These Papers All Did The Same Sexist Thing To Announce Hillary's Nomination


So, here's a head-scratcher for you: It's 2016, and some of the world's most popular newspapers are slapping a big old sexist picture on the front page.

On Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton officially became the presidential nominee for the Democratic party at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

She tweeted this in celebration:

I mean, this picture and the headline, "History," would have been the perfect front page for any US publication.

But instead, a number of newspapers led with pictures of Bill Clinton under the headline, "Hillary Clinton Wins Nomination."

I'm confused.

Here's the Wall Street Journal, for example. It looks like halfway through the night, they caught onto the sexist juxtaposition, changed the front page and resent it to the printers.


And it wasn't just the WSJ. The Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and Houston Chronicle all pulled the same trick.

It's just so odd. I can't think of a single reason why they wouldn't use a picture of Hillary. It's not like these publications are lacking images from photo agencies.

I'm looking at hundreds from Reuters right now. Here's the one they should have used: