I was recently interviewed about research that I did with Massey University colleagues about the quality and quantity of media coverage men and women gained during the Beijing Olympics last year.
This made me reflect on media coverage and why it is that some athletes gain more media coverage than others.
From the 7th to the 25th of August, 432 photographs of New Zealand Olympians were published in two major New Zealand newspapers (The Press and The New Zealand Herald).
Although women made up nearly half the New Zealand Olympic team, they received a third of the photo coverage (64% were of men and 34% featured women).
When compared with photos that were collected from 12 newspapers in China, Italy, South Africa, the United States and New Zealand this gender divide is middle of the road.
The clearest gender divide was in South Africa where men gained 72.8% of the coverage.
Gender equity in terms of media coverage was closest in China. What were the reasons for male New Zealand athletes gaining two thirds of the media coverage at the Olympics? What is going on in China and South Africa? We are yet to thoroughly analyse the results.
One explanation is that the medal tally for New Zealand favoured men, with 12 medals going to male athletes and three to female athletes (who all won gold).
Working in the world of sports media must always involve taking risks which is why sporting outcomes remain uncertain and exciting.
Journalists, photographers and editors must second guess who the stars and winners of the Games will be based on form, rankings and public interest. As a result, the likes of Mahe Drysdale and Moss Burmester got snapped on many occasions. Mahe Drysdale had 19 of his 23 photos published before he won bronze, while the Evers-Swindell sisters only had 6 of a total of 13 photos published prior to their gold medal-winning performance.
Although Valerie Vili was a favourite in her event, only 14 of her 26 photos were published prior to her event.
Other athletes come out of nowhere.
For some reason the media (and public?) were fascinated by Sarah Walker who gained a total of 19 photos despite crashing and burning in the final to place fourth.
And since the Olympics her attractiveness appeals more to the Beef and Lamb advertisers than Valerie Vili's gold-winning performance.
As female consumers of beef and lamb would we be put off eating red meat if Valerie was promoting it? Are we really that shallow and naïve? Surely, New Zealand women would feel liberated and thrilled to have not only a woman of significant proportions, but also of Pacific Island origin promoting beef and lamb.
Are they targeting the white or Pakeha female market only? Is there no point marketing red meat to the brown sisters of Aotearoa/New Zealand because they're already getting their quota? Originally, I thought the beef and lamb advertisers were heroes for promoting female athletes who were gold medallists.
By including Sarah Walker it has tarnished the focus of their ads for me.
Apparently, Valerie Vili struggles to gain sponsorship and endorsements in the New Zealand market and may be seeking to compete for Britain or France where she would be appreciated more. Please stay, Valerie.
As a woman who doesn't fit the Evers-Swindell, Ulmer or Walker mould, I find your consistent performance, uncompromising personality, and life story inspirational and entertaining, and would like that to continue for a few years yet.
