They have the power to overturn government decisions, but also to influence individual behavior. The experts who have taken center stage over the past two years, and who have the responsibility — and the privilege — of speaking out in the media, are mostly men. This is revealed by an analysis of the Homework of more than 200,000 articles in French published since January 1, 2020 in Canada.
Since the start of the pandemic, only 36% of expert citations in articles related to COVID-19 have been attributed to women. These experts are university professors, doctors, senior public health officials or even researchers who sit on government committees.
Unsurprisingly, Horacio Arruda, number one in public health until January 10, 2022, was by far the most quoted by the media. It alone accounts for 20% of some 15,000 quotes from experts analyzed by our robot.
On the political side, elected officials were cited three times more often than their female counterparts, whose weight occupies a meager 26% of media space. A number which is mainly explained by the gender of the provincial and Canadian premiers as well as that of the Minister of Health of Quebec, Christian Dubé, who succeeded Danielle McCann on June 22, 2020.
The health “boys’ club”
Whether on the job market or at home, it is women who have borne the brunt of the pandemic first. Yet their voice has been systemically muted, impacting not only the notion of expertise itself, perceived primarily as masculine, but also tinting the experience of the pandemic in a male telescope.
How can this imbalance be explained? “With COVID-19, elected officials are much more cited by force of circumstance, says Laura Shine, director of Femmes Expertes. Those who speak most often in the media, or who have greater decision-making power, which is somewhat the same thing, are men: François Legault, Justin Trudeau, Christian Dubé, Horacio Arruda, etc. »
Despite variations from one group of experts to another, none reached the parity zone, normally established between 40 and 60%. All categories combined, our sample includes 15,006 interventions by women, against 41,186 by men.
Politicians are by far the most frequently cited in articles about COVID-19, with 75% of occurrences (43,500). In addition to professors (2999) and doctors (2491), we have created a fourth category, called “Government Experts”. It includes senior public health officials from Quebec, experts from the Institut national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ), those who sit on committees of the Quebec Ministry of Health (MSSS) related to COVID-19 , scientists from the Public Health Agency of Canada and those from federal expert groups related to COVID-19. These were cited 9179 times, or 16% of the total number of citations.
When these data are analyzed according to the number of people cited at least 10 times rather than the number of occurrences, the portrait is more representative of society, especially among government experts, where 46% are women. The other three categories oscillate between 28 and 38%.
At the heart of the crisis
“From a personal point of view, I have found that the pandemic has favored the participation of women in media coverage,” says Nathalie Lemieux, research journalist for Radio-Canada. For the simple and good reason that so many women find themselves in the field of health: they are doctors, immunologists and occupy other positions which have placed them at the heart of the crisis. »
Nathalie Lemieux covered the entire pandemic working for the daily public affairs program 24-60 (ICI RDI) with two other colleagues. She speaks neither on behalf of her employer, nor on behalf of the show, nor for her fellow research journalists.
She gives the example of the professor of the School of Public Health at the University of Montreal, Roxane Borgès Da Silva, the second most cited academic for two years, according to calculations by the Homework. “We were probably the first to invite him to 24-60then everyone gave him a microphone, said Mme The best. Inviting women is part of a concern we have, and not just for pandemic coverage. We always try to see who are the experts or the actors in a situation who will be the most relevant, and in this context, we also obviously try to see that they are the women in these positions. »
That said, she repeats that the degree of expertise, public interest, availability and communication skills always prevail as determining factors. The show does not formally and legally impose any genre quota.
Nathalie Lemieux has been working as a rare pearl fisherman for 30 years. Her profession is largely feminized. She observes that women now take their place more and have less need than before to let themselves be persuaded to publicize their expertise.
“Before, we called the best academic in her field and she replied that she was perhaps not the best placed to talk about it. There was a doubt that we feel much less at the moment. »
Saturday, in the second part of the file:
With Stephane Baillargeon