Is it sexist to obsess over a female TV reporter's beauty?

Visual appeal is a major driving force behind who gets hired to be on television. So much so that it can override anything else at times.

Let's start with the example of Alli Raffa.

Allie-Raffa.jpg


This woman is a knockout. She's truly an exceptional and rare beauty. I wonder, would she be on the NBC News payroll if she had Kelly Osborne's face? Is there any amount of intelligence, skill, or journalistic excellence that would overcome such a face to land her in exactly the same place in her career at exactly the same time? How much ineptitude is forgiven in by her employer for the sake of being able to have this face on their airwaves?

Let's look at another face in the NBC news world.

tur.png


Katy Tur is beautiful woman. I've seen her on TV plenty of times and even have followed her on Twitter at one point for a while, and she seems like she's probably a perfectly nice person. But she's not exactly a rocket scientist. She stumbles on her words at times on TV. She doesn't really conduct meaningful interviews. I don't think she really says an original thought and largely says whatever is fed to her on a teleprompter or that her producer tells her through her earpiece. Would she be in her job with Kelly Osborne's face? I doubt it.

There's a reason I'm focusing on the NBC News sphere. Liberals claim to champion women's equality and empowerment. And NBC News seems to really put that into action by seemingly favoring female anchors. But how is this not actually sexist?

If women are going to reduced to their beauty on TV, then shouldn't it be perfectly OK to constantly see these women as nothing more than a hot piece of ass?
Ask Jeff Glor, who lost his job to Nora O'Donnell on ABC--no sexism there.
 
By "obsess" I mean to reduce woman to her physical appearance and attractiveness and define her based on that, to the exclusion of her other traits. You know, what liberals would normally say is sexist, but appears to be okay when their favorite news outlets do it.

Business is about generating ratings and yes, profit comes before politics until advertisers start jumping ship…
 
Visual appeal is a major driving force behind who gets hired to be on television. So much so that it can override anything else at times.

Let's start with the example of Alli Raffa.

Allie-Raffa.jpg


This woman is a knockout. She's truly an exceptional and rare beauty. I wonder, would she be on the NBC News payroll if she had Kelly Osborne's face? Is there any amount of intelligence, skill, or journalistic excellence that would overcome such a face to land her in exactly the same place in her career at exactly the same time? How much ineptitude is forgiven in by her employer for the sake of being able to have this face on their airwaves?

Let's look at another face in the NBC news world.

tur.png


Katy Tur is beautiful woman. I've seen her on TV plenty of times and even have followed her on Twitter at one point for a while, and she seems like she's probably a perfectly nice person. But she's not exactly a rocket scientist. She stumbles on her words at times on TV. She doesn't really conduct meaningful interviews. I don't think she really says an original thought and largely says whatever is fed to her on a teleprompter or that her producer tells her through her earpiece. Would she be in her job with Kelly Osborne's face? I doubt it.

There's a reason I'm focusing on the NBC News sphere. Liberals claim to champion women's equality and empowerment. And NBC News seems to really put that into action by seemingly favoring female anchors. But how is this not actually sexist?

If women are going to reduced to their beauty on TV, then shouldn't it be perfectly OK to constantly see these women as nothing more than a hot piece of ass?
I think the networks are just giving us what we want, low-lifes that we are. If I'm going to watch the news on TV I'd much rather watch an intelligent and attractive woman than any man. Sue me, I'm hetero. If Americans preferred to watch a decrepit old man, that is what we'd get.

My personal favorite, cnn's kate bolduan:
80c24b1e28ef379206b7ee2290d4209391-18-kate-bolduan.rsquare.w330.jpg
 
By "obsess" I mean to reduce woman to her physical appearance and attractiveness and define her based on that, to the exclusion of her other traits. You know, what liberals would normally say is sexist, but appears to be okay when their favorite news outlets do it.

While I agree with you and second your take on women selected for high-power, high exposure jobs based on looks, this reality where women must sell themselves sexually for position is irrefutable proof of the failure of the classic feminist movement or it is undeniable proof we men were behind said movement all along. Nowadays women's movements mean nothing, what with men pretending to be women dominating women's sports and other high profile professions and in doing so slaughtering the dreams of women and young girls everywhere. Myself, I enjoy looking at eye candy on the TV screen as much anyone but I also abhor exploitation in any form of the human form.
 
Which is kinda crazy because i didnt know there were attractive leftists
Well, except on my local KARE11 news in Mpls...
6a87914c-dd21-48af-8edf-ec13bf7edfcd_1140x641.jpg


Now that's what I call going
"All In" on the Harry Potter lesbian look.
 
Business is about generating ratings and yes, profit comes before politics until advertisers start jumping ship…

Ah, see. Therein lies the rub. The pretty faces are clearly a major boon for ratings among the liberal audiences of NBC/MSNBC and CNN. And that can only mean that liberals' viewing behavior (despite their claims to champion women's equality) is reduces the the worthiness of these women to their attractiveness.
 
Ah, see. Therein lies the rub. The pretty faces are clearly a major boon for ratings among the liberal audiences of NBC/MSNBC and CNN. And that can only mean that liberals' viewing behavior (despite their claims to champion women's equality) is reduces the the worthiness of these women to their attractiveness.
I don't see your hot or not thread as political.
 
Ah, see. Therein lies the rub. The pretty faces are clearly a major boon for ratings among the liberal audiences of NBC/MSNBC and CNN. And that can only mean that liberals' viewing behavior (despite their claims to champion women's equality) is reduces the the worthiness of these women to their attractiveness.

Agreed. What it means is that everyone has a price regardless of their politics.
 
Visual appeal is a major driving force behind who gets hired to be on television. So much so that it can override anything else at times.

Let's start with the example of Alli Raffa.

Allie-Raffa.jpg


This woman is a knockout. She's truly an exceptional and rare beauty. I wonder, would she be on the NBC News payroll if she had Kelly Osborne's face? Is there any amount of intelligence, skill, or journalistic excellence that would overcome such a face to land her in exactly the same place in her career at exactly the same time? How much ineptitude is forgiven in by her employer for the sake of being able to have this face on their airwaves?

Let's look at another face in the NBC news world.

tur.png


Katy Tur is beautiful woman. I've seen her on TV plenty of times and even have followed her on Twitter at one point for a while, and she seems like she's probably a perfectly nice person. But she's not exactly a rocket scientist. She stumbles on her words at times on TV. She doesn't really conduct meaningful interviews. I don't think she really says an original thought and largely says whatever is fed to her on a teleprompter or that her producer tells her through her earpiece. Would she be in her job with Kelly Osborne's face? I doubt it.

There's a reason I'm focusing on the NBC News sphere. Liberals claim to champion women's equality and empowerment. And NBC News seems to really put that into action by seemingly favoring female anchors. But how is this not actually sexist?

If women are going to reduced to their beauty on TV, then shouldn't it be perfectly OK to constantly see these women as nothing more than a hot piece of ass?
I believe studies have shown that good looking people of either sex are more likely to get hired than the not so good looking. Don't ask me for source but I seem to remember hearing about or reading that.
 
Ah, see. Therein lies the rub. The pretty faces are clearly a major boon for ratings among the liberal audiences of NBC/MSNBC and CNN. And that can only mean that liberals' viewing behavior (despite their claims to champion women's equality) is reduces the the worthiness of these women to their attractiveness.
To be fair, Fox, OAN, and Newsmax have their share of attractive female anchors.
 
Katy Turd is as smart as AOC. I used to see her doing the local “Hey! It’s snowing heavy in the NYC Metro area” reports from local NY NBC news. She is fair looking. But she’s a dope.

The local CBS nighttime anchor, however, is very pretty:
E0C29019-4EA7-4008-BD57-33B269792110.jpeg

That’s not even a particularly flattering image of her.
 
She works for NBC News now.



Your personal tastes are not the question here.
She only joined NBC in January after 6 years at Fox News. The internet hasn't even caught up yet!

That's funny bout my taste! Did you happen to read your thread title? No one in their right mind would obsess over her
 

Forum List

Back
Top