Katie: A Woman At The Table
One week ago, Katie sat down for a briefing at the White House, and noticed something unusual.
Last Wednesday, President Bush gave his address to the country about “the new way forward” for Iraq, and lots of journalists—including me, of course—were in Washington to cover it. But before the Big Speech, there was the little-known Big Meeting.
The White House invited all the network anchors, and some cable anchors, along with the Sunday political show hosts to a meeting with unnamed VERY senior administration officials. (Obviously I know their names, but the agreement was that in order to attend the meeting, we couldn’t reveal the people who spoke to us.)
And even though I’ve been in this business for more years than I’d like to admit, and interviewed countless Presidents and world leaders, it’s still thrilling—and even a little awe-inspiring—to get “briefed” at the White House, no matter who is sitting in the Oval Office.
And yet, the meeting was a little disconcerting as well. As I was looking at my colleagues around the room—Charlie Gibson, George Stephanopoulos, Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Bob Schieffer, Wolf Blitzer, and Brit Hume—I couldn’t help but notice, despite how far we’ve come, that I was still the only woman there. Well, there was some female support staff near the door. But of the people at the table, the “principals” in the meeting, I was the only one wearing a skirt. Everyone was gracious, though the jocular atmosphere was palpable.
The feminist movement that began in the 1970’s helped women make tremendous strides—but there still haven’t been enough great leaps for womankind. Fifty-one percent of America is female, but women make up only about sixteen percent of Congress—which, as the Washington Monthly recently pointed out, is better than it’s ever been...but still not as good as parliaments in Rwanda (forty-nine percent women) or Sweden (forty-seven percent women). Only nine Fortune 500 companies have women as CEO’s.
That meeting was a reality check for me—and not just about Iraq. It was a reminder that all of us still have an obligation to ask: Don’t more women deserve a place at the table too?
(CBS)
The White House invited all the network anchors, and some cable anchors, along with the Sunday political show hosts to a meeting with unnamed VERY senior administration officials. (Obviously I know their names, but the agreement was that in order to attend the meeting, we couldn’t reveal the people who spoke to us.)
And even though I’ve been in this business for more years than I’d like to admit, and interviewed countless Presidents and world leaders, it’s still thrilling—and even a little awe-inspiring—to get “briefed” at the White House, no matter who is sitting in the Oval Office.
And yet, the meeting was a little disconcerting as well. As I was looking at my colleagues around the room—Charlie Gibson, George Stephanopoulos, Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Bob Schieffer, Wolf Blitzer, and Brit Hume—I couldn’t help but notice, despite how far we’ve come, that I was still the only woman there. Well, there was some female support staff near the door. But of the people at the table, the “principals” in the meeting, I was the only one wearing a skirt. Everyone was gracious, though the jocular atmosphere was palpable.
The feminist movement that began in the 1970’s helped women make tremendous strides—but there still haven’t been enough great leaps for womankind. Fifty-one percent of America is female, but women make up only about sixteen percent of Congress—which, as the Washington Monthly recently pointed out, is better than it’s ever been...but still not as good as parliaments in Rwanda (forty-nine percent women) or Sweden (forty-seven percent women). Only nine Fortune 500 companies have women as CEO’s.
That meeting was a reality check for me—and not just about Iraq. It was a reminder that all of us still have an obligation to ask: Don’t more women deserve a place at the table too?
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 72 CommentsChild care benefits? Whatever happened to parents being responsible for their own children? There are some things that should never change. If both parents working means that children are to be raised by someone other than the parents, then there is a severe problem. It might sound old-fashioned, but if the old way works, leave it alone.
By the way, this quota Rwanda imposes on its Parliament and these fabulous child-care benefits Sweden provides have sure done a lot to advance those nations on the world's scene. Would people (including Ms. Couric) please quit using other nations, especially waste-of-time nations like these, as some sort of useless standard by which we should judge our own nation. When Rwanda or Sweden can honestly and justifiably take the title of 'the greatest nation on earth' away from the U.S., maybe then we can idolize them as beacons of hope in an old-fashioned USA, but until then let's find some Better Standard by which to judge ourselves.
When you say "deserve" what are you emplying? Should we just hand over elected positions in congress or turn over CEO positions to women just because they are women? No, our country grants all sexes the oppurtunity to serve as our representatives and elected officals. If you want more women in Congress should you not be encouraging women to vote for women (if 51% of the population is made up of women then you should be good to go). Frankly it does not matter to me if it is a man or a woman that represents myself and my country, just ensure they have my best intrests in mind and are not on some personal mission to set their agendas into motion. Take a look at your progression as a professional. Would you be satisfied if you did not earn your role as a leader in the media industry through hard work and great talent? I think you would not be happy if you were just handed your position due to your ability to wear a "skirt". Oh, in the future please due not ever compare my Great Nation to Rwanda or Sweden, that is an insult.
Yes, the characature of many female managers being particularly more defensive and standoffish with female coworkers is true. Yes, the catty, "just HAVE to get it in there" comment by women is true. And, yes, there IS a reason why there were more men at that table.
Last I checked, our officials are elected. This fact, coupled with the statement that 51% of America is women, leaves little room for unequality jabs.
If a woman wants to run for an elected office... nothing is stopping her.... If a woman wants to vote for a woman... nothing is stopping her. Anyone can vote for whoever they like. As it stands now, fewer women run and fewer women get elected. Not because women are barred from holding office.... but because women don't run for office nearly as much as men do. And, that.... is their choice
The people elect the government, never forget that. You seem to think that having more women in congress is automatically a good thing. The truth may be a different story. In the end, we Americans have the freedom to choose who we want in office representing us... If it so happens that that particular person happens to be male, so be it. If it so happens that that particular person happens to be female, so be it.
But saying we still suffer from unequality is just plain.... well... silly!
As for Couric, I'm not a fan, but not for the reasons many of the goofy reactionaries on this thread are spouting...I simply think she covers unimportant stories too frequently. People knocking her for libral bias should get a life...the comment was completely indirect and unspecific. THEY put the meaning there in their heads because deep down they KNOW Bush is staggeringly unpopular (and he is). This isn't about politics, its about a lousy reporter trying to do right by not sniffing the throne of a lousier President. You hear that Conservatives? GW Bush will be a JOKE in the history books. A JOKE! And you goofy Conservatives will all eat crow...
I especially liked the hypocrite who complained about Couric's "bias" and then said "Brit Hume should have been the only reporter there". Oh really? So when a Democrat is President I guess we can ban all Fox News reporters eh? Fox News is EXTREMELY biased to the right (and logic would dictate that Conservative bias is bias nontheless) and only ask tough questions when the stench of incompetance and corruption is so strong that spin simply doesn't work (Hurricane Katrina, Mark Foley, the last election).
Katie, you need to understand that to get into Congress, you need to win an election. Its not a group of people that are suppose to mimic the diversity of the US population. If so we would have even more stupid Congress people.
Read your blog. I know you're a busy person, so please appreciate my direct message.
You have never been a credible hard journalist, and you should know it. If you don't know it, you have been pumped up by those who, unsuccessfully, have tried to exploit your TV popularity. I don't think this is your fault, directly. You have been given opportunities for two reasons: you are intelligent, intuitive and pleasant, and you are attractive. You do a great job at morning light-news lifestyle shows. You, however, are not a hard journalist. You simply don't have a solid grasp of the world. I have witnessed significantly superficial interviews by you and feel CBS management was, well, simply dumb in putting your in your current position.
I regard you much more highly than this email may seem. But you're wrong in blaming anti-feminism for your being in that room where you felt alone. Clearly woman belong in the room. But you don't. If you didn't feel comfortable, it is because it is YOU shouldn't be there. You simply have not earned it, and do not really want it. If you don't agree with me, and if you can, please do a show to educate me
Merideth V? is no subsitute for you, and you need to go back to the Today Show and do what you do well.
Thanks for years of good TV, but not on CBS, and not as a hard news journalist anywhere. Enjoy your life, you don't need to prove anything.
Palpable isn't a good journalistic word; it's a worn-out, amateurish, freshman literature kind word.
And why is it that the few women who manage to attain these "heights" are always so self-congratulatory? Did you "cut in line," Catie? Do you have the "power?"
Keep in mind people, for all the women who aren't Fortune 500 CEOs, Congresswomen or Senators, there are essentially the same number of men who aren't either. Those people number around a thousand, and there are millions and millions of people in this great nation.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 72 Comments