A study examined how women's magazines covered the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) between 1970 and 1979, especially investigating whether the publications spotlighted or ignored the amendment. Thirteen publications, spanning fashion to homemaking to working women, were analyzed on the basis of editorial profile, frequency of publication, and circulation figures during the 1970s. All issues for the years 1970 to 1979 were examined for extensiveness, characteristics, and intent of coverage. Results showed that "Ms." magazine published more articles (45) than any other magazine, followed by "Redbook" (14). Content analysis revealed that coverage in the early years attempted to educate the reader as to what the ERA would and would not do, discussed the background and history of the amendment, and focused on Phyllis Schlafly as its most vocal opponent. During the middle 1970s, when the debate became heated, stories began to contain intensely personal viewpoints. Articles in 1976 (the year of heaviest coverage, with 29 articles) and 1977 generally expressed little doubt that the amendment would be ratified, but by 1978 when it became apparent that this would not occur by the 1979 deadline, articles asking for an extension began appearing. Quantitative research showed that the top circulation magazines paid scant attention to the amendment compared with the smaller sized and more specialized magazines. Findings suggest that the women's magazines followed the lead of their readership in covering the ERA--in keeping with research showing that specialized magazines are read by people who want to reinforce their beliefs and opinions. (Tables of data are included, and 68 footnotes are appended.) (NKA)