Sport and women's sport: addressing sports ground invisibility

In opening the London Olympic Games in his role chairing the 2012 Olympic Games Organising Committee (OGOC), sometime sports star Sebastian Coe spoke of 'mankind' and his 'countrymen'. As a man amongst men, there being one woman only (Anne Windsor) amongst 'the sports boys' on the 2012 OGOC, perhaps his language was apt – or might be considered so.

Yet some were attuned to its infelicity. Raymond Lloyd, redoubtable supporter of equality amongst and between women and men, editor and publisher of The Parity Democratic, took issue, observing that Coe employed the same non-inclusive language in his opening of the Paralympics.

Nevertheless, Coe's words may be unremarkable to others. Amongst various lessons-in-bombast, he said:

'The Olympics brings together the people of the world in harmony and friendship and peace to celebrate what is best about mankind … To the athletes, gathered here on the eve of this great endeavour, I say that to you is given something precious and irreplaceable. To run faster, to jump higher, to be stronger. To my fellow countrymen, I say thank you, thank you for making all this possible …'

So it is that all of us people are to celebrate not what is best about humankind (at least in sports physiology and physicality), but about mankind alone.

Still, despite this lack of generic affirmation of sports prowess, the athletes are affirmed by this one encompassing term. Yet Coe's countrywomen are not to be thanked nor recognised for their existence and substantial contribution not only to the holding of the Olympics in London – think of myriad cleaning staff and volunteers, along with women bus, tube, train and taxi drivers, station staff, stadium ticket checkers and collectors … but to securing the Olympics for London.

Tessa Jowell, Labour's (then) Minister, was substantially responsible for securing the Games and bringing planning and organisation to fruition. (Let's hope she was not responsible for the egregious appointment-process resulting in the OGOC's comprising eighteen men and one woman, albeit Wikipedia asserts Jowell and her Tory counterpart Jeremy Hunt were members – though not according to the official site!)

History indicates Jowell initiated London's bid to host the 2012 Olympics, 'coming up with the idea [in 2002] during her time as Culture Secretary … when there was said to be very little [Cabinet] support …', for 'many [were] thinking Paris would win'. Jowell launched the London bid in 2004. When successful, she became Olympics Minister, retaining the shadow post after British Labour lost government in 2010.

Women's admission to Olympic Games fields, pools, venues and arenas in sporting roles see them performing well, often taking home swags of medals. For Australia, this follows consistently. Yet news coverage does not necessarily reflect women's Olympic-stage performance and, where it does, concerns arise as to whether this coverage will continue for women's sport post-Olympics.

In the United Kingdom, newly appointed Culture Secretary, Maria Miller, has written to broadcasters 'ordering them to stop burying coverage of women's football, rugby, cricket and tennis in their schedules … [and] want[ing] television channels to carry on the mainstream coverage the BBC gave to women in the Olympics when 16 million people tuned in to watch Jessica Ennis take gold in the heptathlon'.

In her letter of 16 September 2012, Miller expresses as 'one of her biggest worries' the fear that albeit British media did 'a simply fantastic job' of 'championing' British female athletes at the London Games, a return to male football 'dominance' would show a failure to 'capitalise' on the 'public appetite' growing over the summer 'for watching women's sport':

'… outside the Olympics and Paralympics, women's sport has been woefully under-represented on television [with] sports where women compete … end[ing] up buried pretty deep within the TV schedules, if shown at all … [T]he names of our female Olympic and Paralympic stars will fade into the background.'

Miller concluded:

'I am writing to urge you to continue to embrace the enthusiasm and inspiration of London 2012 and continue to give space to women's sport.'

This problem is not isolated to the United Kingdom. Australian media suffers from the malady, too.

Together with (then) Senator Robert Bell, in May 1992 former Senator Rosemary Crowley initiated, and Senator Crowley chaired, a Senate Inquiry into Physical and Sport Education. Submissions from around the country poured in, with interviews were held in capital cities and centres. A report tabled in Parliament in December that year carried recommendations for positive change in sport, games and physical education for girls and boys, women and men. A major impetus to the Inquiry was 'a very big sense of girls dropping out of sport with the onset of puberty'.

Rather than seeing this 'dropping out' as signifying failure on the part of the girls, the report recognised the importance of peer pressure and assumptions about the 'masculine' nature of sport. The role of the media was a significant factor. Thus the following year an Inquiry was held into Women, Sport and the Media, addressing (lack of) media coverage and presentation of women's sport. Research descried the regular absence of sportswomen and commentators from sports pages and sports programmes - print, radio and television, or minimal coverage.

Ironically, whilst these Inquiries were ongoing, the media was replete with stories of the 'doom' and 'failures' of Australian cricket: the (men's) test team was regularly losing test matches and the Ashes. It was not until 1989 that men's test cricket recovered, with an Ashes win for the first time 'away from home' since 1934, the Australian men's team then holding the Ashes for a straight run of some 16 years.

Simultaneously with the gloom accompanying 'Australian test cricket', Australian test cricket was in fact doing well, with regular wins. The Australian cricket achieving positive results was the Australian women's team; that which was failing was the Australian men's team. Yet the women's team was invisible to the media, and the men's team was the Australian team, always reported as 'the Australian test cricket team', the (men's) tests reported as 'the tests' or similarly. 'Women' were not designated as 'the' team or 'the Australian team', nor were women's tests 'the tests'. Rather, whenever the women's test prowess reached the sports pages or programmes, invariably it held the stage only as 'women's cricket', not Australian cricket.

Yet women's cricket tests began in Australia in 1934 in Brisbane between the Australian and English team, and the Australian national women's cricket team has won the Women's cricket World Cup no fewer than five times, more than any other team.

Meanwhile, netball has the highest participation rate of any sport in Australia. Women play and compete in their thousands. The Australian team won the World Cup in 2007, yet television viewers did not see the win in real time. Australia beat Aotearoa/New Zealand 'in a tightly fought contest in Auckland', yet viewers were forced to wait 'hours' to see the win, because the ABC delayed the telecast. Consequently, 'sports' administrators accused ABC management of acting with shocking disrespect, saying this is no way to treat Australia's latest world champions'. Four years of rebuilding the team after losing to Aotearoa/New Zealand in 2003 led to the win, with Liz Ellis, retiring captain, describing the team as now 'at the peak of its powers, a team bursting with talent, enthusiasm and … great women who will … dominate Australian and world netball for years to come …'

The telecast delay was attributed by ABC management to the need 'to honour the commitment audiences have with regularly scheduled programmes'. Yet the apparent reluctance of the media generally to treat women's sport with the deference extended to sport and sports played by men is bound to have coloured viewers' disappointment.

What is the problem?

Male tennis players have expressed the view that the women's game 'doesn't rate' because in that sport, at top levels, women's games constitute fewer sets than men's. Hence, women tennis players are not entitled to the same level of prize payments, runs the argument. Yet marathon runners are not paid more in prize money than competitors in the hundred metre dash. Nor are swimmers competing over shorter distances claimed to be worth less than those swimming longer races and, hence, thereby entitled to differential levels of prize money.

Some will claim women's sport is 'not as interesting' as men's sport, so why should it gain equal media coverage. Others will assert women's sport draws smaller audiences on the field (whether or not borne out by facts), so why should it gain greater coverage on the page or in the airwaves. Yet returning to netball, the ABC bought the rights to World Cup coverage, and it is unwise to assume that this was a move without regard to viewer potential and audience numbers. Indeed, Kate Palmer, Chief Executive Officer of Netball Australia said that the coverage generally 'was very, very good'. This does not support the 'low audience numbers' contention. It is difficult, therefore, to avoid some agreement with Palmer's view that the decision to delay the telecast of the World Cup 'just showed an incredible lack of respect for the athletes and for [the] sport'.

Palmer did say the ABC had 'the upper hand' because 'not a lot of other broadcasters are interested' in televising the sport. This again may be characterised as a concession to the proposition that women's sport simply 'doesn't rate', just as those tennis players asserted.

Yet surely the issue is one that ought not to be dealt with by such glib dismissals. Is male domination of media ownership and administration unrelated to the paucity of coverage of women's sport, the substantially fewer numbers of women employed in the industry as on-screen talent, fewer numbers in 'behind the scenes' roles, endemic unequal pay and fewer promotion opportunities for women, fewer positions for women on-screen at all and particularly upon reaching 'a certain age'?

In 2012, on-screen presenter Miriam O'Reilly, dropped from rural affairs show Countryfile, won her age discrimination case against the BBC. She was one of four female presenters in their forties and fifties 'let-go'. The tribunal said 'a significant factor' in this, and in the choice of alternative presenters, was the latters' comparative youth' and the claimant's age. The wish 'to appeal to a prime-time audience, including younger viewers' was a 'legitimate aim'. However:

… we do not accept that it has been established that choosing younger presenters is required to appeal to such an audience …'

Responding to the decision, the BBC said questions 'for the whole industry' were raised which 'need to be addressed'. The BBC pledged to provide 'additional training to senior editorial executives' and 'issue new guidance on the fair selection of presenters'. The 'fair representation' of people 'of all ages across the broadcasting industry' was an important issue, highlighted by the circumstances leading up to the bringing of the suit by O'Reilly and its outcome. In evidence, O'Reilly said she had been warned by a Countryfile director that she should 'be careful with those wrinkles when high definition comes in'. Nine months later, 'she was axed'.

In her follow-up to the British media in the wake of the Olympics, Culture Secretary Miller's message is that the one hour's television coverage of women's sports versus every twenty hour's of men's sports coverage must be rectified. She issued an invitation to all broadcasters to meet with her 'to discuss how they can improve their coverage'. Despite the London Olympics having concluded, the 'powerful role models' for young women exemplified by London Olympics medallists should remain on-screen, not off it.

Meanwhile, Tessa Jowell leads a campaign to ensure that the number of medals – hence the number of Olympic competitions – at the Rio Games is not skewed. More medals should not be available for winning by male competitors, and more events should not be designated for competitors simply because they are men. Jowell wants equality in competitions, events and opportunities to mount the winning podium.

Let's hope the Australian media joins in as well as looking to its own record, and that Australia's sports ministers take up the campaign, as well as keeping up with the action on the women's as well as the men's sporting fields. It would be embarrassing if any were caught in the humiliating position of Jeremy Hunt, former UK Culture Secretary, who - during the London Olympics – was unable to name any members of the British women's football team. Not one.