Skip to main content Accessibility help

Looking for Sex in All the Wrong Places: Press Coverage and the Electoral Fortunes of Gubernatorial Candidates

  • Linda L. Fowler (a1) and Jennifer L. Lawless (a2)


Although female candidates have achieved parity on some dimensions, political institutions remain deeply gendered in how they structure the parameters of electoral competition. We rely on a new data set of gubernatorial races from the 1990s to address the theoretical and empirical challenges created by the interaction of gender, media content, and electoral institutions. Based on an analysis of 1,365 newspaper articles for 27 contests in which a woman held a major party nomination, we uncover evidence of continuing bias in media coverage. Yet significant coefficients on candidate sex tell only part of the story. Gendered contextual factors linked to the contest and state in which candidates compete, as well as the newspapers that cover their races, also affect women's experiences on the campaign trail. The major finding, however, is the presence of a powerful baseline effect favoring male candidates that is deeply embedded in U.S. politics. All else equal, women gubernatorial candidates suffer a substantial vote deficit that results from non-observable influences. The results support the emerging consensus among feminist theorists that greater focus on the political context is likely to produce bigger scholarly payoffs than is continued attention to observable differences between male and female candidates.



Hide All
Arnold, R. Douglas. 2005. Congress, the Press, and Political Accountability. Princeton: Princeton University.
Banwart, Mary C., Bystrom, Dianne G., and Robertson, Terry. 2003. From the primary to the general election: A comparative analysis of candidate media coverage in mixed-gender 2000 races for governor and U.S. Senate. American Behavioral Scientist 46 (5): 658–76.
Banwart, Mary C., and McKinney, Mitchell S.. 2005. A gendered influence in campaign debates? Analysis of mixed-gender United States Senate and gubernatorial debates. Political Communication 56 (4): 353–74.
Borrelli, MaryAnn, and Martin, Janet M.. 1997. The Other Elites: Women, Politics, and Power in the Executive Branch. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Braden, Maria. 1996. Women Politicians in the Media. Lexington: University of Kentucky.
Burns, Nancy. 2007. Gender in the aggregate, gender in the individual, gender and political action. Politics and Gender 3 (1): 104–24.
Burrell, Barbara C. 1994. A Woman's Place is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Bystrom, Dianne G., Banwart, Mary Christine, Kaid, Lynda Lee, and Robertson, Terry A.. 2004. Gender and Candidate Communication. New York: Routledge.
Carroll, Susan, and Fox, Richard. 2006. Gender and Elections in America. New York: Cambridge.
Carroll, Susan, and Schreiber, Ronnee. 1997. Media coverage of women in the 103rd Congress. In Women, Media and Politics, ed. Norris, Pippa. New York: Oxford.
Decker, Cathleen. 1990. “Feinstein Pushes to Get Edge While Wilson's Away.” Los Angeles Times, Oct. 28: A1, A32.
Devitt, James. 1999. “Framing Gender on the Campaign Trail: Women's Executive Leadership and the Press.” New York: Report to the Women's Leadership Fund,
Dolan, Kathleen. 2004. Voting for Women: How the Public Evaluates Women Candidates. Boulder: Westview.
Duerst-Lahti, Georgia. 2005. Institutional gendering: Theoretical insights into the environment. In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, ed. Thomas, Sue and Wilcox, Clyde. 2d ed.New York: Oxford.
Duerst-Lahti, Georgia, and Kelly, Rita Mae. 1995. Gender, Power, Leadership and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Enloe, Cynthia. 2004. The Curious Feminist. Berkeley: University of California.
Fiber, Pamela, and Fox, Richard L.. 2005. A tougher road for women: Assessing the role of gender in Congressional elections. In Gender and American Politics, ed. Tolleson-Rinehart, Sue and Josephson, Jyl J.. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Fox, Richard L. 1997. Gender Dynamics in Congressional Elections. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Fox, Richard L., and Oxley, Zoe M.. 2003. Gender stereotyping in state executive elections. Journal of Politics 65 (3): 833–50.
Fridkin, Kim L., and Woodall, Gina S.. 2005. Gender differences in U.S. Senators' presentation of self. In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, ed. Thomas, Sue and Wilcox, Clyde. 2d ed.New York: Oxford.
Gidengil, Elisabeth, and Everitt, Joanna. 2003. Talking tough: Gender and reported speech in campaign news coverage. Political Communication 20 (3): 209–32.
Gunderson, Dan. 2004. “Coya's Story.” Minnesota Public Radio, May 3.
Hancock, Ange-Marie. 2007. When multiplication doesn't equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics 5 (1): 6379.
Hawkesworth, Mary. 2006. Feminist Inquiry: From Political Conviction to Methodological Innovation. New Brunswick: Rutgers.
Holmes, Janet, and Meyerhoff, Miriam. 1999. The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in Society 28 (2): 173–83.
Huddy, Leonie, and Terkildsen, Nayda. 1993a. The consequences of gender stereotypes for women candidates at different levels and types of office. Political Research Quarterly 46 (3): 503–25.
Huddy, Leonie, and Terkildsen, Nayda. 1993b. Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science 37 (1): 119–47.
Iyengar, Shanto, Valentino, Nicholas, Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Simon, Adam. 1997. Running as a woman: Gender stereotyping in women's campaigns. In Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Norris, Pippa. New York: Oxford.
Johnson, Cathryn. 1994. Gender, legitimate authority, and leader-subordinate conversations. American Sociological Review 59 (1): 122–35.
Junn, Jane. 2007. Square pegs and round holes: Challenges of fitting individual-level analysis to a theory of politicized context of gender. Politics and Gender 3 (1): 124–34.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1994. Does gender make a difference? An experimental examination of sex stereotypes and press patterns in statewide campaigns. American Journal of Political Science 38 (1): 162–95.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia.
Karakowsky, Leonard, McBey, Kenneth, and Miller, Diane L.. 2004. Gender, perceived competence, and power plays. Small Group Research 35 (4): 407–39.
Koch, Jeffrey. W. 2000. Do citizens apply gender stereotypes to infer candidates' ideological prientations? Journal of Politics 62 (2): 414–29.
Lawless, Jennifer L. 2004. Women, war, and winning elections: Gender stereotyping in the post September 11th era. Political Research Quarterly 53 (3): 479–90.
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Fox, Richard. 2005. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office. New York: Cambridge.
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Pearson, Kathryn. 2008. The primary reason for women's under-representation: Re-evaluating the conventional wisdom. Journal of Politics 70 (1): 6782.
Leeper, Mark. 1991. The impact of prejudice on female candidates: An experimental look at voter inference. American Politics Quarterly 19 (2): 248–61.
McDermott, Monika L. 1998. Race and gender cues in low-information elections. Political Research Quarterly 51 (4): 895918.
McDermott, Monika L. 1997. Voting cues in low-information elections: Candidate gender as a social information variable in contemporary US elections. American Journal of Political Science 41 (1): 270–83.
Moncrief, Gary F., Squire, Peverill, and Jewell, Malcolm E.. 2001. Who Runs for the Legislature? Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Niven, David. 2006. Throwing your hat out of the ring: Negative recruitment and the gender imbalance in state legislative candidacy. Politics and Gender 2 (4): 473–89.
Norris, Pippa. 1997a. Introduction: Women, media and politics. In Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Norris, Pippa. New York: Oxford.
Norris, Pippa. 1997b. Women leaders worldwide: A splash of color in the photo op. In Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Norris, P.. New York: Oxford.
Palmer, Barbara, and Simon, Dennis. 2006. Breaking the Political Glass Ceiling: Women and Congressional Elections. New York: Routledge.
Rahn, Wendy. 1993. The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2): 472–96.
Rausch, John D., Rozell, Mark, and Wilson, Harry L.. 1999. When women lose: A case study of media coverage of two gubernatorial campaigns. Women & Politics 20 (4): 122.
Rosenwasser, Shirley M., and Dean, Norma G.. 1989. Gender roles and political office: Effects of perceived masculinity/femininity of candidate and political office. Psychology of Women Quarterly 13 (June): 7785.
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2006. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Seltzer, Richard A., Newman, Jody, and Leighton, Melissa Voorhees. 1997. Sex as a Political Variable. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Smith, Kevin B. 1997. When all's fair: Signs of parity in media coverage of female candidates. Political Communication 14: 7182.
Smith, Eric R.A.N., and Fox, Richard L.. 2001. A research note: The electoral fortunes of women candidates for Congress. Political Research Quarterly 54 (1): 205–21.
Stall, Bill. 1990. “Wilson, Feinstein Hope to Harvest Farm-Rural Vote.” Los Angeles Times, October 21, A1, A33.
Tannen, Deborah. 1994. Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford.
Thomas, Sue, and Wilcox, Clyde. 1998. Women and Elective Office. New York: Oxford.
Weatherall, Ann. 2002. Gender, Language and Discourse. New York: Routledge.
Weir, Sara J. 1996. Women as governors: State executive leadership with a feminist face? In Women in Politics: Outsiders or Insiders, ed. Duke, Lois Lovelace. 2d ed.Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Wells, Robert A., and King, Erika G.. 1998. “Gender and the Press: Newspaper Coverage of the 1990 California, Texas and Pennsylvania Gubernatorial Campaigns.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, September 3–6.
Westlye, Mark C. 1991. Senate Elections and Campaign Intensity. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins.


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed