The problem is that most people, including academics and various people in the industry, have a very narrow perception of what is actually a very broad and global industry.
Females have been featured prominently since the 1980s, if not earlier. Females have been in the industry as creative talent as well as players. Females have also been in the industry from the business side as managers (at various levels) as well as part- and full-time staff. This is particularly true for the Japanese market and industry, of course, which may be one reason that Japanese gaming led the industry for decades until fairly recently (and is still very popular and well-received globally, of course).
The whole "females are a minority" perception only became a "thing" (i.e., political talking point) in the mid-1990s. Various people in the industry as well as academics have not helped, either, because they refuse to listen to people (myself, for example) who have grown up with the industry since it began, who have worked in the industry as well as studied it academically, and who have both played and worked with women in the industry as well as consumers/players. Some of the comments I have read or heard from academics as well as people in the industry simply make me sick because they are so inaccurate or even flat-out wrong (i.e., they only apply to a very limited and biased perception of a much broader industry and market than what such people perceive).
As Roberta Williams said in 2006 when asked the (now typical) question of what it was like being a woman in the so-called "male dominated" gaming industry, no one ever brought up or asked such a question when she co-founded Sierra Online with her husband Ken and no one ever brought it up as any kind of issue during the subsequent 10-15 years that she was developing some of the most well-received games of the time. Instead, people only considered her talents and capabilities. Her six simply was not an issue at all because a person's six was not made an issue until later, after she had retired.
Having said all of that, of course it would be nice to see a developer such as Bethesda showcase a heroine even in games where there is a choice. Japanese games feature heroines quite often either as main characters or as key supporting characters. In the latter case, it is quite common for heroines to be essentially the lead character even if the product is pitched as having a male as the nominal lead. Another key aspect is that such heroines are not shown simply "being badass" (i.e., acting in stereotypically masculine ways) but instead are shown as very feminine yet extremely strong and capable in their own way. Think of heroines such as Alis in the original Phantasy Star, Shion in Xenosaga (or the many other heroines there) or the many heroines in the Tales games, or heroines in franchises such as Langrisser or Growlanser, or Star Ocean... the list goes on and on. For Western companies, it is much less common, of course, although there are exceptions such as Guild Wars.
Western companies, or at least their marketing people, have never had a real clue what the market actually likes even when Japanese games have demonstrated great success and popularity worldwide. Why haven't Western companies paid proper attention over the decades? Who knows. As I said, though, the various industry and academic voices that have been most vocal have not helped, and I would say have actually hurt the perception of the market and industry a great deal. Thus the myth continues and many people continue to pursue it as a phantom that will never be caught because it doesn't exist.
Regarding the Bethesda "Meet the Team" spot, keep in mind that Courtney was late and almost missed the entire panel. There was not much that could be done by the time she arrived as they were wrapping up everything at that point.
Regarding surveys for products like Skyrim or Mass Effect, everyone should be aware that the results of ANY survey mean nothing as far as the actual reality is concerned. Claims that the vocal people on the Net don't represent the actual player base of such games based on survey results is an oxymoronic claim because surveys are inaccurate and generally non-representative by nature. This is particularly true for the types of surveys being mentioned here (i.e., non-academic, informal surveys with no oversight or proper attention to minimizing bias, offering statistically meaningful results, etc.). Surveys are commonly used in various research because they are simple and because they lend themselves to quantitative anolysis. The latter element introduces its own bias which qualitative researchers such as myself find exasperating, to say the least, because so many people, including many academics, think that quantitative results are somehow more reliable than qualitative anolysis even though reality does not work according to quantitative/statistical principles. Bottom line, though, is that such surveys for games/players mean nothing at all aside from giving marketing departments something to refer to even though that reference is enormously biased and basically worthless as a research tool.