Morgan Webb, co-host of TechTV’s X-Play, recently launched WebbAlert, a daily video show that rounds up tech headlines. Unlike X-Play – which I think is often annoying and juvenile – WebbAlert is solid stuff: it’s smart, concise and entertaining. Webb is a great host, who is obviously on top of her stuff and who can be both natural and professional in front of the camera.

The reaction to the show has been generally positive. Still – it’s been interesting that most of the posts I’ve seen inevitably make mention of Webb’s ‘babe factor’, noting her magazine appearances in Maxim and FHM and her status as ‘geek sex symbol’ (oh go google them…). Webb is hardly alone in this respect however; every prominent female geek, from Veronica Belmont to Cali Lewis to Amanda Congdon has at one time or the other been described in terms of how “hawt they are zOMG!!!!11111!!”

To my mind, the interesting question is why female personalities like Webb either feel compelled to market their sexuality or simply do so as a matter of course. I don’t so much want to get into questions of whether or not they should, as I don’t think it’s one I can adequately answer. When a woman appears in Maxim is she empowering herself by claiming her sexuality as her own, or is she objectifying herself? People far smarter than me haven’t been able to adequately answer this yet, so I’m not about to try.

But in terms of the ‘why’, I would argue that one of the undercurrents of Web 2.0 trends, from Dramatic Chipmunk-esque memes to the iPhone has been that of cultural capital – essentially, the display of markers of cultural savvy and status. In the current model online, people display their ‘web capital’ through the use and appropriation of memes, frequenting popular apps, networks and destinations, as well as the more traditional displays of wealth and success. If we approach the sexualisation of female web personalities from this mindset, the ‘swishy’ hair of Cali Lewis or provocative poses of Morgan Webb in Maxim make a heck of a lot more sense – display your desirability and you yourself become more desirable, driving traffic to your site. Whether it’s empowerment or objectification doesn’t really enter into the debate, as its effectiveness is the same. An important addendum is that this desire occurs not only in lustful teenagers, but also people genuinely interested in your content – ‘sexiness’ is just another reason layered on top.

The obvious point, of course, is that Cosmo is rather unlikely to have a spread of a scantily-clad Anil Dash, Om Malik or Jason Calcanis anytime soon. This need to make yourself desirable using your body is something that only applies to women. ‘Course, we can’t exactly act surprised: this double-standard preceded the Web by a couple of millennia and, if anything, the blogosphere is a place where sexism runs rampant rather than being challenged. Furthermore, if Web 2.0 has been commodified far more quickly than anyone imagined, then so have its personalities – to wit, if capitalist values underpin the business culture of blogging, social networking etc. then they also underpin its culture period.

So why am I picking on Morgan Webb? I’m not really. As an articulate, well-informed woman, I think she’s a pretty solid role-model for the youngsters who follow her. What does concern me a little, however, is the increasing sense that a woman’s only option is to sell herself in some fashion. From pop stars to movie stars to web stars, women’s sexuality is part of their marketability and without it, they are less desirable, regardless of their talent. While I still don’t have hard answers as to whether this is unequivocally ‘good’ or ‘bad’ – i.e. some will argue that this gives women a sort of power that men have no access to and are also subject to – I do think that some scepticism is a wise move. Anytime you have people becoming commodities, it’s a safe bet that something is probably wrong.