The Christine Craft lawsuit was a 1983 federal sex discrimination and fraud case brought by a former KMBC-TV news anchor against Metromedia Inc. after she was told she was “too old, too unattractive, and not deferential enough to men.” Craft won jury verdicts in two separate trials, including a $325,000 fraud award, but a federal judge threw out the discrimination finding, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit later overturned the fraud verdict. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case in 1986.1United Press International. Christine Craft Loses Supreme Court Appeal
What Happened at KMBC-TV
Metromedia’s KMBC-TV in Kansas City recruited Craft in late 1980 after a consulting firm circulated her tape without her knowledge. Before signing, Craft told management she “showed signs of her age and experience” and would not undergo a cosmetic makeover. She was hired as co-anchor on a two-year contract and started January 5, 1981. Her attorney later told a jury that management had assured her, “We love you just as you are.”2United Press International. I Didn’t Look Right on the Air
Within eight months the station’s news ratings climbed from second to first.3The Harvard Crimson. Occupational Hazards Behind the scenes, KMBC hired Media Associates, a Dallas consulting firm, to advise on Craft’s makeup and hairstyling and to test her appeal with viewers.4Time. Requiem for TV’s Gender Gap Craft spent hours with wardrobe and appearance consultants and was required to follow a “clothing calendar.”5Kansas City Star. Guest Commentary
In spring 1981, Media Associates ran four focus group sessions moderated by its research head, Steven Meacham. At one session Meacham told participants, “Let’s spend 30 seconds destroying Christine Craft. Is she a mutt?”6United Press International. Focus Group Moderator Testifies in Craft Trial A follow-up telephone survey of 400 Kansas City residents rated Craft’s work “excellent” at 8 percent, compared with 34 and 24 percent for competing anchorwomen. On August 13, 1981, Media Associates recommended replacing her, and the news director told Craft the next day that the report on her was “devastating and unprecedented in the history of Media Associates.”7Justia. Craft v. Metromedia, Inc., 766 F.2d 1205
Station manager R. Kent Replogle removed Craft from the anchor desk. Craft alleged management told her the demotion was because she was “too old, too unattractive, and not deferential enough to men.”8Christian Science Monitor. Christine Craft Case Replogle testified that appearance ranked above all other qualities in a television news presenter: “If I had to rank them I would put appearance at the top of the list.” He denied the decision was sexist and said the station would have done the same to a male anchor.9United Press International. Christine Craft Was Removed From Her Position Rather than take the reporter job, Craft left KMBC.
The Claims She Filed
Craft sued Metromedia in federal court in Kansas City, alleging sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, violations of the Equal Pay Act, and fraud. The fraud claim rested on the allegation that KMBC had promised she would not have to undergo a cosmetic makeover, then subjected her to one and used appearance research to justify her removal.10New York Times. Court Bars $325,000 Award to Christine Craft She sought reinstatement as anchor, $200,000 in double back wages, and $1 million in damages.11Washington Post. TV Discrimination Suit Her lead attorney was Dennis Egan, a Kansas City employment lawyer.12Missouri Lawyers Media. Power List 100 – Dennis E. Egan, Popham Law Firm
The Two Jury Verdicts
The first trial took place in the summer of 1983. Meacham took the stand and acknowledged the inflammatory prompts he had used in the focus groups, saying they were meant to “move discussion along.”6United Press International. Focus Group Moderator Testifies in Craft Trial In August 1983 the jury found for Craft on the fraud claim and recommended $500,000 in damages ($375,000 actual, $125,000 punitive). The same jury advised the judge that Metromedia had committed sex discrimination, and returned a verdict against Craft on the Equal Pay Act claim.8Christian Science Monitor. Christine Craft Case
U.S. District Judge Joseph E. Stevens Jr. rejected the jury’s advisory finding on sex discrimination. He ruled that KMBC’s appearance standards were applied in an “evenhanded, nondiscriminatory manner” to men and women alike, and that the extra attention paid to Craft’s appearance reflected her “individual shortcomings” in makeup and clothing. Stevens then set aside the fraud damages as excessive and ordered a new trial on that claim alone.7Justia. Craft v. Metromedia, Inc., 766 F.2d 1205
The retrial was held before a sequestered jury in Joplin, Missouri. On January 13, 1984, that jury also found in Craft’s favor, awarding $225,000 in actual damages and $100,000 in punitive damages, for a total of $325,000.13Washington Post. Craft Wins in Retrial
How She Lost on Appeal
Metromedia appealed. On June 28, 1985, a three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit unanimously overturned the $325,000 verdict, holding that Craft had not made a “submissible case” on fraud under Missouri law. The panel found the evidence about the station’s intentions at hiring was “equally consistent with honesty and good faith.” The appellate court also affirmed the trial court’s rulings against Craft on her Title VII and Equal Pay Act claims and denied her request for a new trial on the discrimination question.14Los Angeles Times. Court Bars Award to Christine Craft
Craft’s reaction: “What a bummer.” She said she was “shocked and appalled” but “not a quitter,” and pointed to the two juries that had sided with her: “We’re told so often can you be judged by a jury of your peers. . . . I’ll take a jury anytime.”14Los Angeles Times. Court Bars Award to Christine Craft
Egan petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court. On March 3, 1986, the Court declined to take the case, letting the Eighth Circuit ruling stand. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor indicated she would have granted review but could not muster the four votes required. Egan said afterward, “There is a flaw in the system when an appeals court can interfere like this. She won twice.” Metromedia sought $17,000 in litigation costs from Craft.15Los Angeles Times. Craft Supreme Court Petition Denied
Why the Case Still Matters
Craft lost in the courts, but the litigation forced a public reckoning with the unequal appearance standards applied to men and women in television news. After the first trial, women’s groups sought her out for lectures and a New York publishing house approached her about a book. The attention became intense enough that she resigned from a co-anchor job at KEYT-TV in Santa Barbara, saying she could not focus on reporting.16New York Times. Christine Craft, Reporter or Symbol or Both
Craft later observed that the double standard persisted for decades: male anchors aged on-screen with “jowls, balding pates” and faced few consequences, while women were held to standards emphasizing youth and attractiveness over journalistic credentials.5Kansas City Star. Guest Commentary The case became a reference point for later discrimination suits in the industry, including Karen Fuller’s age and gender discrimination settlement against KCTV-5 in Kansas City. Craft herself went on to law school, graduating from the University of the Pacific’s McGeorge School of Law in 1995,17Museum of Broadcast Communications. Craft, Christine and later practiced employment and disability law in the San Francisco Bay Area.18State Bar of California. Christine Ann Craft – Attorney Licensee Detail