Before today’s big Olympic victory, the US Women’s Gymnastics Team already won their media gold medal by landing on the cover of Sports Illustrated (SI) [1]. Does this represent a new SI era after a well-celebrated 40th anniversary of Title IX or merely Sports Illustrated’s yearly one-and-done women’s cover quota?

Under Terry McDonell — current Sports Illustrated Group boss — SI’s depiction of women has never been worse. SI is a prime case study in the Title IX paradox: The 1972 legislation has helped bring sports participation of women to historic highs, but related sports media coverage has dropped to all-time lows

Criticism of SI and women is not new: A 2012 study[2], “Where are The Female Athletes in Sports Illustrated?” updates a 30-year chorus of studies from 1979[3], 1988[4], 1991[5], 1994[6], 1996[7], 1997[8], 2002[9], 2003[10], 2008[11], 2009[12], 2010[13], videos [14], and you get the point.  According to must-see documentary “Not Just A Game”[15] and TV studies[16], ESPN The Mag and Sports Center are not much better[17].

Sports Illustrated’s newest low can be traced directly to McDonell’s 2002 arrival as SI’s Editor in Chief. He arrived with much-needed tech-savvy, but also an editorial history dominated by Men’s magazines. His previous two stops at the tabloid US Weekly and Men’s Journal would noticeably influence SI’s direction.

Last year, The Atlantic’s Eleanor Barkhorn kindly treated readers with the nine ways a woman could land an SI cover. In this year’s remix, her special spirit is applied to McDonnell’s 10-year tenure.  Under the new rules, breaking the cover barrier is less about “what you play” than “who you are”.



The Problem: Skin trumps skill. “Bikinis or Nothing” isn’t just a swimsuit cover slogan, it’s a cover policy.  With this month’s Olympic Cover, the score is now tied. Since 2002, ten covers have been devoted to swimsuits models, and ten depicted as actual athletes (*excludes shared covers or “commemorative” issues not mailed to subscribers[18]).

Before McDonell: SI was heavily criticized in the 1990’s, but still had more than twice as many covers of women (non-swimsuit models). With just the slightest reinvestment of swimsuit profits back into women’s sports, SI could easily exceed its 1950’s average of five covers per year.

Big Picture: McDonell counts on “naked women” to move copies, and SI’s swimsuit issue– a multi-media cash cow — sold more copies in 2011 than all other issues in the first five months combined [19]. While these profits have always deafened SI to past well-documented criticisms of sexism, the absence of female athlete alternatives only intensifies that impact which is well-summarized at “Beauty Redefined”:

“SI Swimsuit Issue profits from a philosophy of constructing men as active, women as passive; men as subjects, women as objects; men as actors, women as receivers; men as the lookers and women as the looked-at; and I argue, men as consumers and women as the “to-be-consumed”



The Problem: Country even trumps champion. While last year’s “one and done” solo cover went to USA Soccer goalie Hope Solo, The Japanese Women’s World Cup Champions and heroics of Homare Sawa were “Do You Believe in Miracles?” material.

With their supreme underdog status, incredible grace, and context of Japan’s devastating earthquake and tsunami, they also should have been SI’s 2011 easy choice for “Sports Person(s) of the Year”. But they were just sooooooooo – Japanese.

Before McDonell: Roberto Duran (7), Bjorn Borg (5), and Steffi Graf (3) all received  multiple covers for their brilliance.

Big Picture:  Unless wearing an American uniform, SI doesn’t care much for foreigners anymore – women or men. The greatest victim has been Roger Federer whose legendary tennis career produced one solo cover and several Sportsperson of Year snubs. Boxing sensation Manny Pacquiao?: Nothing. Same goes for soccer phenoms Lionel Messi and Marta, and the golfing brilliance of  Annika Sorenstam and Yani Tseng.



The Problem: Hair trumps heart. Long is good, blond is better, flowing is preferred, and bleach is a legal performance enhancer.   Rule #3 can trump rule #2 but not rule #4. At least Maria Sharapova won a Grand Slam title unlike previous Russian cover tennis princess Anna Kournikova whose 2000 cover predated McDonnell.

“But Women Can’t Sell!”: In 2004[20], Sharapova was a top-seller who  even doubled single-copy sales of  Derek Jeter and Kevin Garnett.

…Is it because blondes have more fun?…

Big Picture: Softball great Jennie Finch was covered in a mini-skirt, and skiing sensation Lindsey Vonn’s derriere was bent up high. Unlike the standard tuck position, Vonn is smiling with head cocked sideways, and seems to have forgotten her helmet. Oops.

In “Sex Sells Sex, but Not Women’s Sports”, sports media scholar Mary Jo Kane writes:

“A major consequence of the media’s tendency to sexualize women’s athletic accomplishments is the reinforcement of their status as second-class citizen in one of the most powerful economic, social and political institutions on the planet. In doing so, media images that emphasize femininity/sexuality actually suppress interest in, not to mention respect for, women’s sports.”




The Problem: White trumps right. In a sports era dominated by African-American women, only Serena Williams has been featured by herself[21] — besides Beyonce. SI ignores women of color today as it once did Black men before 1968 [22].

Venus Williams’ seven grand slam titles?:  Not grand enough. Venus and Serena on a cover together, or Laila Ali’s fists?: No storylines there. The hoops dominance of Candace Parker and Brittany Griner in college, or Lisa Leslie and Sheryl Swoopes in the WNBA-Olympics? Not dominant enough. Historic women’s hoops win streaks of UCONN (90-games) or Olympics (35 and counting)? Not long enough.

Before McDonell: In the previous 10 years, SI featured a young Serena, a young Venus, Michelle Kwan, Marion Jones, Jamila Wideman, the Women’s Olympic Basketball team, Gail Devers, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, and Kristi Yamaguchi.

…Is it because black women are too angry?…


     July 12, 2010                   July 19, 2010

Big Picture: All Serena Williams did to receive a 2003 cover was win four consecutive Grand Slams. After 13 Slam wins, another came in 2010 entitled: “Love Her, Hate Her”.  Why would SI “hate her”?: For berating an official? Should John McEnroe burn in hell? Or at least not profit from it? Let’s debate.

Just how big is the gender-race compound bias facing women of color? Just one week later, SI issued an IPad cover entitled “An Appreciation“[23]  for George Steinbrenner – a man who turned boorish behavior into an Olympic sport when not collecting two felonies. Why can’t SI just “love” Serena? 

Serena’s first-ever outburst in 2009 received a US Open record fine – more than the combined total of McEnroe’s first 20 tantrums. The Crunk Feminist Collective summarizes the broader issue that stretches from mass media to mass incarceration:

“White anger is entertaining; Black anger must be contained”.




The Problem: America’s best two female athletes the last two years went coverless. Abby Wambach doesn’t quite fit SI’s definition of “feminine enough”, Brittney Griner definitely doesn’t, and both violate previous rules.

Before McDonell: SI’s Sexist-Heterosexist-Eurocentric femininity box is not new, and past rule-breaking sports legends like Martina Navratilova and Jackie-Joyner Kersee did not get the attention they warranted — but they still received three covers each from SI.

Big Picture: Concerned citizen Sarah Thomas wants SI to shatter all “artificial barriers” and “corporate beauty standards” by putting Sarah RoblesHolley Mangold, and the U. S. Women’s Weightlifting Olympic team on SI’s cover. In her petition she writes:

 “Sports Illustrated would be making a strong statement confirming their commitment to their true mandate; celebrating the achievements of great athletes… And maybe, just maybe, young girls who don’t resemble swimsuit models either can be inspired by these women’s stories to be physically active, have positive self esteem, and even – who knows? – nurture dreams of future Olympic success.”


(especially if you play hoops)


The Problem: Diana Taurasi and Maya Moore each led the UConn Huskies to multiple championships, but can’t land a regular edition cover without male validation. Pat Summitt too! Shared covers would be a great thing if they served as additions and not replacements for solo covers (commemorative issues don’t count[18]).

Under McDonnell, a regular SI issue has never been solely devoted to college, WNBA, or Olympic basketball (also see rule #4). Diana Taurasi stated last week:

“I think it’s funny. We’re a team that’s won four [Olympic] gold medals in a row and yet we’re still fighting for respect in our own country. I think it’s a little sad.” 

“But Women Can’t Sell!”: The 2003 and 2008 shared college basketball previews (CBP) both had great success[24], and the 2003 Taurasi-Okafor cover was clearly the highest seller of nine CBP issues studied.

Big Picture: Brittany Griner still can’t crack a 5-part multi-cover college preview, and sports media scholar Michael Messner sheds light in “No Hype for Women’s Hoops”:

“When big games are shown on TV, people tune in: … The 2010 women’s title game between Connecticut and Stanford attracted 3.5 million TV viewers, up 32 percent from the previous year. Despite this increasing fan interest, though, viewers of sports news and highlights shows still experience what novelist Tillie Olsen called “unnatural silences” about women’s basketball.”



The Problem: Danica Patrick is the only woman to land more than one positive SI solo cover under McDonnell, but competing against men is not the easiest path to emulate.

“But Women Can’t Sell!”: Patrick’s 2005 cover outsold the previous seven issues including Tiger Woods, Steve Nash, Randy Moss, Shaq, the NFL Draft, and every single baseball and basketball issue that year (non-previews).

Big Picture: If Tim Tebow can receive six college covers without having to compete against the very best men in his sport (i.e. NFL), women should not have to either.




The Problem: With this month’s Olympic cover preview, Rule #8 has just been cautiously reinstated. In 2008, SI completely ignored women for the first Olympic year in SI’s history[25] despite dominance by US Olympic hoop team, gymnast Shawn Johnson, and swimmer Natalie Coughlin.  SI is not alone.

“But Women Can’t Sell!”: Sales of the 2004 Women’s Olympic Softball team not only edged out Michael Phelps from previous week, but also outpaced 2004 covers by men named Brady, Vick, Clemens, Griffey, Kobe, Armstrong, and Mickelson.

Big Picture: In 2008, those four separate Olympic covers went to Michael Phelps, Michael Phelps, Michael Phelps, and Michael Phelps. The Women’s Foundation helps explain why:

Researchshows that the primary factor in determining what sports get covered in newspapers is the sports interests of the sports editor. Many sports editors grew up in a time and culture in which the abilities of women to play sports were devalued.



Jennie Finch - Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2005Danica Patrick - Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2009Lindsey Vonn - Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2010

The Problem: The significant majority of female athletes with solo covers have also posed as swimsuit models within its pages[26]. While each athlete certainly has that right, a disturbing pattern has emerged: Williams, Finch, Patrick, and Vonn were all rewarded covers within a few months after posing for the swimsuit issue.

Vonn reflected on her 6-month old swimsuit photo shoot: “Back then I had no idea I was going to be on the cover of the regular SI”. By now, all SI cover aspiring women get the unspoken deal: “If you really want the cover – it really helps to get uncovered.”

Before McDonell: In different decades, Marion Jones, Michelle Kwan, Florence Griffith Joyner, Chris Evert, and Peggy Fleming all made covers without posing in bikinis for SI.

Big Picture:  In”Does Sexy Mean Selling Out“, Laura Pappano clarifies:

“Much of the [right to be sexy] debate is a distraction to the fundamental challenge of getting to a more fair place… Seeking real equity for female athletes means learning to appreciate female athletes’ performances on their own.”

This debate has also distracted from SI’s reality that one’s “right” has morphed closer to “requirement”, and individual choice into institutional force. The full scope of Sports Illustrated’s sexism and McDonnell’s mantra becomes clear:

Objectification of women isn’t a swimsuit thing — it’s the only thing.

Terry McDonell President of Sports Illustrated Group Mark Ford and Editor of Sports Illustrated Group Terry McDonnell attend the SI Swimsuit Launch Party hosted By Pranna at Pranna Restaurant on February 15, 2011 in New York City.

Mark Ford (SI Group President) and Terry McDonell (Editor of SI Sports Group)
At 2011 Sports Illustrated Launch Party



The Stronger Women Get, The More SI Loves Swimsuits. In the 1990’s, past employees cited Sports Illustrated’s “entrenched sexism”[27], past fans cited its racial “sensationalism”, and in her 1997 landmark study on SI’s swimsuit issue, sociologist Laurel Davis concluded (p. 120) that SI creates

“an atmosphere of hegemonic masculinity… [that] tramples over women, gays/lesbians, people of color, and people from the (post)colonized world” and is “built on the backs of these others”. 

With all due respect to Dr. Davis, SI’s 1990’s era now seems like a human rights movement since McDonnell’s debut cover of Charles Barkley in chains. In 1994, Salwen and Wood’s SI cover study clearly warned:

“If sports journalism does not improve its coverage of women and girls, it runs the risk of becoming a bastion against change and progress in the field of journalism. Future research should investigate what factors account for the possible resistance in sports journalism to improved coverage of female sports.”

Investigating factors of “possible resistance” includes my mirror. For too long, I not only accepted that corporate profits[28] justify sexism, but also the “women can’t sell” myth itself. I wasn’t just wrong, but I had the privileged audacity to confidently believe this myth without doing a stitch of research (see previous examples).

But my gender bias didn’t stop there: I was perfectly fine with a male athlete routinely bombing on cover sales without holding him and all other men hostage to those failures.

But my male privilege didn’t stop there:  After some soul-searching, I realized that I wasn’t detecting blatantly sexist media practices because I didn’t really want to detect it. Besides, such talk was disturbing my very important fun and games.

But white male privilege didn’t stop with me: 94% of all sports editors are men and 97% are white[28]. These decision-makers range from folks like me with good intentions and flawed blind spots to those quite content to flex their “isms”.

Stir into that pot some powerful corporate interests, and a sports media recipe results that ignores women sports, villainizes athletes of color, promotes white men and is far more willing to protect Penn State and Paterno than to embrace the great American success story of the Williams sisters.

Should Serena Williams lose her cool, corrective coverage is left largely to websites such as Colorlines, Crunk Feminist Collective, D.K. Wilson Island, The NationNew Black Man, and The Starting Five. Title IX celebrations are nice, but for in-depth articles and analysis, go to On-the-Issues Magazine. When mainstream sports media looked the other way, it was left to a local 24 year old reporter named Sara Ganim to break the Penn State scandal

A diverse and independent sports media won’t simply provide better coverage, it can also protect children from being molested. 


Title IX Cover - Sports Illustrated May 07, 2012

While recent Title IX 40th anniversary tributes by SI and others are still noteworthy, back-pats come with caution. If you grow up fatherless, and Dad pops in for your 40th birthday party bearing gifts and newfound love, wouldn’t you ask: “Where have you been?”  Assuming you even let him in the door, wouldn’t you also wonder “will I ever see you again?”

For the past 10 years, Terry McDonell has been that deadbeat Dad – but far worse.

SI celebrates Title IX’s words, but ignores its meaning. Women in bikinis pay SI’s rent, but those in uniform are refused as tenants. McDonell has never publically uttered the words “nappy-headed-hos”, but his cover policy screams it.  If McDonell looked more like hip hop, there would be town hall meetings and congressional hearings.

Instead, he amasses many accolades and a 2012 induction into the Magazine Editor’s Hall of Fame. Some even believe that “Sports Illustrated has always been progressive when it comes to the portrayal of women in sports”.

It is an incredible magic trick. SI’s sexism is so thoroughly normalized that it no longer seems sexist.

Will SI ever reinvest some of that swimsuit cash into promoting women sports? Will he move beyond the dainty-white-blond-Barbie box? Or will last week’s rule-breaking cover simply be this year’s “one and done?”

McDonnell claims to embrace change, but it will be left to the purchasing public to help guide Sports Illustrated into or out of the 21st century.

 Terry McDonell - 2010 Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year Celebration - Inside

POPSspot Related:

The author can also be reached at 

A special thanks to all those below who have contributed past research on SI and women as each study makes it easier for the next person to build on. If a key study is missing below, please email and the information below will be updated.

[1] With more than three million weekly subscribers (and 23 million weekly readers), SI sells about triple the amount of runner-up ESPN the Mag when considering its 2+ million subscribers come on a bi-weekly basis.
[2] Study: “Where are The Female Athletes in Sports Illustrated?”, Jonetta Weber;Robert Carini 2012
[3] Study:  Sports Illustrated’s coverage of women in sports, Reid & Soley, 1979
[4] Study: “Media Coverage of Female Athlete… : Sports Illustrated Revisited, Mary Jo Kane, 1988
[5] Study: Analysis of Sports Illustrated feature articles, 1954-87, Angela Lumpkin; Linda Williams, 1991
[6] Study: “Depictions of Female Athletes on Sports Illustrated Covers, 1957-1989, 1994, 1994
[7] Study:  Media Coverage of the Post Title IX Female Athlete: A  Feminist Analysis…, 1996
[8] Book: “The Swimsuit Issue and Sport”: Hegemonic Masculinity in Sports Illustrated, Laurel Davis 1997
[9] Study: Femininity in Sports Illustrated and Sports Illustrated for Women, Fink and Kennix, 2002
[10] Study: Missing in Action: Feature Coverage of Women’s Sports in Sports Illustrated, Ronald Bishop 2003
[11] Study: Examination & Interpretive Analysis of Depiction of Women in Sports Media, Susan E. Mckenna, 2008
[12] Study: Female Representation in Feature Articles… by Sports Illustrated in the 1990s, Angela Lumpkin, 2009
[13] Study: Race and Gender Bias in… Photographs …  in Sports Illustrated Kids, 2000-2009, Ashley Furrow, 2010
[14] DVD:  “Playing Unfair: The Media Image of The Female Athlete”, Media Education Foundation
[15] DVD: “Not Just A Game: Power, Politics, & American Sports” by Media Education Foundation
[16] Study: “Gender in Televised Sports”, News and Highlights 1989-2009”, Michael Messner and Cheryl Cooky
[17] Since 2009 report, ESPN has shown some recent signs of improvement with extended Title IX TV & web coverage, NCAA women’s Tournament coverage, and the hiring of sports media critic Mary Jo Kane as an advisor.
[18] Serena Williams (2), Mia Hamm, Women’s Olympic Softball Team, Maria Sharapova, Danica Patrick (2), Lindsey Vonn, Hope Solo, and 2012 Gymnast Olympic Preview. Token commemorative issues that never reach mailboxes are not counted, and 2005 Jennie Finch “summer party” were excluded.
[19] Information is from Audit Bureau of Circulations SI Publisher’s Statement for six months ending June 30, 2011.
[20] From ABC Sports Illustrated Publisher’s Statements ending June 30, 2004 and Dec. 31 2004. Beyond top-selling staples (preview issues and champion issues), Sharapova was a top seller.
[21] This does not include “shared covers” or token “commemorative” issues (see Candace Parker).
[22] For SI’s first 33 years, Althea Gibson was only African-American woman to make a cover (Lumpkin; Kane). Pprior to social landmark year of 1968, Jim Brown, Bill Russell, and Hank Aaron combined for two total covers.
[23] While it is bad form to speak ill of the dead, Steinbrenner’s cover appreciation eulogy was far beyond normal.
[24] From ABC SI Publisher’s Statements, nine available College Basketball Previews were studied from 2001, 2003-2009, 2011. The 2003 Taurasi-Okafor was highest seller of single-copy sales at 100,000, a 25% increase over surrounding years studied. The 2008 shared cover including six issues with African-American women sold 80,000 which matched or exceeded six other CBP covers
[25] From 1956-2004, SI has had a woman during every year of Olympic coverage spanning 15 separate years. By 2006, women were reduced to half a cover before being shut out in 2008 by Michael Phelps’s four covers.
 [26] Exceptions to posing for swimsuit issue prior to cover: Mia Hamm did not pose; Sharapova received SI cover at 17, and posed at 18 (and looked 15);  Hope Solo did not for SI, but did last year for ESPN’s “The Body Issue”; and last week’s Olympian gymnasts are still teenagers.
[27] Book: In The Franchise: A History of Sports Illustrated Magazine, Michael MacCambridge (1997). Former SI writer Julie Vader blamed SI’s depiction of women on “the entrenched sexism she’d encountered in the building” (p. 356).
[28] Like men, not all women covers will sell well.
[28] Study: The 2010-11 Associated Press Sports Editor Race and Gender Report Card, Richard Lapchick


11 Responses to Beyond Bikinis: Sports Illustrated’s Nine New Rules to Land a Cover

  1. kos says:

    Thanks for bringing this issue back up, MODI. We’ve had this discussion before on other sites. It’s bad that the only thing that’s changed since then is that Roger Federer finally got on the cover.

    Folks like McDonnell probably view SI as a last bastion for “manly” men. He knows what men want. Women should be seen and not heard. Hence, the sparse coverage of women’s sports in the magazine in the first place.

    Unfortunately, too many men agree with this view. They don’t want women’s sports….unless it’s the Lingerie Football League or mud wrestling, etc.

    Some of it, I’ve always felt was a fear that women were actually better than men in a chosen sport. They deserve the same respect for working at their chosen craft as hard as those men playing on the highest level.

    Then, the issue of femininity. There’s always the question of is the woman who plays sports is a lesbian or not. She should just be judged on her play, just as any man.

    You’d hope that things would be changing by now with more women than ever playing sports, gaining opportunities, but as long as you have backward thinkers like McConnell running things, it’s going to be business as usual.

  2. MODI says:

    thanks kos. To your point, the Women’s Sports Foundation has a Q&A sheet:

    Q5. Doesn’t selling women athletes as feminine and pretty solve the “image problem” associated with women’s sports? Don’t most people think that female athletes are lesbians and isn’t it important to show that they aren’t?

    A5. The so-called “image problem” is really a code term for “homophobia” — fear of homosexuality. The function of the media is not to sell “heterosexism” or “sexist images” for that matter. All heterosexuals are not attractive and all lesbians are not mannish. The function of the media is to cover sports and athletes rather than assume their sexual preference. … The assumption that the public assumes that all female athletes are lesbians and the reporter or advertiser has a responsibility to fix this is absurd.

  3. Dakota says:

    Great article Modi. We have to continue to have these discussions. The blatent disregard for the contributions of women in sports continues to run rampant in an industry dominated by male editors, add to the mix editors like McDonnell who’s past experience at so called “male mags” made the objectification of women an olympic sport, and its easy to see why the increase in womens participation in sport has been met with a decrease in womens coverage in sports media. People might say “why should we care about SI”? In this internet age, some think that SI is old school and not relevant, but the truth is they are still the best selling sports magazine, and the swimsuit issue is the best selling “sports issue” hands down. That paints a distrubing picture. Their images have impact, their decisions have weight, that means they still have power and influence, and therefore we must continue to hold them accountable.

  4. An says:

    When Martina Navratilova hardly lost a match in 1983-1884 she should have been sportspersonality of the year instead they chose Mary Decker who posed with her husband a thing Martina did not do because she is an honest person.
    Ofcourse Chris Evert did get the honour as did Billy Jean King before anybody knew she was a lesbian would she have been sportspersonality if it was not a secret in the year she won.

    Martina knew then what was made known by the sportsjournalists of SI. many years later that they had chosen Martina over Mary Decker but that they were not allowed to go on with it by the editor. At least 20 years SI was given the change to make a right out of a wrong so many years Martina played but none of this. Did you know that Martina never was on the wheaties box I have looked at the list and I do not know a lot of athletes on it but I do know Martina and I am from Europe. Strange country the US are.
    By the way have you seen how the current editor looks so he only wants goodlooking men and women on the cover what a joke.

  5. MODI says:

    An, thank you for chiming in from Europe with that info. I knew Martina was denied wrongly denied Sportswoman of Year because she was a lesbian, but didn’t know it was stated explicitly later by journalists. She was an absurd 86-1 in 1983. No contest. She should have had 10 covers easy.

  6. DD says:

    Great job MODI! Kudos to you for keeping this issue on the table. It very important for men to be allies for women’s justice & equity. I agree with An that our country is strange when it comes to respecting differences, however we shouldn’t overlook the challenges that Europe has had in regards to these same systemic issues. In addition, the inherent false sense of superiority is not limited to any borders, it is a global disease, primarily steeped in the male European axiological construct.

    We must keep raising awarness to unconscious conditioning and how it’s systemic nature affects every aspect of culture.

  7. Damon says:

    Good article Modi, there’s definitely a lot of truth in those “rules”, but for me I come away with a few of my big picture takaways from them.

    Rule 2- Truth. Annika Sorenstam should’ve been SI’s sportsperson of the year in 2003 and Roger Federer should’ve won the honor in 2006. If you wanted to make a case for Manny Pacquaio in 2009, I would’ve been fine with that too since he really hit his height in popularity/in-ring brilliance.

    Rule 4- I’ll defend SI on the Serena 2010 cover because the story wasn’t designed to make you hate her at all, that’s just a catchy title designed to get you to pay attention. The premise of the cover/article itself was a compliment to Serena that she’s the best woman’s player ever (which is saying a lot, despite the negative tone of “Hate Her” being thrown in), but dealing with the “hate her” crowd that feels she hasn’t always been the easiest person to root for due to her indifference with the sport at times, the way she’s perceived as making excuses when she loses, etc.

    Rule #7- Being the Danica Patrick fan I am, this one has sparked many debates, particularly from the people she had to compete against and those who watched her race in the Indycar series. She got a lot of grief from within the Indycar series because she hadn’t won, yet had driven the media/tv coverage of the 2005 Indy to levels it hadn’t seen since 1996 (the first year of the open wheel racing split), yet when SI puts the 4th place finisher of the Indy 500 on the cover and the winner (the late Dan Wheldon of England) in the corner, it didn’t sit well at all with the other drivers and that disconnect only got worse throughout 2005 and beyond. I was okay with it though, because even though she didn’t win that race, she WAS the reason people watched it and if anybody claims otherwise, they’re lying.

    So this was an example, much like Hope Solo last year being on the cover over the Japanese National Soccer team or even her teammate who won AP Female Athlete of the Year honors, Abby Wambach, where winning isn’t always everything, but how you competed and the interest you drove to your sport in the process.

    Rule #9- While it is true what you say about Serena, Jennie, Danica and Lindsey all being in the Swimsuit issue, then getting a solo cover a few months later, to me it’s purely coincidential. After all, Serena got a cover in 1999 and didn’t crack the swimsuit issue until 2003, Jennie was on the cover with her softball teammates in 2004, was in the 2005 issue and Danica got her cover in 2005, then was in the 2008 issue.

    In Lindsey Vonn’s case, she was looking to back up her success on the World Cup circuit with an Olympic gold medal and was by far the biggest name going into the 2010 Winter Olympics, so that’s the biggest reason why she was picked by SI to be in the swimsuit issue as well as getting a solo cover on the preview issue. Same thing is happening with Alex Morgan of the US Women’s National soccer team being in the swimsuit issue this year following her breakout performance in the World Cup and heading into the Olympics as one of the athletes to watch on one of the teams to watch.

    Lastly, much has been focused on the lack of women on the cover issue, which I understand, but I’ll say this, spend too much energy on that and not the content written about these women on the inside and you’ll miss quite a bit about their stories.

  8. MODI says:

    Damon, thank you for your extended comments. Much appreciated…

    Rule #2: Most definitely.

    Rule #4: “Hate” is a strong word. If say, Paterno, Lance Armstrong, Josh Hamilton covers were framed similarly, SI being catchy would be easier to accept. The only other time I recall a similar SI title, a similarly-scowling Latrell Sprewell was on a Knicks cover (Love Them, Hate Them).

    Rule #7: Agree that Danica clearly made it for being a woman in a man’s sport which can be a story in its own right.

    Rule #9: If say, Candace Parker asked SI for a photo shoot, would SI have warmed up to giving her a real cover?… You may be right that the pattern is purely a coincidence, but I suspect it includes “pre-marketing” by leadership with only one view of women. Whichever the case, a condition is created where other female athletes will feel forced to follow for cover fame. That impact is the main problem.

    Your last point: For what it’s worth, past SI researchers who studied women beyond the covers (Bishop 2003; Lumpkin 2009; listed in article) also reported negative findings. Given history, the best guess is that the pages in between have gotten worse under McDonell’s leadership. The SI cover is generally symbolic and reflective of institutional problems with women that permeate all aspects of SI.

  9. Damon says:

    Quick update on Rule #2- Usain Bolt gets the solo cover for this week’s SI, his second overall. He got one in 2009 when he set the world record in the 100 meters at the World Championships. Well deserved honor for the most entertaining athlete in sports right now.

    Rule #9- Interesting to see the tug-o-war between SI and ESPN the Magazine’s body issue. SI has avoided Candace Parker, Diana Taurasi and Abby Wambach, but ESPN has gladly featured all three in their Body Issue, including Candace twice.

  10. MODI says:

    Damon, great to see Usain get the cover. best choice hands down considering his ridiculous time in Olympic signature event in star-studded field.

    Per ESPN, they have been historically terrible on women, but making some noticeable strides in last year. Includes Extensive Title IX coverage; decent women’s college B-ball coverage, and body issue is at least egalitarian. The hiring of Mary Jo Kane as a consultant in 2010 helped. They are tapping into a female market that is at least 30% of viewership which has always been there to cultivate. However, I don’t care for the segregating their website into an “ESPN W” instead of a full integration into its main website.

    What ESPN should now do is hire a guy like Harry Edwards and like consultants to help change leadership structure and reliance on criminalizing athletes of color as their common means of selling stories. In that respect, no one is worse than ESPN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *