 16% 341 Portugal 131 95% 6 4% 1 1% 138 Romania 160 96% 6 4% 0 0% 166 Spain 258 82% 40 13% 17 5% 315 Sweden 175 95% 5 3% 5 3% 185 Switzerland 141 94% 6 4% 3 2% 150 Turkey 199 91% 10 5% 9 4% 218 United Kingdom (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) 417 94% 18 4% 8 2% 443 Latin America Argentina 125 74% 15 9% 28 17% 168 Bolivia 24 22% 42 39% 42 39% 108 Brazil 230 76% 29 10% 43 14% 302 Chile 43 68% 2 3% 18 29% 63 Costa Rica 122 79% 27 18% 5 3% 154 Ecuador 223 98% 2 1% 3 1% 228 El Salvador 96 98% 2 2% 0 0% 98 Guatemala 141 82% 6 4% 24 14% 171 Mexico 132 62% 46 22% 34 16% 212 Nicaragua 101 87% 7 6% 8 7% 116 Paraguay 115 76% 4 3% 33 22% 152 Peru 119 77% 12 8% 23 15% 154 Uruguay 216 97% 5 2% 2 1% 223 Middle East Egypt 19 73% 7 27% 0 0% 26 Israel 298 98% 2 1% 5 2% 305 Jordan 44 77% 10 18% 3 5% 57 Lebanon 183 99% 1 1% 1 1% 185 Tunisia 218 82% 10 4% 39 15% 267 United Arab Emirates 82 100% 0 0% 0 0% 82 North America Canada 262 94% 10 4% 7 3% 279 United States of America 135 78% 20 12% 18 10% 173 Pacific Australia 260 97% 3 1% 6 2% 269 Fiji 75 93% 3 4% 3 4% 81 New Zealand 173 93% 3 2% 11 6% 187 Papua New Guinea 62 77% 4 5% 15 19% 81 Tonga 63 97% 1 2% 1 2% 65 108 Annex 4. Participating Countries, Regional and National Coordinators AFRICA Regional Coordinators African Woman and Child Feature Service (AWC), Rosemary Okello-Orlale, Kenya Réseau Inter- Africain pour les Femmes, Médias Genre et Développement (FAMEDEV), Amie Joof Cole, Senegal Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Glenda Muzenda and Lowani Mtonga, South Africa National Coordinators Benin: Tchibozo K. Makeba Botswana: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Pelonomi Letshwiti- Macheng Burkina Faso: Réseau Inter- Africain pour les Femmes, Médias, Genre et Développement (FAMEDEV) Habi Ouattara Burundi: Association des Femmes Journalistes du Burundi (AFJO), Dorothée Bigirimana Cameroun: Nkong Hill Top Common Initiative Group (NCIG), Gospel Nti Mabotiji / Cameroon Radio Television (CRTV) / Etoa Epse Nkono and Barbara Béatrice Congo, Rep (Brazzaville): Brigitte Makombo / Edouard Adzotsa Congo, Dem Rep: Si Jeunesse Savait / Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Françoise Mukuku / Anna Mayimona Ngemba Ethiopia Women’s Media Association, Abebech Wolde Ghana: Ghana Broadcasting Corporation, Charity Binka Guinée Conakry: Kadiatou Thiernor Diallo Kenya: African Woman and Child Feature Service (AWC), Rosemary Okello-Orlale Lesotho: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Sophia Tlali Madagascar: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Flavienne Ramarosaona / Lalfine Papisy Tracoulat Mauritania: Amadou Guisset Mauritius: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Saskia Naidoo- Virahsawmy Namibia: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Sarry Xoagus-Eises Niger: Point focal genre du Réseau InterAfricain pour les Femmes, Médias, Genre et Développement (FAMEDEV), Hamadou Yvette Dovi Nigeria: Society and Media Initiative, Nkem Fab-Ukozor Senegal: Réseau Inter- Africain pour les Femmes, Médias, Genre et Développement (FAMEDEV), Amie Joof-Cole South Africa: Gender and Media Southern African (GEMSA) Network, Glenda Muzenda and Lowani Mtonga Sudan: Association of Media Women in Southern Sudan, Apollonia Mathia Tanzania: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA),Wilbert Kitima / Gladness Munuo Hamedi Togo: Francis Pedro Amuzun Uganda: Uganda Media Women’s Association (UMWA), Margaret Sentamu Zambia: Gender and Media Southern Africa (GEMSA), Pepertual Sichikwenkwe Zimbabwe: Media Monitoring Project, Nhlanhla Ngwenya ASIA Regional Coordinators University of Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dr. Gitiara Nasreen Communication Foundation for Asia, The Philippines, Teresita Hermano National Coordinators Bangladesh: University of Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dr. Gitiara Nasreen China: Media Monitor for Women Network, Zhang Qi India: Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI), Ammu Joseph Japan: Forum for Children’s Television and Media (FCT), Toshiko Miyazaki Kyrgyzstan: Rural Women’s Public Association (Alga), Olga Djanaeva Malaysia: Universiti Sains Malaysia, Dr Wang Lay Kim Nepal: Asmita Women’s Publishing House, Media and Resource Organisation, Manju Thapa Pakistan: Uks Research Centre, Tasneem Ahmar The Philippines: Communication Foundation for Asia, Teresita Hermano / Miriam College, Lynda Garcia South Korea: Olive Tree Production, Rev. Soonnim Lee Taiwan: National Chengchi University, Nien-hsuan Leticia Fang Thailand: Burapha University, Ratchanee Vongsumitr Vietnam: Research Centre for Gender, Family and Environment in Development, Pham Kim Ngoc CARIBBEAN Regional Coordinators Women’s Media Watch, Jamaica, Hilary Nicholson Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication (CARIMAC), Jamaica, Dr. Corinne Barnes Universidad de Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico, Dr. Maximiliano Dueñas-Guzmán National Coordinators Belize: Women’s Issues Network of Belize, Florence Goldson Dominican Republic: Espacio Insular, Seferina de la Cruz Grenada: Grenada National Organisation of Women (GNOW), Elaine Henry-McQueen Guyana: Artists in Direct Support, Desiree Edgehill Haiti: Rezo Fanm Radyo Kominote Ayisyen (REFRAKA), Marie Guyrleine Justin Jamaica: Women’s Media Watch - Jamaica / Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication (CARIMAC), Hilary Nicholson / Dr. Corinne Barnes Puerto Rico: Universidad de Puerto Rico Lourdes, Lourdes Lugo-Ortiz St. Lucia: Caribbean Association for Feminist Research and Action (CAFRA), Flavia Cherry St Vincent and The Grenadines: SVG Human Rights & Women in Support of Equity, Sheron Garraway Suriname: Caribbean Association for Feminist Research and Action (CAFRA) Sandra Clenem 109 Annex 4. Participating Countries Trinidad & Tobago: Network of NGOS of Trinidad and Tobago for the Advancement of Women, Hazel Brown/ Stephanie Leitch EUROPE Regional Coordinators Be Aware, Be Emancipated (B.a.B.e.), Croatia, Sanja Sarnavka University of Liverpool, United Kingdom, Dr. Karen Ross National Coordinators Austria: Salzburg University Dept. of Communication Studies, Dr. Susanne Kassel Belarus: Center for Gender Studies of the European Humanities University, Irina Solomatina Belgium: University of Ghent, Sofie Van Bauwel / University of Louvain, Laurence Mundschau Bosnia & Herzegovina: United Women (Udružene žene) Banja Luka Ms Natalija Petric / Aleksandra Petric Bulgaria: People & Borders Foundation, Iliana Stoicheva Croatia: Open Society - ProEquality Centre, Tereza Wennerholm Caslavska Cyprus: Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies (MIGS), Susana Pavlou Czech Republic: Open Society - ProEquality Centre Tereza, Wennerholm Caslavska Denmark: Kontrabande, Birgitte Raben Estonia: Ruta Pels Finland: Swedish School of Social Science, Jaana Hagelberg France: Université de Toulouse II, Marlène Coulomb-Gully Georgia: Journalists Association Gender Media Caucasus, Galina Petriashvili Germany: League of Women Journalists, Birgitta Schulte Greece: Department of Journalism & Mass Communication, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Dr. Dimitra Dimitrakopoulou Hungary: Hungarian Women’s Lobby, Reka Safrany Iceland: University of Iceland, Valgerður Jóhannsdóttir Ireland, Republic of: Women’s News, Annette Carter Italy: Osservatorio di Pavia, Monia Azzalini / University of Padova, Dr. Claudia Padovani Kosovo: Vjollca Krasniqi Malta: University of Malta, Brenda Murphy Montenegro: Anima Kotor NGO, Aleksandra Kovacevic Netherlands: Radio Netherlands Training Centre Europa, Bernadette van Dijck Norway: University of Oslo, Elisabeth Eide Poland: University of Lodz, Dr. Elzbieta Oleksy Portugal: Instituto de Estudos Jornalisticos, Maria Joao Silveirinha Romania: University of Bucarest, Dr. Daniela Frumusani Spain: Association of Catalan Women Journalists, Elvira Altes Sweden: Media watch group Allt är Möjligt, Maria Jacobson Switzerland: Bureau de l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes, Sylvie Durrer Turkey: Anadolu University, Dr. Nezih Orhon United Kingdom: Dr. Karen Ross, University of Liverpool, (England); Dr. Cynthia Carter, Cardiff University (Wales); Jen Birks, University of Stirling (Scotland); and Kellie Turtle, Queen’s University, Belfast (Northern Ireland) LATIN AMERICA Regional Coordinator Grupo de Apoyo al Movimiento de Mujeres del Azuay (GAMMA), Nidya Pesantez-Calle and Sandra López Astudillo, Ecuador National Coordinators Argentina: Instituto Movilizador de Fondos Cooperativos, Claudia Florentín/ Marcela Gabioud Bolivia: Centro de la Mujer Gregoria Apaza, Cecilia Enriquez Brazil: Universidade Metodista de São Paulo, Sandra Duarte Souza / Rede Mulher de Educação e Associação Mulheres pela Paz, Vera Vieira Chile: ISIS Internaciónal, Ana María Portugal Costa Rica: Universidad Bíblica Latinoamericana, Nidia Fonseca / Vilma Peña Ecuador: Grupo de Apoyo al Movimiento de Mujeres del Azuay (GAMMA), Nidya Pesantez-Calle and Sandra López Astudillo El Salvador: Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Centroamericana ‘José Simeón Cañas’, Carlos Léon Ramos Guatemala: Centro Evangélico de Estudios Pastorales en América Central (CEDEPCA) Ana Silvia Monzón / Elisabeth Carrera Paz / Maya Cu Mexico: Comunicación e Información de la Mujer (CIMAC), Miriam González Nicaragua: Centro Inter-Eclesial de Estudio Teológicos y Sociales (CIEETS), Blanca Cortés Robles Paraguay: Coordinación de Mujeres del Paraguay, Alicia Stumpfs / Radio Viva, Mirian Candia Peru: Asociación de Comunicadores Sociales Calandria, Lizett Graham Uruguay: Cotidiano Mujer, Francesca Casariego MIDDLE EAST Regional Coordinators Appropriate Communication Techniques for Development (ACT), Egypt, Dr. Azza Kamel Coptic Evangelical Organisation for Social Services (CEOSS), Egypt, Amany Latif Ebied National Coordinators Egypt: Appropriate Communication Techniques for Development (ACT), Dr. Azza Kamel / Coptic Evangelical Organisation for Social Services (CEOSS), Amany Latif Ebied Israel: Sapir College, Dr. Einat Lachover Jordan: Arab Women’s Organisation, Layla Hamarneh Lebanon: Maharat Foundation, Roula Mikhael Tunisia: Centre for Arab Women Training and Research (CAWTAR), Atidel Mejbri United Arab Emirates: Zayed University, Dr. Catherine Strong / Dr. Badran Badran PACIFIC Regional Coordinator FemLink Pacific: Media Initiatives for Women, Fiji, Sharon Bhagwan-Rolls National Coordinators Australia: Queensland University of Technology Dr. Angela Romano Fiji: FemLink Pacific: Media Initiatives for Women / Fiji Media Watch Group, Sharon Bhagwan-Rolls / Violet Savu New Zealand: School of Political Science and International Relations Victoria University of Wellington / Massey University, Dr. Kate McMillan / Dr. Margie Comrie Papua New Guinea: Communication Arts Department at Divine Word University, Joys Eggins Tonga: Ma’afafine mo e Famili, Betty Blake / Kalolaine Fifita NORTH AMERICA Canada: Simon Fraser University. Dr. Kathleen Cross United States of America: United Methodist Church - General Board of Global Ministries. Dr. Glory Dharmaraj 110 Annex 5. Virtual working group members Tasneem Ahmar, Uks – A Research Centre, Resource and Publication Centre on Women and Media, Pakistan Dr. Corrine Barnes, Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication, Jamaica Sharon Bhagwan-Rolls, FemLINKPACIFIC Media Initiatives for Women, Fiji Dr. Glory Dharmaraj, General Board of Global Ministries, United Methodist Church, USA Dr. Shari Graydon, Media Action, Canada Dr. Maximiliano Duenas Guzman, University of Puerto Rico Amie Joof-Cole, Inter-African Network for Women, Media, Gender and Development (FAMEDEV), Senegal Dr. Azza Kamel, Appropriate Communication Technologies for Development (ACT), Egypt Colleen Lowe Morna, Gender Links, South Africa Dr. Sarah Macharia, World Association for Christian Communication, Canada Dr. Kate McMillan, School of Political Science and International Relations Victoria, University of Wellington, New Zealand Francoise Mukuku, Radio OKAPI, Democratic Republic of Congo Dr. Gitiara Nasreen, Department of Mass Communication and Journalism, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh Hilary Nicholson, Women’s Media Watch (WMW), Jamaica Rosemary Okello-Orlale, African Woman and Child Feature Service (AWC), Kenya Nidya Pesantez-Calle, Grupo de Apoyo al Movimiento de Mujeres del Azuay (GAMMA), Ecuador Nebojsa Radics, Lebanon Violet Savu, Fiji Media Watch, Fiji Judith Smith-Vialva, Southern African Media and Gender Institute (SAMGI), South Africa GMMP Monitoring, Mauritius 111 Amie Joof is a journalist, activist, and the Executive Director of The Inter-African Network for Women, Media, Gender and Development (FAMEDEV). She spearheaded the establishment of women and adult education radio programming, radio listening groups, women’s community radio stations and the training and use of traditional media namely theatre and musical groups for development programming at Radio Gambia now part of Gambia Radio and Television Services (GRTS). She is a member of an expert group of the Communication for Education and Development (COMED) of the Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) that developed a hands-on toolkit on covering education for journalists and communicators in Africa. Amie is a member of the Gambia Press Union (GPU) and has served as a gender and media resource person for the International Federation of Journalists, (IFJ) Africa Office, the Eastern Africa Journalists Association (EAJA) and the Southern Africa Journalists Association (SAJA). She currently coordinates ‘An Alternative Voice for Gambians’, an online radio in support of socio economic development, freedom of expression and human rights in The Gambia. Nidya Pesántez is an Information Sciences graduate from the University of Cuenca in Ecuador. She also holds a diploma in Gender-Sensitive Budget-Making for the Eradication of Poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean from FLACSO, the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences. In addition, she earned a graduate degree in Anthropology and Social Conflict from the Bolivarian University of Santiago and the Fundación Unida in Argentina. She presently works as the coordinator of the Grupo de Apoyo al Movimiento de Mujeres del Azuay – Support Group for the Azuay Women’s Movement (GAMMA) in Cuenca, Ecuador. Prior to this she was the Technical Director of Ecuador’s National Council of Women. Pesántez is an expert in gender and communication for development. Mindy Ran is an Amsterdam-based journalist and audio/ video documentary and feature maker. She has regularly contributed features and documentaries on a variety of issues for Radio Netherlands Worldwide and is currently producing and presenting a weekly programme. She is also managing editor of Intervention, a journal on psychosocial interventions for survivors of war, trauma, torture and natural disasters. Her other freelance credits include (among others): stringer/fixer and production assistant for Rapido TV (UK - Channel 4), CHX Productions and Prospect Pictures (UK); the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC - Radio 1, 4, 5, (UK) Scotland and World Service), Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and National Public Radio (U.S.). Ms. Ran is a member of the Dutch Journalist’s Association (the NVJ) and the British Journalists’ Union (the NUJ). She served for 9 years on the National Executive Council of the NUJ representing Continental Europe and is currently the chair of the Equality Council (3rd term). She also represents the NUJ within a wider, international basis through the International Federation of Journalists (Gender Council, chair, 2nd term), and as a member of Amnesty Trade Union Network; specializing in equality, human rights, antiglobalization and press freedom issues. Annex 6. Special Commentaries: Contributors’ Biographies GMMP Monitoring, Lebanon World Association for Christian Communication 308 Main Street Toronto, ON M4C 4X7 Canada Telephone +1 416-691-1999 Fax +1 416-691-1997 INFO@waccglobal.org www.waccglobal.org www.whomakesthenews.org WACC is a UK Registered Charity (number 296073) and a Company registered in England and Wales (number 2082273) with its Registered Office at 71 Lambeth Walk, London SE11 6DX Tel: +44(0)-207-735-2877. It is an incorporated Charitable Organisation in Canada (number 83970 9524 RR0001) with its head office in Toronto, Canada.