Palin spoke in a black leather jacket and mini-skirt with her brunette hair hanging down, and a mammoth American flag behind her.
Excuse me Sun-Times, but that is incorrect. I also took note of Governor Palin’s outfit and as you can see, my description was a bit different: http://twitter.com/AnnaTarkov/status/13883321168
Now, I can understand that Mr. Pallasch, the reporter who wrote this piece, might not be too well-versed in women’s fashions. But surely even the most clueless of men knows the difference between a miniskirt and a skirt that is knee-length?
But that’s not even the point, is it?
The point is that it is blatantly sexist to even mention what Governor Palin was wearing. If this was a male politician, would we have gotten a description of his suit and tie? Also, what relevance does her outfit and hairstyle have to what she says?
By the way, in my review of the Chicago Tribune’s coverage of the event, I didn’t find a single mention of Sarah Palin’s physical appearance. That’s the way it should be.
UPDATE: I’m told by the Sun-Times that a female copy editor saw the reference to a mini-skirt and removed the “mini” part from the print version which, as we now know, also later happened in the online version. Questions that remain are:
1. Would a male copy editor have left it in?
2. What kind of editing process does the online version of a story go through and why wasn’t a similar edit made there?