Lynn Povich is the author of The Good Girls Revolt: How the Women of Newsweek Sued their Bosses and Changed the Workplace. She spent many years at Newsweek, where she was the magazine's first woman senior editor, and also has been editor-in-chief of Working Woman and managing editor at MSNBC.com. She is a co-editor of All Those Mornings...at the Post, a collection of the work of her father, sportswriter Shirley Povich. She lives in New York.
Q: Why did you decide to write
this book?
A: I had taken the legal papers
home with me when I left Newsweek in 1991; I was one of the few senior women
left, and Radcliffe had requested them.
I wrote a book on my dad with my brothers in 2005. Then I thought I should
send the [Newsweek] papers to Radcliffe, and I thought I should write a history
of the papers [to provide more information about them]. I started interviewing people, and realized
this could be a book.
This history was lost—people had
heard of the New York Times lawsuit; Nan Robertson had written The Girls in the Balcony. No one knew the Newsweek women had been first.
Q: You begin the book by discussing a group
of young women who faced the same issues that you had faced decades earlier
with sexism in the workplace. What has changed, and what has remained the same?
A: There’s been enormous
progress—women certainly are in the middle-to-senior management, but they’re
rarely at the top. Though in the last year or two, there has been Tina Brown [at
Newsweek/The Daily Beast] and Jill Abramson [at The New York Times].
Now there’s a woman [Deborah
Turness] running the NBC News division—the first woman to run a network news
division. There’s a woman [Nancy Gibbs] running Time. Maybe whenever things get
bad they put a woman in.
Earlier, there were women at The
Oregonian, the Chicago Tribune, the Philadelphia Inquirer … Each moment is a
picture in time; it ebbs and flows.
There are not enough women in
leadership positions, not as many women sources and voices, not enough on
television. There are still sexist depictions of women in the media. [There’s]
the pay gap, the glass ceiling, and sexual harassment.
What’s interesting about the young
generation is that they do really well in school. Girls do better in school.
Then they go into the work world, and they’ve never before experienced
discrimination in school. They meet obstacles they’ve never met before. [The
young women of today in the book] didn’t identify it with a gender issue, they
thought they must not be good enough. That’s the kind of subtle discrimination
that still exists--old boys’ clubs.
Q: What was the overall impact of
your lawsuit?
A: The immediate impact was that
it opened doors for other women to sue. Three months later there was a suit at
Time, Fortune, and Sports Illustrated. Then the door opened, and there were
suits at the AP, NBC, and The New York Times. One woman [I spoke with] said
that this was not only [affecting] the media, but she had worked in an
advertising office, and read about the Newsweek case and [considered a suit]—there
was an impact beyond the media.
It changed Newsweek. We started to
hire men as researchers, and I became the first woman senior editor in August
1975. Meetings were integrated. There was an immediate impact on the magazine.
[Newsweek editor] Osborn Elliott said it made it a better magazine. It changed
our lives. None of us would have had those opportunities so quickly.
Q: How does the news business
compare with other fields when it comes to the treatment of women employees?
A: Today, certain fields are
feminized. Medical schools are at about 50 percent. Law school is about 50
percent. Not that many women choose the financial services business; there’s a
pay gap among MBA graduates. I find that some of the unhappiest women I know
are lawyers in firms. Many leave for corporations. The law firms haven’t
changed that much.
In academia, 28 percent of full
professors are women. That’s pretty low. About 18 or 19 percent of Congress and
16 to 18 percent in the corporate suite are women. The problem is that it’s low,
but also that it’s been [the same] for 10 years.
Q: What has been the reaction to
your book?
A: It’s been overwhelming to me. I
was very worried that no one would want to read about a lawsuit from 40 years
ago. I’m lucky that the young women called me, and that allowed me to
[incorporate recent material]. I’m lucky that this was published after Mad Men,
and the interest in that era, and after the presidential campaign, which put
women’s issues on the front burner.
There’s the Sheryl Sandberg book
and the Anne-Marie Slaughter piece. I’ve been speaking to women’s groups, law
firms, young men and women at universities. It’s resonating among a larger
group. It’s a moment to talk about what hasn’t changed, and what needs to
change.
Q: How difficult was it for you
and the other women to go into work every day during the lawsuit? How were you
treated in the newsroom?
A: Some of our bosses were very
supportive. But a lot of the guys didn’t like affirmative action…. Osborn
Elliott, had he stayed on the editorial side, would have made changes. He was
the father of three girls. It was the middle-management level where a lot of
discrimination took place. The three women who tried out as writers after the
lawsuit all failed their tryouts. We knew those guys didn’t want them to
succeed…
Going in was a little [testy] with
certain people, but most of our bosses were supportive. They worked with us
every day, and knew we were talented. But it wasn’t a fun time, particularly
for those women who stuck their necks out.
Q: What do you think of the
decline of Newsweek?
A: It is so sad for all of us. It
was such a great and important magazine. It really mattered what Newsweek and
Time put on their covers; they had great reporters and writers. It hasn’t been
that way for a long time. The whole industry is in turmoil. …
Q: What do you see as the future
for print journalism?
A: My husband [Stephen Shepard]’s
book about the failure of journalism came out the same week as my book. With
the exceptions of The New York Times and a few others, probably the print
newspaper will disappear, or appear on certain days, or be targeted to a
community.
Most will go digital. There are
more journalists on more platforms than ever before. The issue is, How do we
pay for quality journalism? It has yet to be seen, but [there’s the] New York
Times model—people who want good stuff and are willing to pay for it.
The metropolitan papers have to
change their strategy. What major city papers have to do is to go local, put
their reporting into covering their city….
Q: Are you working on another
book?
A: No. I’m still thinking about
some issues about young women and where feminism and women are today; I have a
daughter who’s 32. I’ve been talking to a lot of people.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb. This interview was conducted in conjunction with The Lessans Family Annual Book Festival at The JCC of Greater Washington. Lynn Povich will be speaking at the festival on Monday, November 11, at noon.
No comments:
Post a Comment