Bysong-TessaMcP

8/6/2019 Bysong-TessaMcP

1/12

Bysong 1

Tessa Bysong

FYC 115

Unit Two

Martha and the Media:

Souffl, Scandal, and Sex Roles

To say Martha Stewart is successful is putting it lightly. The proud owner of

multiple homes and a company worth billions of dollars, she is one of the most successful

American businesswomen to date. To say Martha Stewart has had it rough lately is ahuge understatement. News broke early in the year when Kmart, which sells a line of her

products, declared bankruptcy, followed quickly by allegations of an insider trading

scandal. Recently, Martha Stewart Omnimedia stockholders filed a lawsuit against her.

Is there something about her apparent perfection and success that draws the media to any

hint of a Martha Stewart scandal? Recently, the biggest scandal has been the accusations

that Stewart sold off her shares of the soon-to-fail ImClone after getting an illegal tip-off

from the owner of the company. The media seems to have a great deal of interest in this

case and has paid it an undue amount of attention. Granted, the recent wave of corporate

scandals, starting with Enron, has obviously contributed to this attention on Stewart, but

any possible scandal she may have been involved with pre-Enron was also covered

heavily, as I will discuss later. Why does the media report so negatively on Martha

Stewart, and what does it reflect about our culture? To answer this, we must look at the

coverage various media outlets have provided and use information from educated

authors. In doing so, we will discover that media coverage of Martha Stewart reflects the


2/12

Bysong 2

larger problem of Americas continued distaste for successful women and the gender

biases that exist in this progressive age.

The history of women in American business before Stewart has been a rocky one

at best. In brief, women first entered the workforce in record numbers during World War

II, filling in for the men at war. After being removed from these jobs and returning to the

home following the war, women didnt emerge as a vital part of the work world until the

1970s. Faced with prejudices, women found it difficult to break-in to the working

world and were forced into segregated roles as secretaries or marketers of distinctly

feminine focused products (Scott 245). Simone de Beauvoir, noted philosopher andfeminist, offers a possible reason for this difficulty saying, Throughout history [women]

have always been subordinated to men, and hence their dependency is not the result of a

historical event or a social change it was not something that occurred (de Beauvoir

58). Essentially, women faced difficulty becoming involved in business because they had

always just been housewives; this wasnt looked on as abnormal, rather as just the way

things were. Becoming a businesswoman, however, was abnormal, and thus it required

(and still requires) a special, almost heroic, effort on the part of women to be successful

in business. Thus, Martha Stewarts ability to go beyond the traditionally feminine role of

marketing domestic goods to control her company, hundreds of workers, and even (until

recently) sitting on the Board of Directors for the NYSE is particularly unique. These

accomplishments become especially distinctive because they allow Martha Stewart to

retain domesticity, through centering her business on affairs of the home, while

conquering the business world.


3/12

Bysong 3

Yet despite her phenomenal success, the media is clearly interested in reporting

the negative side of Stewart both before and after the ImClone scandal. A People article

by Alex Tresniowski quotes a close friend of Martha Stewarts as saying, When she

steps out, she gets slammed. She knows everybody smells blood (Tresinowski). But

what, exactly, are the people who are slamming Stewart saying? For example, an

article by Seth Stern in The Christian Science Monitor describes how A stock trading

scandal is chipping away at her image and that she risks sinking her media and retailing

empire unless she resolves the mess soon (Stern). Stern is over-exaggerating the danger

to Stewarts company, which becomes obvious later in the article when he concedes thatad sales for her magazine have sold through the end of the year. Clearly, other

companies still have faith in Stewarts empire.

So, why are newspapers, television news programs, and magazines so interested

in destroying her image? Shirley Teresa Wajda, a professor of both Womens and

American Studies at Kent State University, offers an interesting possibility in her article,

Kmartha. She proposes that we, as Americans, are uncomfortable with Martha Stewart

because she embodies what has become an increasing dichotomy for women between

promoting family well-being (at least in the sense of striving to make a comfortable home

for ones family) while maintaining independence. As Wajda puts it, we see in Stewart

our own widespread anxiety about [our] pursuit of the American dream (Wajda 72). In

essence, observing Stewart easily balance everything domestic while becoming a tough,

efficient business owner reminds women of their own failed attempts at this balance.

While we struggle to reconcile our desire for family cohesion and community with


4/12

Bysong 4

self sufficiency (Wajda 72), our society doesnt necessarily enjoy seeing someone

handle this impossible balancing act so well, and we inevitably become a bit jealous.

Thus, we become ready for Martha to fail, waiting to see her perfect equilibrium

collapse and, in turn, for her perfection to be chipped away. We perceive Stewarts

ability to create balance as yet another symptom of her perfection, which further

intimidates us by confronting us with our obvious lack of perfection in comparison.

After all Martha Stewart also re-enacts the selflessness embedded in womens domestic

roles and promotes a lifestyle in which the individual is not only the laborer but also

the CEO of his or her own household (Wajda 77). Stewarts image is that of a womancapable of anything, and women were anxious to feel that this perfection was not entirely

possible before the recent scandals. Now that news of the ImClone scandal has broken,

we feel even more justified in pointing out her imperfection, as is made obvious by a

USA Today headline that reads, Why Does the Government Seek to Ruin Ms. Perfects

Life? (Doherty). Clearly, in referring to Stewart as Ms. Perfect, and continually

referencing the troubles that Stewart has with the government, our media reflects

societys distaste for her perfection by reporting every foible Martha possesses or

difficulty that comes her way. In this manner, we are not quite so obligated to achieve

this balance and perfection, and we arent confronted with our failure to do so whenever

we see Martha on television.

Media coverage then simply shows us what we want to hear. Examples abound

of criticism and sarcastic humor aimed at making Martha Stewart appear less perfect and

emphasize her failings. For instance, a faux book cover, circulated on the internet before

the recent scandal, sports the title, Martha Stewart Walks on Water and depicts Stewart


5/12

Bysong 5

in a cardigan and khakis standing cheerily atop a calm body of water offering a plate of

cookies. While intended for parody and amusement, the message is obvious: we believe

that Martha Stewart considers herself so perfect that hyperbolic comparison to the

supposedly perfect figure of Jesus seems funny. Obviously, we find a degree of

satisfaction in hinting that perhaps she isnt so perfect. Even more criticism can be found

now, post-scandal. A brief note about Stewart in Time flashed the headline, Someone

Else Will Have to Bring the Scones (Orecklin). The article describes Stewarts

relinquishing of her position on the NYSE Board of Directors, and the headline clearly

demonstrates how we dislike seeing her achieve balance. The reference to scones (adecidedly domestic product) in an article about Stewarts difficult business affairs mocks

the apparent fact that she cannot handle both successfully. We, in turn, are justified in

not being able to achieve balance as well because if Martha cant, why should we be

expected to?

The problem of the medias over-coverage of Martha Stewarts most recent

scandal likely reflects a problem in our society beyond our desire to see perfection fail:

Americans are still surprised and not necessarily comfortable with a powerful woman in

business. We were anxious to see Stewart fail before because we didnt like her

perfection, and since the ImClone scandal broke, we have a new area in which to wish

her ill. As Americans, we still arent ready for powerful women in business, so we

become anxious to hear about a womans failure. Stephan Weiler and Alexandra

Bernasek, both psychologists and sociologists, point out that the number of self-

employed women in the United States is still much lower than that of men, and typically,

women-owned businesses are much less successful than those run by men (Weiler and


6/12

Bysong 6

Bernasek 88). In fact, women make up little more than 30% of the self-employed in the

United States (McManus 74). Furthermore, Annual incomes of self-employed women

were 36.7 percent of the incomes of self-employed men and 28.2 percent of the incomes

of male wage and salary workers (Hundley 1). Obviously, women are still not a huge

force in self-employment in the United States. Thus, the confident, highly successful

business woman is not the norm, and we, as a society, cannot necessarily relate to her nor

are we particularly ready to do so.

This is reflected in the difficulty many women have in breaking into business.

That difficulty results from others in the business world not being accustomed to their presence and because women do not have the network connections that men do (Weiler

and Bernasek 90). Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman, both professors of Sociology,

discuss the reasoning behind this division: We conceive of gender as an emergent

feature of social situations: as both an outcome of and a rationale for various social

arrangements and as a means of legitimating one of the most fundamental divisions of

society (West and Zimmerman 476). Women do not have the same business

connections that men do not only because women havent been in the business world as

long, but also because men see them as the other in the social situation that is

business. As de Beauvoir describes it, He is the Subject, he is the Absolute she is the

Other (de Beauvoir 56). Business is a mans world, and he has always inhabited it.

Thus, when women become involved, they are seen as the outsider in a non-traditional

role. Because Stewart crosses the division between the mens world and womens world

we become even more uncomfortable as we begin question the legitimacy of this

fundamental division of society. Her ability to succeed in the mans world probes


7/12

Bysong 7

the question of why these divisions exist in the first place. So, we look for her to fail to

reinforce our reasons for believing women shouldnt be so involved in business.

Sociologist Patricia McManus also suggests this idea, further saying that our usual

views of a successful business person include typically male characteristics. She

describes the successful male by saying, In this classical vision, entrepreneurship is the

act of a charismatic individual who recognizes new opportunities, takes risks, perseveres

through adversity, and eventually changes the face of the economy (McManus 79). In

essence, we associate these characteristics with men because they have always embodied

the business world. Furthermore, Competent adult members of [Western] societies seedifferences between the two (men and women) as fundamental and enduring, and these

differences are seemingly supported by the division of labor into womens and mens

work (West and Zimmerman 477). The separation of men and women in business is a

further extension of the differences we believe exist between them in the rest of society.

To see a woman step up and become successful in business confronts us with the idea

that our society is changing, causing discomfort for many people. It is this discrimination

that McManus suggests perpetuates difficulties for female business owners and may help

to explain why the ImClone scandal receives so much media attention. Reporting that

Martha Stewarts empire, from TV shows to Kmart towels, scrambles as the stock

scandal drags on (Stern 192), gives those unnerved by her success a chance to relax and

believe that perhaps things arent changing that rapidly after all.

We have so far established that the media wants to convey an image of a

successful businesswoman not succeeding. A further possible explanation for the

medias negative and excessive coverage of this case lies in societys gender biases. We


8/12

Bysong 8

not only want the media to show us that not everything is changing and that women

arent going to dominate business, but media coverage also reveals how we feel about

women themselves. While we were intimidated by Marthas perfection before the

scandal, we now have even more ammunition; we can attack her femininity because if

she was succeeding in business, there must have been something manly about her. This

can be seen in many cases. An editorial in the Omaha World-Herald , for a simple

example, states, Rosie we like. Oprah we love. Not Martha. If Martha came to our

door, we would hide behind our sloppily slipcovered sofas (Rowell 17). American

women are intimidated by Stewart, and thus lash out at her personally, pointing out howshe is unloved unlike other famous females. Granted, these other women receive

negative press as well, but as Rowell clearly describes, women like and love them.

Obviously, Martha Stewarts transgressions are viewed as much more egregious than

anything these women do, likely because neither of them transgresses gender roles the

way Stewart does.

In an interview with Larry King on February 14, 2002, Martha Stewart spoke

about the gender biases held for women in the public eye. King asked Do you think

successful women have it tougher than successful men? The successful man is called

tough, the woman is called a bitch Ive never heard a successful mans appearance

being discussed. Martha responded, I think theres still a little bit of inequality at the

top We have to talk the business talk. And I think sometimes coming out of a

womans mouth, business talk sounds maybe it does sound a little tough (King 7,8).

Here Stewart strikes an excellent point. We are used to the way men in business behave

because giving orders, making tough decisions, behaving in the classical vision of


9/12

Bysong 9

entrepreneurship, is simply what one has to do to survive in business. However, we do

not expect that sort of behavior from a woman; we expect her to be polite, caring,

understanding of others feelings, and having other stereotypical womanly characteristics.

Popular culture holds the assumption that doing gender merely involves making use of

discrete, well-defined bundles of behavior that can simply be plugged into interactional

situations to produce recognizable enactments of masculinity and femininity (West and

Zimmerman 484). So, if a woman survives in business by portraying male bundles of

behavior, she is considered atypical, masculine, and, as King so adroitly put it, a bitch.

Historian Joan Scott elaborates on this idea: Business is not reflecting or appealing to stable beliefs in gender; rather it is producing these beliefs and

relationships (Scott 249). She essentially believes that the gender roles and difficulties

that develop in business spill over into society. The lack of successful businesswomen

causes the assumption that men are the only gender that can be tough and successful,

which is reflected in our society and our media. Thus, perceived business roles

perpetuate stereotypes, and we have a societal trend toward discouraging businesswomen

simply because they are breaking with tradition and gender roles. As a result, the media

glorifies in reporting, as King points out from The Examiner in his interview, Martha

Stewart, Fraud! Shes falling apart. And this one has [her] as ballooning to 212

pounds (King 7) to show us that women who are successful and challenge their roles

will inevitably suffer and have huge difficulties. The media coverage of the ImClone

scandal serves as a fatherly finger-wagging reminder not to break with gender roles,

especially in business.


10/12

Bysong 10

Despite all this, however, some may argue that the Martha Stewart scandal does

warrant the coverage it has received. After all, she is a celebrity, so she receives a lot of

attention, and celebrities open themselves up to public comment, whether it is pleasant or

not. This, of course, is true; those who live in the public eye are doomed to be judged by

that eye. However, it seems to me that we judge Martha more harshly than other women.

As Rowell pointed out earlier, we seem to enjoy other powerful female celebrities, and

while they do get harsh, unfair critiques in the press sometimes (like the chronicling of

Oprahs weight battles), Stewart is criticized about nearly every aspect of her life

including her relationships with her children, her appearance on her television show, theway she treats her employees, the way she presents herself in her magazine, and

obviously, her business choices.

Critics of Martha Stewart might offer, with some justification, the recent

explosion of corporate wrongdoings as justification for her media backlash. I absolutely

agree that the public deserves to be informed about corporate wrongdoings, and if Martha

Stewart has been involved in illegal activity, we ought to know. However, to illustrate

just how much attention everything about Martha Stewart receives, I did a search in a

periodical database for articles about Kenneth Lay (CEO of Enron) and found 434 such

articles. When Martha Stewart was the search topic, 2775 articles appeared. Obviously,

Stewarts story is being followed much more closely than that of Kenneth Lay. The fact

that she, personally, (not her company) is the one who may have benefited from illegal

activities shows that this does, in fact, have little to do with the general public. Whether

or not Stewart made $40,000 illegally will not determine the future of an entire company

and the jobs of hundreds of workers as Lays scandal did. Yet, she is still the topic of


11/12

Bysong 11

many more articles and editorials. Based on this evidence, it seems obvious that the

media does pay an undue amount of attention to Martha Stewart.

Martha Stewart has long endured the negative spotlight, likely because she

highlights our struggles for independence and a loving home, represents a changing

society in which women are emerging in unexpected power, and because she has broken

traditional gender roles. Various media outlets, when examined in the light of multiple,

educated authors, show us that the media coverage of Martha Stewart appears on the

surface to be merely a nightly update, but the reasons behind the reporting and our

reasons for watching go deeper than that. In fact, the reporting on Stewart is a reflectionon ourselves, as well as our societal values. As it stands now, a woman watching the

beating that Stewart receives from the press could easily become disheartened. Martha

sums up this feeling saying, Its kind of difficult to survive in a world that is always kind

of pounding you down (King 8). Hopefully, as more women become active in business

and rise to the heights of power, we as a society will become more comfortable with all

that they represent and learn to give them their deserved respect.


12/12

Bysong 12

Documents

Bysong-TessaMcP