The Week In Review

–Notable O.E.P. Stories for the Week Ending in August 10th, 2012–

(by J. J. Morr)

“The Planet Mars” – E. L. Trouvelo, 1860

Another work-week draws to a close. As always, there are a multitude of things that happened to split our attention, perhaps in order to win it: NASA’s Mars “Curiosity” rover successfully landed on Mars and has sent its first color photographs; the closing ceremony for the Summer Olympics is this Sunday (already) and the U.S. currently boasts the most medals, 82 total, 34 of them gold; Syria’s civil war continues to rend an entire people and its government to pieces; and fossils unearthed in upper Kenya provide answers, and rather intoxicating questions, about the development of the human species.

“Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera” indeed, if I may borrow a quip from Yul Brinner’s King Mongkut of Siam. (Pardon the guilty pleasure.)

To the point: just within these past seven-or-so days several of our Op-Ed alumni have published opinion articles (online) in publications that range from TIME to The Christian Science Monitor. Yes, so many successes to report, and happily. Listed below are five “highlights” for this week’s edition of the Op-Ed Project Review:

	Krystina Friedlander penned this wonderfully textured and inquisitive post regarding cognitive dissonance, “pop-spirituality,” and stereotyping of Eastern religion. Really she speaks to a certain theological realism; all these belief systems, for all their heavenward posturing, are populated with humans – and are flawed.
	Nowile M. Rooks, three-time author and associate professor at Cornell, wrote a piece regarding the ethical - and educational, and social – impli- cations of free online coursework as provided through ivy-leagues like Harvard and Duke. (I myself am en- rolled in a January ’13 course from U of Edinburg, through Coursera)
	Tera W. Hunter writes, and rather lucidly, about current discussions pinpointing Gabrielle Douglas, “the first black woman to win gold in the (Olympic) gymnastics individual all- around.” Along with an appraisal of the media’s handling of Douglas’ family history, Tera wonders aloud about the ways in which the public can “know” others’ personal histories.
	Sarah Swanbeck optimizes the op-ed form in her (negative) estimation of California’s newly-proposed Prop 31. And although she is clear from the beginning regarding her position – a plainly-stated “against” – Sarah is deliberate and provides the reader with basic information about the var- ious and practical applications of the initiative.
	Anya Cordell‘s “Sikhs Bearing Pizza” proves itself straight away: an emo- tive first line, repeated and charged phrasing, and an admission of involve- ment that would seem to elevate Anya from mere commenter to, say, an experiencer. It doesn’t hurt that she’s worked closely with categorical “Others” in an activist capacity. Rad.

There you have it – this week’s roundup. I’ll be posting a Review, if all goes well, once per week, most likely on Friday but perhaps (like today) on an occasional Thursday. So thanks for reading through, and a more wide-spanning “Thank You (& Congrats)” to all of our Op-Ed alumni for your hard work and most especially for your willingness to give the rest of us a chance to hear what you have to say.

- J. J. Morr

Now that the dust has settled: the Byline blog (October 20 – 26, 2011)

Hello Byline readers!  This is Taryn, and I’m going to take you for a quick trip down memory lane… A few days ago, as I pored over the LA Times op-eds, I felt the need to revisit the Estrich vs. LA Times 2005 controversy.  (In case you missed it, Susan Estrich, a well known law professor / political pundit, expressed some concerns about the gender imbalance of the LA Times op-ed page to the paper’s opinion editor Michael Kinsley.  He was not particularly receptive. Harsh words were exchanged, etc.)   I was struck by how long the debate lasted and by the amount of discussion that it provoked.  So, here we are six years later, and the dust has finally settled.

I feel no need to stir up those old emotions.  Rather, I’d like to take a look at the dispassionate aspect of that dispute – the numbers.

As you may know, Estrich launched a precursor of the Byline Survey.  Beginning in 2002 or 2003 (there are conflicting accounts), she tasked some of her USC law students with the cataloguing of op-eds from the NY Times, the Washington Post , and the LA Times according to gender.  Throughout her (very public) correspondence with Kinsley and related writings elsewhere, she cited the survey findings to make her case.  In one of the innumerable blogs attacking Estrich, the students conducting the survey were referred to derogatorily as bean counters.  How dare they?

So, as a proud bean counter, I thought that it would be interesting to compare the data from the Estrich survey with present day Byline numbers.

The following data were taken from Estrich’s various writings in 2005 (I’ve yet to find the actual survey).  The corresponding present day stats (from 9/22 to 10/26) are in bold.  

• LA Times:  10% to 14% women.
• “The best the LA times has done is 20% to 25%”.
•  Presently:  21% women; on their best day: 45%.

• The New York Times:  16% women.
• In February of 2005, NYT published no women’s op-eds on 12 of 28 days.
• Presently:  22% women; no women published in 8 of the last 28 days.

• Washington Post:  12% women.
• Presently:  21% women.

As you can see, there have been significant gains all around, and they’ve been made in the short span of six years.  The averages are much higher – from 6 to 10 percentage points – working their ways up to the tipping point of 30%.  The LA Times’ best day of 45% is a tremendous leap from the earlier best of 25%.  In my opinion, Estrich deserves a lot of credit for collecting this data.  Without it, we would be unable to chart this excellent progress.

Join me next week when I’ll be examining coverage of the GOP presidential candidates.

The OpEd Project’s First Ever Follow-up Workshop in NYC

The fabulous Katherine Lanpher has been working with an amazing group of OpEd Project experts to draft, refine and pitch their op-eds (not to mention have a great time–which, believe me, they do: I can hear them laughing through the walls every Wednesday night!).

They just had their third of four sessions last night and all have great pieces in the pipeline. We can’t wait to see them all published!

OEP OpEd Project Members Prepare for Their Brain-Trust Session with Mentor-Editor Katherine Lanpher