It's becoming the new goal of news producers: those lips, those eyes, those heaving . . . uh, you get the general idea. To hell with the journalistic experience and skill.

Welcome to the modern era of women in broadcasting.

First, Jane Pauley is replaced on the Today morning news program by Deborah Norville, a woman I affectionately refer to as "the Broadcast Bimbo." Norville signs a contract worth $1.5 million a year. I really don't think she's worth that much.

When this story hit, we were treated to "behind the scenes" information, including Pauley and Norville's alleged daily "cat fights," which both parties have vehemently denied.

In fact, Pauley pointed out on several talk shows that she was considering leaving the show anyway. She also lamented the fact that the media looked for the gossip behind the story.

Just recently, we had Kathleen Sullivan replaced by Paula Zahn on the "CBS Morning News." Paula who? She replaced Sullivan because, in one CBS executive's words, Zahn "had the right character and attitude that the viewers wanted, and Sullivan did not."

In recent months, we also have been treated to stories about how Sullivan dyed her graying hair and lost 15 pounds. We learned about the saga of Linda Ellerbee's battle of the bulge, as if this was an important concern to the American public.

As I was writing this column, one of my fellow Collegian staffers looked over at a picture of Sullivan and said, "Boy, is she hot! You should have seen her in a t-shirt and shorts during the Super Bowl."

Not one word about her journalistic skills. Yet, when I asked him what he thought of Tom Brokaw, he said, "He's an excellent journalist."

The disparity in the treatment of male and female journalists also becomes apparent when you take a look at CBS' handling of Sullivan and Dan Rather. One part of the reason that Sullivan was fired, in addition to the ones listed above, is that last year she thought her microphone was off and quipped "CBS stands for the Cheap Broadcasting System," a comment heard only by CBS executives in New York.

Yet, in 1987, Rather walked off the set in Miami to protest CBS Sports tennis coverage running into his airtime. The entire network went blank for nearly seven minutes before Rather would return to his anchor chair. Which sin deserved the harsher punishment?

Let's face it, more and more, producers are concerning themselves with the fact that women broadcasters look good on television. They don't seem to worry about whether or not women broadcasters can deliver the news accurately and professionally.

Even the medium itself is guilty of sexism, especially when covering women broadcasters. In the December issue of Manhattan, Inc., it lashes out at the sexist treatment of Pauley, Norville, Diane Sawyer, Connie Chung and other women broadcasters. Manhattan's accompanying graphic: the women, in low-cut evening gowns, performing a can-can.

How many of you remember a TV Guide issue several months ago, when the cover story was about the hairstyles and wardrobes of several women broadcasters?

Again, low-cut dresses and seductive poses were used to depict the women. I was happy to see the public respond angrily with charges of sexism and demand that the magazine change its views toward newswomen.

However, is that really the prevailing attitude of the news audience? And what about the news organizations themselves? Is there any hope for women broadcasters to be treated on an equal par with their male counterparts?

Right now, it wouldn't seem so. In a 1989 survey of nightly network newscasts by the consulting firm TV Track, 22 percent of the journalists at CBS were women, with ABC at a low 11 percent.

Even the newswomen themselves admit they have a long road ahead of them in earning the respect and admiration of their colleagues.

In her 1987 book, Waiting for Prime Time, Marlene Sanders wrote that when she reported: "The (Dan) Rather broadcast counted for everything, and if you didn't meet its producers' standards of charisma, looks or age, no matter how good a reporter you were, you were not part of the group that mattered."

Too true. So, barring some kind of radical change in thinking of news producers, count on seeing more built and beautiful women reporting the news. Then again, that philosophy may start carrying over to the male journalists also.

I wonder how Peter Jennings would look in a pair of Speedos? Hmmm . . .