Adding Insult to Injury: Broadcast Media Coverage of <i>Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes</i>

Authors

  • Shea Smock Florida State University
  • Jennifer M Proffitt Florida State University

Abstract

In 2000, Betty Dukes of California filed a sex discrimination case that would later become the largest class action suit in US history.  Rather than denying systemic sex discrimination, Wal-Mart successfully argued that the class action suit was too broad.  The U.S. District Court in California and the Court of Appeals sided with the women, but the Supreme Court did not. Our analysis focuses on how the US broadcast news media covered the cases. Using a political–economic interpretive lens, we analyze ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS news transcripts and find that the coverage and context differed greatly depending on the gender of the reporter and sources.  Mainstream media stories tended to focus on the emotionalism of the plaintiffs, the amount of money at stake, the effects on business and consumers, and the plaintiffs who continued to work for Wal-Mart after experiencing discrimination. PBS coverage was sparse, but what was presented was more in-depth and provided the context that the commercial media ignored.

Author Biographies

Shea Smock, Florida State University

Shea Lynn Smock is a PhD Candidate in the School of Communication, Florida State University, USA. Her research interests include political economy of media, feminist political economy, journalism, media ownership regulation, and popular culture.

Jennifer M Proffitt, Florida State University

Jennifer M. Proffitt, PhD, is an associate professor in the School of Communication, Florida State University, USA, and is currently the president of the Florida State University Chapter of the United Faculty of Florida, Florida's faculty union. Her research interests include political economy of media and popular culture, media ownership policy and regulation, and broadcasting history.

Downloads

Published

20-05-2013

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2013)

Section

Articles