Athletes creating “sites to behold”: new technologies, gender disparities

I came across an interesting blog post by Marie Hardin from Sports, Media and Society last week. In this post, Marie points to an article in the San Diego Tribune which discusses how athletes are using the Internet to take control over their brands.

In this article, the author (Tod Leonard) excellently wrote about how high-profile athletes have embraced the Web as a way to connect with fans and raise their profiles.

Key takeaways: It’s up to the athletes themselves to 1) make the investment and 2) decide how they want to be branded. Subversively, it’s evident that men and women are portrayed differently.

Leonard said,

“In this age when millions of facts are literally available in the palm of our hands, when baseball games can be followed pitch-by-pitch on a computer and football highlights are enjoyed on your phone, top-level athletes and coaches are only beginning to scratch the surface of the Internet’s potential for their career and their lives.”

He’s completely and totally right. As long as that comment is kept to male sports.

Unfortunately, there’s a discrepancy on how male and female athletes are portrayed on the Web, and this article by Leonard is proof that it’s happening.

In the up-front of this article, Leonard mentioned how Tiger Woods – upon learning he had to undergo knee surgery – decided to break the news on his Web site, where bloggers (not surprisingly) picked upon the information and began spreading it faster than the speed of light.

He mentioned his love for Adrian Gonzalez (who blogs regularly) and golfer Pat Perez (whose site “rocks”), and criticized stars like quarterback Philip Rivers for “being quiet” and golfer Phil Mickelson, whose site “just lays there.”

Leonard said there are athletes “who get it” and athletes “who don’t.”

But where it really gets interesting – and credit needs to go to Marie Hardin for pointing this out – is the difference between the sites of male and female athletes. Unfortunately, the sites of females are tending to reinforce some traditional stereotypes about women.

Women’s sites are emphasizing a certain superfluous material and sex appeal – two items that are absent on sites of men (shocker).

In an age where digital communication is on the brink of taking over print media, the athletic industries need to decide how to brand female athletes so that they’re taken seriously.

And at a time when the athletes themselves have control over how their branded, it is their responsibility to demand to be taken seriously.

Women who are leading this movement – individuals like Maria Sharapova and Danica Patrick – are taking the opposite approach, and it’s not leading to a good online presence.

Here’s what Leonard said about race car driver Danica Patrick’s site:

“Take a look at the opening page of the site of IRL driver Danica Patrick (danicapatrick.com), and the racing helmet on her hip is barely noticeable because she’s wearing a sexy, light blue dress with a plunging neckline. There’s a reason for that.”

“The new site is based more on fashion and real life,” said Patrick’s father, T.J., who runs her business affairs. “People know about her racing now. They need to see her as a fashion person. She’s very up on fashion, and we like to promote the regular Danica. Eventually, she won’t be racing and we still have to keep going.”

But why does she need to see her as a fashion person? Is that really the only way they can draw fans? Doesn’t that emphasis demean her achievements as an athlete who has broken gender barriers in a masculine sport?

I mean, yes, she’s beautiful, and she knows how to dress well, but that’s not why she’s famous. She’s famous because she kicks ass at race car driving.

Right now, Patrick’s site gets 1 million visits per year and features the music of up-and-coming female artists and as many red-carpet glamour shots as racing photos.

I think she can do much, much better.

Another example is that of Michellie Jones, “a personable Aussie triathlete” who is “all about the whimsy of the blog.” Leonard mentions that she compulsively takes photos from her iPhone and posts them on her site (gomichellie.com), “no matter how wacky.”

“If I giggle at them, maybe other people will too,” Jones said.

The blogs read like letters to her dearest friends, complete with run-on sentences and bad punctuation.

“Blogs have made it more personal,” Jones said. “People feel like they can connect with you. Some of my blogs are better than others, but if it makes somebody laugh, and if they can relate to you in some way, then you’ve reached the purpose the site was intended for.”

Now, take a look at how the two female athletes were portrayed in this article and then compare it to how Tiger Woods and others were discussed.

Female athletes = sex objects who are superficial and not serious.

Male athletes = cutting edge sports stars who “get it” when it comes to technological advances.

It’s important that this is addressed early in the game before it’s too late.