I would like to focus this blog on the Brown, Gardetto article titled, "Representing Hillary Rodham Clinton: Gender, Meaning, and News Media."
This article points out that the news media is supposed to, or tries to, report in an unbiased way. But points out that the fact that Clinton is not only female she is, first lady (public wife), and citizen. She must be careful how she speaks to the media. If she speaks as first lady she is violating herself as citizen, if she speaks as citizen she is going against herself as first lady. This puts Clinton in a very awkward situation.
It is interesting that as a nation we have certain expectations of what a woman should do and who she should be. We expect a lot of women to fight for woman's rights and to be independent. But when it comes to our first lady we expect the woman to take on the traditional roles of wife and succumb to the husband. Many Americans do not like the idea that Clinton might have been behind some of the decisions made by her husband Bill. We expect her to act as a wife should act. Staying out of the media and out of politics.
It is interesting that when Clinton became involved the the media through her testimonial for the Whitewater case American's weren't sure how to view her; citizen or first lady. I can't help but raise the question why was Clinton's involvement in the media such a big deal? Nancy Reagan was very involved in her husband's presidency, often relying on her psychic for advice. Was this as controversial? Or not the same situation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I liked how you brought in both sides of Clinton's job when she was First Lady. She had to be a citizen but also be the First Lady. When she was running for Presidency last year, I felt like she had a similar struggle. She had to act like a strong leader but also a feminine sort of role model. In the end, it didn't work out but I am not sure that being a woman had more to do with that than Obama's campaign being more inspiring to the people who were voting in the primary.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, in that Hiliary's involvement in the media has been very contradictory. When she ran for office for instance she was often criticized for being to aggressive, and that women were not relating to her. It finally took her crying for women to realize she was just like them. I think that because the Clintons are such a famous family that they are looked at through a microscope; although the Ragens too were a very famous family they did not receive nearly the amount of media coverage as the Clintons. She is a very strong woman and is one of the first to publicly show just how tough she really is, and I think that is very intimidating to a lot of people out there.
ReplyDeleteI really liked this article too, for I think it outlines precisely the sometimes demeaning and contradictory reporting on women who have become prominent in any way within the American public sphere; especially in politics. Secretary of State Clinton worked, therefore, as a marvelous example of this situation as she has continually been regarded according to the expectations of the American public and media of how a woman should behave in certain aspects of public/private life in America.
ReplyDelete