A study examined, through comparison, The "New York Times'" coverage of the 1995 women's and men's National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) basketball tournaments. The study sought to answer three questions: (1) Does the "Times" frame the women's event as unimportant?; (2) If so, how?; and (3) What does this say about the "Times'" attitude toward female athletes? A qualitative and quantitative comparison was conducted of the newspaper's coverage of the 3-week event, including the number and length of articles, the size of photos and graphics, placement in the paper and sports section, among other elements. Results indicated that there were three times as many stories, photos, and graphics on the men's tournament as on the women's, and there were 18 features on male players and 6 on their coaches as compared to 2 on female players and 4 on their coaches. Placement on page A1 was almost the same, but men's stories appeared on the front page of the sports section 31 times versus 4 for women. Findings revealed that the frame presented by the "Times" is one of separateness--the women's tournament is the "other" tournament, as opposed to the "real" tournament, played by men. Findings also revealed that the "Times" used stereotypical gender roles as the basis for many stories; for instance, male players were often lauded for their ability to take over the game while female players were praised when they shared the spotlight. (Contains a story breakdown and 120 references.) (CR)