Academy's puzzling approach to racially diversifying award nominees...

[MadDAsHell]

Their gut reaction to increase the racial diversity of award nominees is to increase the racial diversity of the Academy members/voters themselves.

Is that not openly admitting that the Academy assumes its voters, both persons of color and white, are going to mostly vote for nominees of their own race?

And if that's indeed the truth behind how most Academy voters vote, then why are any of us, of any race, supporting this bigoted organization?

[underthematrix]

1. I'll start with the facts

The current makeup of Academy membership is over 94% white, 76% male, and average age is 63 years. The president of the Academy is an African American woman. http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/03/oscar-voters-94-white-76-men-and-an-average-of-63-years-old/284163/

When the typical Academy member was growing up, America was arranged in a way that advantaged white folks. But once the doors were cracked, POCs used that opportunity to OPEN the door. Now it's money and power. Whiteness isn't what it used to be. People don't want to be white, they want to POClicious. They wanna rock it like a POC.

I don't think Academy members only vote for people of their own race as indicated by the fact there have been POCs who have won Oscars. But I do think a more diverse membership that reflects the demographics of America would be helpful.

I think it appalled people that the ONLY people who were nominated for Oscars for Outta Compton and Creed were white. I think Will Smith's Concussion was not nominated for an Oscar for political reasons. I think it had to do with the NFL's billion dollar franchise as some folks in the media have pointed out.

[cherokeeprogressive]

23. "...they want to POClicious. They wanna rock it like a POC." What does that mean?

And since you're starting with facts, keep it factual, k?

[Bluenorthwest]

2. The Academy is taking steps it can take and they are good ones, and frankly it's good for everyone

The thing is, there are many people who are qualified to join the Academy who don't, it's a process and most people don't do it, even if they can. Many do not know that they can at all. Seeking membership among those qualified on an active basis is a really good idea. Academy voters are not demographically representative of the film business in any way, not by race, not by gender and not by age. They should have taken some of these steps years ago.

Of course the actual problems are not in the Academy but in the business itself, in the lack of diversity in the power structures and among decision makers and at the large agencies.

This year 305 films were in Oscar qualified release. If there were films being directed by a group of directors proportionate to the US population there should be about 150 films by women, 45 or 50 African American directed films, dozens by LGBT and Latino and Asian, Native America directors, directors with disabilities. But of course that it not the case at all. 17 of those directed by women, I think. That might be last year's number but it won't be much different. 6.8%, 6.5% is the typical rate for women directing films, and of course half of humanity are women not 6.8%. Look up the rest that's all I remember but it is indicative of how it lies for other minority groups as well. Should be 50% but it's 6.8%.
Hard to get an Oscar for a film that did not get made. Really hard. No matter who casts the votes.

[kwassa]

4. perfect summation of the issues.

[oberliner]

6. That is a preposterous argument

By that logic, there ought to be 100 movies directed by Born-Again Christians.

[laundry_queen]

14. U serious?

I'll let you think about why it might not be comparable.

[oberliner]

17. Absolutely

Not everyone wants to go into the film industry.

For example, the percentage of movie executives who are Jewish is much higher than the percentage of the population in general who are Jewish.

Should steps be taken to put those percentages in line with one another?

I think that racism and sexism are big problems in the film industry, as they are across the USA, and steps ought to be taken to address those serious problems.

That will not be accomplished by creating a system where films must be made according to the percentages listed above.

[frizzled]

22. Well, yes.

Not everyone wants to go into the film industry.

You mean not everyone gets a job in the film industry. You'd be nuts to think they hire on pure talent alone, too. Nepotism and favoritism is the order of the day like every industry.

Should steps be taken to put those percentages in line with one another?

But you've raised a good point. It would be better if the media reflected what the population actually looks like, by way of ethnicity, sex and religion or lack thereof.

If it did, Hollywood would probably make movies that reflected most people's lives a lot better, rather than narrower concerns.

[oberliner]

27. Good points

Hollywood is also extremely biased against overweight and older women.

[madinmaryland]

24. Huh? You are arguing that religion (a personal choice) is the same as a person's skin color.

Try again.

[oberliner]

25. Being Jewish is not a personal choice

It is an ethnic identity. A sizable percentage of Jewish people do not follow any religion. Many are agnostic/atheist.

[frizzled]

28. As well as what the other poster said, most people don't choose their religion.

nt

[madinmaryland]

29. That's not the point. The "choose" to stay with the religion they were raised with.

It is a choice. Comparing one's religion to one's skin color or one's sexual orientation is very disingenuous.

People can and do change their religions like some people change their underpants. (i.e. Kim Davis).

[frizzled]

30. Very few people change their religion, so it largely isn't a choice.

If you're brought up with a certain religion from birth and brainwashed, if you like, into it, you've never had a chance to exercise a meaningful choice. Your parents deliberately ensured you never developed the critical thinking skills, and your religious culture keeps you from it. You cannot be said to have had a choice over religion.

More less like consent is impossible for sex if you're underage. Did I just compare indoctrinating children with child rape? Yes I did.

[madinmaryland]

31. Regardless of how many do change, they DO have the choice. Explain to me how

someone can change their skin color?

I'm sorry, but child rape is a completely different issue. Last time I checked religion was not a crime.

[frizzled]

32. Actually, people DO change their race.

There is quite a bit of sociological research on that. Race is a cultural construction, and you can show people tend to identify as white when they have higher income in the United States.

Last time I checked religion was not a crime.

But it should be a crime to indoctrinate children before they develop critical thinking.

Since very few would convert if they weren't brainwashed as kids, this would outlaw religion. Yes, I want to do this.

[djean111]

3. Just curious - how, exactly, do "we" support the Academy?

Not being contentious, but I have never paid any dues, or even gone to see a film solely because it won an award. I only watch in order to see the clothes, hopefully to laugh, and have never watched the whole thing beginning to end, I tend to click around.
If I am supporting the Academy by watching movies in general, then that is a much bigger picture - boycott all movies, until.....?

[uriel1972]

5. Tried to talk with my dad about this...

he says it was possible that there were no POC actors good enough for an Oscar this year and it would be 'Racism' to include someone because of their skin colour. /sigh. I didn't bother arguing with him it would have been wasting my time.

My point is how 'GOOD' do you have to be if Russell Crowe can win best actor for Gladiator.

[LiberalAndProud]

9. Yeah, he totally didn't deserve an Oscar.

or a Broadcast Film Critics Association Award
or an Empire Award
or a London Film Critics Circle Award


I haven't seen the movie or his performance in it, so I thought, "Scandalous!" On the google, maybe not so scandalous.

[uriel1972]

13. heh watch it and see...

make your own mind up...

[FLPanhandle]

7. I feel for the inevitable black nominees next year

No matter how good their performance, the public will view them as the "Affirmative Action" nominees.

[kwassa]

8. Oh, please.

Read up on the actual issues.

[LiberalAndProud]

12. Why?

A little incentive to produce Oscar winning roles for black performers may be just the ticket. I wouldn't give a fig for the bigots who mutter "affirmative action" under their breath.

[LiberalAndProud]

10. Who will care 100 years from now?

https://altoscars.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/the-third-annual-academy-awards-1916/

Ince also changed the method by which the Academy Awards were determined. Abandoning the previous method of using a “jury of distinguished citizens,” each branch would now make their own nominations. After the nominations had been determined, each branch would elect one representative to sit on the committee that would select the actual winners.

Just a small slice of Academy history.

[uponit7771]

11. It a should be... Ethnic bias is human

[rusty fender]

15. No one who isn't a member of the Academy

should care one iota about its awards. The Academy is a private club whose members are rich and white. Once a year, in public, they fawn over one another , award some with gold statues, and seem to have a good time .

Why do any of you care about this

[MadDAsHell]

18. I'd love to agree with you, but because of their often liberal politics, Hollywood folks...

seem to be idolized here on DU.

Agree with another poster though, the irony of anyone claiming to be liberal fawning over some of the richest folks in the world dressing up in $100,000 dresses and spending an entire evening rewarding eachother with golden statues, is overwhelming.

[rusty fender]

20. Yup

[840high]

33. I don't care and I don't watch.

[SoCalDem]

16. Aren't the ballots cast within specialties?

Directors vote for directors...actors for actors etc?

Think about this..

By the time someone becomes accomplished enough to direct (with any regularity/success) , they have been in the business for at least a few decades..and are most likely white males 50+ in age.

We all know that women "age out" in their mid 30's (unless you are Meryl Streep and a few carefully chosen ones)

Hollywood is a very "crony-hires-crony" place.

Racially diverse and LGBT people are relative newcomers to the "party"..

Waaay back in the day, producers often made "niche" films for different groups, but that would never fly today..(Google Blaxploitation films)

I am surprised that the Academy Awards is still even all that "important", since most films are not all that good..

[alarimer]

19. It's called implicit bias and we all have it.

But what is your solution if you think this is not the right approach?

Ultimately, you would have to improve the opportunities for all minorities at all levels of the film making business. That includes marketing, because a lot of lobbying goes on for nominations as well.

[frizzled]

21. The biggest surprise is anyone takes these things seriously

[Adrahil]

26. What else can they do? Have nomination quotas? Nt