U.S. women's soccer wins everything but the jackpotThe U.S. Women's National Team is ranked No. 1 in the world. They just won their fourth World Cup. And as the game ended, the...
| |  | | Democracy Dies in Darkness | | | | | | | | | | The truth behind the rhetoric | | | | | | U.S. women's soccer wins everything but the jackpot The U.S. Women's National Team is ranked No. 1 in the world. They just won their fourth World Cup. And as the game ended, the crowd rang out with a chant for "equal pay." According to a class-action lawsuit the team filed against their employer, the United States Soccer Federation (USSF), the female players are not treated as equals to the Men's National Team even though they generate more revenue and have consistently outperformed the men. We went in-depth into all these numbers and here's what we found. Let's start with revenue. Since their 2015 World Cup win, the women's team has held its own with the men's team when it comes to revenue from games. But that only accounts for one-quarter of U.S. Soccer's revenue. Sponsorships make up half, and it's hard to determine what the women's team contributed to USSF without more data. What about pay? The men's and women's national teams have separate collective-bargaining agreements that have different pay and bonus structures. We calculated that if the women's team and the men's team played and won 20 friendly games, the women would earn 89 percent of what the men earned. That's up from 38 percent under their previous collective bargaining agreement, which ended in 2016. If both teams lost all 20 games, they would earn the same amount. One of the biggest puzzle pieces here is the World Cup prize money, which is set by FIFA and not U.S. soccer officials. The USSF distributes any World Cup prize money to players based on each team's collective-bargaining agreement. Total prize money for the Women's World Cup in 2019 is $30 million; the champions will walk away with about $4 million. That's much lower than what the French champions won in the 2018 men's World Cup: $38 million from a total pool of about $400 million. |  | | Enjoy this newsletter? Forward it to someone else who'd like it! If this e-mail was forwarded to you, sign up here, for the weekly newsletter. Hear something fact-checkable? Send it here, we'll check it out. Kellyanne Conway's flushable claims about the census White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, a seasoned pollster, got a lot wrong in a Fox News interview while defending President Trump's plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. Conway: "Why can't we just ask the question the way it was asked for 50 years before the Obama administration yanked it out of there? We've been asking questions like this — the American Community Survey every fifth year asks a similar question." No, no and no. President Barack Obama's administration did not remove the citizenship question from the 2010 Census. What actually happened: The Census Bureau in 2005, before Obama took office, switched from one supplemental survey to another. But both of them asked about citizenship, and the timeline doesn't add up to 50 years, as Conway claimed. Since 2005, the American Community Survey has asked about citizenship every year, not every five years. Conway: "We're asking people how many toilets in your house, and you don't want to know who's using them?" A catchy but misleading point. A toilet-related question appeared on a supplemental census survey from 1960 to 2000. The American Community Survey also included a question on flushing toilets from 2005 to 2015. But both of these surveys asked about citizenship also, so Conway's comparison is misleading. Furthermore, the ACS no longer asks about toilets, but still asks about citizenship. A royal flush: Four Pinocchios. | | | We're always looking for fact-check suggestions. You can also reach us via email, Twitter (@GlennKesslerWP, @mmkelly22, @rizzoTK or use #FactCheckThis), or Facebook (Fact Checker). Read about our rating scale here, and sign up here for our weekly Fact Checker newsletter. Scroll down for this week's Pinocchio roundup. — Meg Kelly | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Twitter
Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment