The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Lance Welton Archive
Are Women Editors Worsening Our “Frighteningly Orthodox Media Culture”? Probably!
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Earlier by Lance Welton: Are Women Destroying Academia? Probably

Washington Post journalist Paul Farhi recently put out a very interesting (if embarrassingly fawning) twitter thread on the occasion of Sally Buzbee being named executive editor of the Washington Post a.k.a. his boss:

“Women are now in charge of the newsrooms at the Washington Post, CBS News, ABC News, NPR, MSNBC, Reuters, Financial Times, Guardian and the Economist. The fact that this is not a big deal is kind of a big deal.”

What Farhi presumably meant was that this “fact “was a wonderful example of growing Equality and Progress. He was virtue-signaling his approval at the collapse of male influence. However, unintentionally, he drew attention to something that is important for very different reasons: women being in charge is indeed “kind of a big deal” because the technical literature suggests it will mean that the news will be reported less objectively, less fairly, less accurately—and that some politicians may come under less scrutiny.

Thus, British psychologist Sir Simon Baron-Cohen (yes, he’s the appalling Sacha Baron-Cohen’s cousin) has noted that there are fundamental differences between the typical male and female brain.

The “extreme male brain” is extremely high in “systematizing.” It is focused on logic, reason, order, hierarchy and with making sense of the world accurately Autistic-like, it is extremely low in “empathy”—that is, caring about the feelings of others, and being interested in and able to read external signals of internal emotions.

The extreme female brain is exactly the opposite. It is low in systematizing and high in “empathy.” The result is females are far more interested in equality, making sure nobody gets hurt, and in the feelings of others [The extreme male brain theory of autism, by Simon Baron-Cohen, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002].

In other words, women are less interested in the objective truth, less logical, and more willing to put ideals like “equality” above the truth. Taken to an extreme, “hyper-empathy” means that you over-read social signals, leading you to be paranoid about people’s motives [Mentalism and mechanism, by C. Badcock, Human nature and social values, 2003].

This is made even worse by the fact that women are neurotic than men: they experience negative feelings more strongly ( A good source is Personality: What Makes You the Way You Are, By Daniel Nettle). This makes them much likely to feel “unsafe”—to use a current Leftist buzzword. (Witness this ridiculous headline The Memo: Lawmakers on edge after Greene’s spat with Ocasio-Cortez, by Niall Stanage, May 15, 2021. )

This makes them prone to put “safety” over “freedom” and indeed “truth.” And, as Simon Baron-Cohen noted, they are simply far more conformist, desiring to fit in with the crowd and keep everyone happy.

Today, if you hadn’t noticed, the crowd is Woke Progressives.

And, right on cue, as this wave of women started taking over, the U.S. acquired what as D.C. Circuit Senior Judge Laurence Silberman recently described as “a frighteningly orthodox media culture” [Federal judge pens dissent slamming decades-old press protections, by Josh Gerstein, Politico, March 19, 2021].

In earlier VDARE.com articles, I have noted that the female presence tends to corrupt the jury system, because females will be more swayed by emotional arguments—especially about others being harmed—rather than by logical presentations. And they may assume malevolent motives based on over-empathizing.

I have also argued that women may be destroying academia by putting equality and Everyone Getting Along ahead of truth, by being unable to rationally deal with academic disputation (being Neurotic they are more easily upset and overwhelmed by negative feelings), and by driving geniuses—who tend to be male outlier high IQ autistics obsessed with truth and thus abrasive—out of the university system.

In fact, when my VDARE.com article about women in academe was tweeted about by Prof. Eric Rasmusen, a male academic at the University of Indiana, it resulted in calls, by women, for him to be fired, and in his female provost Lauren Robel [Email her] engaging in the exactly the emotion-fest we’d expect: she claimed his comments were “lethal” for women academics and his empirically-accurate views were “hurtful” [Our Professor’s Views Are Vile, University Says. But We Can’t Fire Him, by Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs, New York Times, November 22, 2019.]

So imagine the damage that could be inflicted on the pursuit of truth as females take over influential newsrooms.

Well, we don’t have to imagine, because it’s already been researched. A female-dominated newsroom is going to tip towards female concerns. Research by the Pew Research Center has unearthed exactly what these are. Being higher in Neuroticism, women are more interested in news stories about natural disasters, health and safety issues and in “tabloid news”—in other words, “celebrity gossip.” In contrast, men, being highly competitive and status-driven, are far more interested in “international affairs, Washington news and sports” [Where Men and Women Differ in Following the News, by Tom Rosentiel, Pew Research Center, February 6, 2008].

More evidence that female-dominated newsrooms are far more interested in these “female” issues and focus on them in reporting: Women Matter in Newsrooms: How Power and Critical Mass Relate to the Coverage of the HPV Vaccine, by Theresa Correa & Dustin Harp, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 2011]

In other words, we would expect female-dominated new rooms to be, essentially, less interested in politics, less likely to hold our leaders to account—because women are more conformist and submissive to authority–and less likely to tell us about crucial international issues. See Sex Differences in Conformity: Status and Gender Role Interpretations, by Alice H. Eagly and Carole Chrvala, Psychology of Women Quarterly, September 1, 1986.

Indeed, because they dislike conflict and desire social accord, we would expect women interviewers to be far less cutting and incisive in their cross-examination of politicians, permitting them to get away with more.

And we would be right. It has been documented that female interviewers are far less confrontational and cutting in their style [Roles and Identities in Confrontational Interactions, by Elda Weizman, Questions de Communication, 2006].

Returning to the Pew Research Center study, if women’s attitudes dominated the news in 2007 when the research was done, we would have heard far more about tornadoes, floods and the recall of toys from China. But, crucially, we would have learned far less about “US/Iran tensions,” the condition of the US economy and (Pew says) “the issue of immigration.”

But we would also have heard less about “the Superbowl”!

So to those of us who aren’t sports fans, there may be some benefit to female influence on the newsroom!

But, clearly, too much female influence is going to leave us ignorant of important national issues.

And, to make matters worse, where they are reported we can expect a Pravda-like enforcement system, where conformist ideals—such the promotion of equality and of not upsetting people—are placed above reporting and getting to the objective truth.

The possible only silver lining, remarkably: here is evidence that female reporters are inclined to rely on male expert sources—sources that are likely to be more logical and appointed on merit—slightly more than do male reporters [Women in TV Broadcast News: Reporters and Sources in Hard News Stories, by Mariah Irvin, Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 2013].

(!!!)

However, with women editors in charge of newsrooms, this will increasingly be for “soft news” stories.

WaPo’s Paul Farhi says female dominance of influential newsrooms is “kind of a big deal.”

That’s kind of the understatement of the decade.

Lance Welton [email him] is the pen name of a freelance journalist living in New York.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology, Science • Tags: Academia, Feminism, Political Correctness 
Hide 18 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. meamjojo says:

    This makes them prone to put “safety” over “freedom” and indeed “truth.” And, as Simon Baron-Cohen noted, they are simply far more conformist, desiring to fit in with the crowd and keep everyone happy.

    Today, if you hadn’t noticed, the crowd is Woke Progressives.

    And also supporters of Covid masking forever, mandatory Covid vaccination (by force if necessary), vaccine passports for all, etc., if the NYT and WaPo reader comment sections attached to their articles are any kind of gauge. Fear of Covid is rampant among posters using female posting names in their writings.

    Perhaps we would be better served as a society if woman were to return to staying home taking care of the family and minding the kids.

    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
  2. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    Are women moving into academia and media making them worse? No, because the two have become increasingly rotten and corrupt over the years and women are just moving in due to the weaknesses of both. Along with them open sex deviants and weirdos have become prominent in both areas. It’s part of the rot. The current so-called men in these fields are pretty poor examples, just pathetic excuses for a man. In defense of women many in academia are good in non-politically toxic fields so let’s be careful about sweeping generalizations. It’s true that women tend to have different interests. Look at this website; there’s hardly a single female that has any interest in any of these subjects. Maybe 3-4 total female commenters. In contrast websites dealing with hairstyles have a large female following. Ditto for sites dealing with worthless trash celebrity gossip. Trivial garbage, celebrity worship, endless relationship chatter are what the women apparently want. People can deny this but the mouse clicks are what tell the story.

    • Agree: GomezAdddams
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  3. Silesian says:

    All I know is, after a woman became editor of Scientific American magazine, its cover stories were solely aliens and black holes, or black holes and aliens. I let my subscription lapse after enough of that.

    • Agree: HbutnotG
    • Thanks: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    , @El Dato
  4. @anonymous

    No, it IS because women are involved that our institutions are, as you say, rotten and corrupt. Don’t say or infer women are coming to the rescue. Our institutions are in dire, desperate need of rescue from the women who rendered our institutions rotten and corrupt. All together through their takeover, women have turned the US into a most unserious and laughable collection of idiots and retards scorned the world over. In particular academia and government, with psycho-chicks stalking and screaming at each other all over Capitol Hill. Nasty, catty, conniving cunts ruining any chance of reconciliation on any level. Your delusion that women can fix what they destroyed is as laughable as what women have turned it all into.

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  5. @Silesian

    They’re SO concerned with their holes and what they can gain from said holes. Monetize, monetize! Or is it Mazel Tav?

  6. black dog says:

    They’re already there at the BBC. The British version, anyhow. Woke yet submissive to government, the BBC now deals in self congratulationary self promotion, virtue signalling and mindless trivia. And apparently believes that 70% of Britons are black or brown. The worst thing? They make us pay for the BBC. It’s a female dominated sham that sees itself as a social engineer. Everything is flavour of the week. This week, it’s Covid and mental health. With the usual woke truth filters applied.

  7. El Dato says:
    @Silesian

    So, around the year 2000?

    Take a look at Quanta Magazine, there are a lot of female writers and wokery is pushed like a matron’s recommended enema, but the articles are mostly well written. Unfortunately there are some which completely miss the mark in case the poor writer can’t explain the math properly and/or was suckered by the handwaving science guy who is going to have the Big Breakthrough any moment now.

  8. El Dato says:

    In fact, when my VDARE.com article about women in academe was tweeted about by Prof. Eric Rasmusen, a male academic at the University of Indiana, it resulted in calls, by women, for him to be fired, and in his female provost Lauren Robel [Email her] engaging in the exactly the emotion-fest we’d expect: she claimed his comments were “lethal” for women academics and his empirically-accurate views were “hurtful” [Our Professor’s Views Are Vile, University Says. But We Can’t Fire Him, by Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs, New York Times, November 22, 2019.]

    As in marriage, if you play along with the over-the-top emotional theatre, it will only get worse.

    People need to be much more negro and tell the bitch to shut up, she ain’t 14 anymore.

    AOC is a poster child of the degeneracy which comes from the conjunction of less-than-stellar IQ, being promoted to a post with no good reason, allied to emotional pampering.

    Should women be forced to read “Dune” in high school? Possibly!

  9. @meamjojo

    “Perhaps we would be better served as a society if woman were to return to staying home taking care of the family and minding the kids.”

    And repealing that pernicious 19th Amendment!

    • Agree: St-Germain, HbutnotG
    • Replies: @Gordon Pratt
    , @Shel100
  10. Good article. For those interested, here is a free e-book on the cognitive differences between men and women. One chapter is specifically about the extreme-male theory of autism.

    https://atavisionary.com/free-book-smart-and-sexy-the-evolutionary-origins-and-biological-underpinnings-of-cognitive-differences-between-the-sexes/

  11. @Joseph Doaks

    As a friend of mine said the other day “There is a reason why women were not allowed to vote.”

    • Agree: goldgettin
  12. @Jim Christian

    In the spirit of Leslie Nielsen, I just wanted to pop in and note that this resembles the time-honored chestnut on the Right: are the Jews taking over society/institution and making it degenerate, or is society/institution degenerate, and hence the Jews are taking over?

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  13. Shel100 says:
    @Joseph Doaks

    Giving women the right to vote has led to the downfall of our once great nation.

    • Thanks: goldgettin
  14. A while back Rosie got upset when I used the word dross to describe women in positions of authority.

    The female brain is also a product of higher levels of the “love hormone” oxytocin.

    It plays various roles in motherhood plus is associated with empathy, trust and relationship-building.

    Doping plebs with oxytocin has even been proposed to aid the Great Replacement.

  15. neutral says:

    are the Jews taking over society/institution and making it degenerate, or is society/institution degenerate, and hence the Jews are taking over?

    The answer is that it started with jews taking over, this is similar to the question “what came first the chicken or the egg”, if you want a straight answer then it is the egg. Much the same way as one can answer the egg question by looking at with evolutionary history, when the jews first enter the land the ever increasing slide into degeneracy of society always starts with them, as society decays ever more it allows the jews to gain ever more power. In the USA, being a total degenerate society, the jews have total power.

  16. The Canadian Broadcasting Corp leans toward a ‘female brain’ version of the news.

  17. @James J O'Meara

    Nah, women are the ultimate traitors. Feminism is the betrayal of men. Doesn’t matter if it was jews or muslims pushing the doctrine, American women embraced it because it released them from responsibility for family and gave them freedom to exercise their natural depravities. This is why old style Christian men and present-day muslims and jews keep THEIR women on VERY short leashes, because women are at heart, ultimately, sluts. They just ARE. We all know it. There’s no disputing it. Only marriage keeps a few of them in line and 80 % of married women in the west cheat in any case. Cosmo tells us this. That said, I have taken full advantage of the new rules that emerged in the 70s to my own hedonistic tendencies when it comes to women damaged by feminism. They made the rules since I was in the 6th grade, I played by and to those rules to this day.

    Pussy is easy, abundant and wet. And I don’t have to marry it.

  18. HbutnotG says:

    Allowing women to vote was the beginning of the end of Western Civilization.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Lance Welton Comments via RSS