When Danica Patrick won the Japan Indy 300 two weeks ago she did what a male counterpart, Dale Earnhardt Jr., in NASCAR has been unable to do for two years, and that is to win a motorsport race. So why is it that Earnhardt is still getting 25 Million Dollars year and Patrick is making about 5 Million Dollars a year. So what does it take to make money is it victories or is it being male. The money is not coming from victory lane its coming from endorsers, so why the disparity? Could it be that women are still viewed as sex symbols instead of athletes? Maybe they are since Patrick does hold more SI swimsuit appearances than Earnhardt does. Another example of a female getting the short end of an endorsement deal, Lorena Ochoa LPGA superstar who only earns about 4.4 million in endorsements where as Tiger Woods gets about oh 100 Million in endorsements a year. This just doesn’t seem fair since Ochoa has accomplished something even Tiger Woods hasn’t even done and that is win 10 out of 15 tournament starts. Maybe all of this unequal sponsorship is due to the fact that male dominated corporate endorsements don’t feel that female athletes can push product as well as male athletes. Hopefully this will all change with the increasing popularity of female sports.
John Story KIN338 S.6.
2 comments:
I feel that you have a very valid point with the fact that men get paid more then women for endorsements. Although, I don’t think that it is that men can sell a product better (because we all know sex sells) I feel that these athletes are better known. Take for example the Lorena Ochoa versus Tiger Woods golf example you have given. I feel that Tiger receives more money in endorsements because he is a "household" name. Almost anyone who know anything about golf know who Tiger Woods is, I'm not so sure that Lorena Ochoa's name is as well know. I definitely think that the problem lies higher up in the ladder. Take for example ESPN. I guarantee Woods has been shown and announce many more times then Ochoa's name. Who do we blame in this situation? The anchorperson? The directors? Or is it the higher up power, and do we blame the owners? Or the producers? Or better yet does the problem lye within us? Are we the hungry animal who needs to see the 400-yard drive versus the strategically aspect of the game? Is it the big knockout that we all lust after and is it just easier for us to blame the endorsers for our lack of appreciation for what truly matters? … The game!
Madelyn Monteath kin 388 sec. 6
Post a Comment