APRILFeedback

Discussion and ConclusionsOur analysis of the NAB 2002 Convention Program shows that even though womencontinue to be underrepresented on the panels at the industry’s largest convention,there are gains for woman across the board. Just as we’ve found in the past few years,there are significantly fewer chairs and presenters in NAB 2002 than in the previousyear, but the percentage of female participation in such roles has increased. The NABBoards, also, have welcomed more women as members. Overall, since 1993, the NABhas made slow, modest, but generally consistent improvement at involving women inits convention—even as fewer total people have been involved. When one considersthat NAB 2002 had nearly 27 percent fewer speakers and panelists than NAB 1998,the consistent relative gains for women are laudable.The BEA, on the other hand, continues to present the opposite picture. Rather thana decrease in the total number of participants in its convention, the number of chairsand presenters has significantly increased over the past few years—from 515 in 1998 to769 in 2002. This increase gives the BEA a substantial, concrete opportunity toincrease the number of women involved in its major convention event. The number ofspeakers and panelists rose by 8.14 percent this year alone—from 691 in 2001. As anorganization, the BEA has not risen to the challenge. Even with the 8.14 percentincrease in the number of participants, the number of female chairs and presenters atthe 2002 BEA convention rose so slightly (by 0.09%) that one can’t consider this anysort of “progress.” The participation of women at the BEA convention has declined by8.75 percent overall since 1993.The number of female BEA Officers and Directors in 2002 is also way down. Thenumber of women participants in this group has dropped by 15.69 percent (from33.33 percent in 2001 to 17.65 percent in 2002) This is down 10.92 percent since1993. The number of female Interest Division chairs remains low, at 13.33 percent.As we noted last year, we have more Interest Divisions now, but no more women serveas chairs.The NAB, long criticized by many for being a male-dominated domain, seems to beincreasingly effective at reaching out to include women—and to maintain the progresswhen it is made. The BEA has not been successful in this regard, and should work toimprove its record. One of the authors of this report (Lind) has gained some insight byvirtue of her serving as the 2002 Convention Planner. Even though she did everythingshe could to encourage people submitting panels to be diverse—among other things,the program proposals themselves explicitly asked about the extent of diversity amongthe invited panelists—this obviously did not happen as much as would be desired.Just as in the convention, the individuals elected to the various leadership positionsrepresent the members’ decisions. And just as in the convention, women either are notseeking elected offices, or are not being supported when they do make such an attempt.The BEA convention is almost a perfect reflection of what BEA members ask for,and it seems clear that BEA members are not exerting enough effort at including theirfemale peers. Numerous women—both scholars and producers—attend the BEAconvention. Many of these women are capable of and probably interested in becomingmore involved in the organization, both as convention participants and as Divisional orOrganizational leaders. We, as BEA members, bear the responsibility of reaching outto and welcoming others, particularly those in under-represented groups. By the same26Feedback April 2003 (Vol. 44, No. 2)