December 17, 2009, 10:50 AM — "Geeks drive girls out of computer science", reads the headline of a recent article MSNBC published in its "Science" section.
Don't believe it--at least, not uncritically. I smell something--OK, a lot of things--out of place. I don't think "gender issues in computing" is important enough to merit the attention it gets, and I'm certain that I've already given MSNBC more weight than it deserves. Rather than fully investigate everything I suspect is wrong with this piece, I'll just recite what I know from my own experience:
- To my own astonishment, I've already felt compelled to write on this subject a couple of times for Smart Development. Read the examples of how thinking on this topic goes off-course.
- MSNBC articles use hyperlinks to pop up advertisements, but not meaningful content. Think about that for a while. In the form I currently see, the article has a link from "computer" in "computer scientists" to printer deals, but not to the abstract of the article on which the MSNBC piece is based. MSNBC's purpose is to sell stuff its advertisers want you to buy; it is not for you, as a reader, to understand things. Articles exist to attract attention, not to reach toward truth.
- While a reporter has a byline for the MSNBC article, and one of the four co-authors of the academic piece is mentioned, we really know very little about who said what. What the reporter wrote likely was rewritten by at least one editor. The reporter might never have read the academic article, nor talked to even one researcher; much--in my experience, a majority--of transmission of scientific research to mass media goes by way of college publicity departments. There's essentially no connection between the headlines on news outlets and the research to which they claim to refer. There's good reporting, and even good science reporting, but it's always in the minority.
- To the extent that the MSNBC article communicates anything, it's at best tendentious. The claims are based on experiments "with more than 250 students ..." Presumably these were at US universities; judge for yourself how far you want to generalize any conclusions. As Professor Cheryan is quoted, "... it's a cultural phenomenon."
- Part of the justification for research in this area is that "women missing out on some of the 'best career opportunities ...'" (bolding copied from the MSNBC article) concerns the researchers. I'm waiting to read the headline: "Women too smart for careers with computers", where another researcher concludes that only "boys" are stupid enough to go into a field that's globally-fungible, where entry-level salaries are declining, and it's common to think that staying up all night for a company-paid pizza is a good deal.
- Computing operations "strewn with video games ..." are a little more common in the business world at large than, say, forensic investigators who accurately identify fingerprints in forty seconds of automated look-up, or doctors who aren't disappointed when they discover that most of their daily work amounts to running a retail store--but only a little. These are all Hollywood images. Reality is a lot different.
Cultural attitudes, gender discrimination, and educational opportunities are serious subjects. Don't fool yourself that what the mass media have to say on them aims to be anything other than traffic-driven entertainment.
Disclaimer: what's my motivation? Who am I to sniff at journalistic outlets that have millions of repeat customers? It's too complex to detail today; perhaps I'll follow-up some time with more on my own background. I do hope, though, that you'll read what I write, that you recognize I ground it in facts, and you'll come back for more.
