# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Do you read our blog? Please support MediaSmarts by making a one-time, tax-deductible, small charitable donation so we can continue to keep our media literacy resources up-to-date and copyright cleared for you to use in your homes, schools and communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If there's one big topic of conversation surrounding this year's awards season, it's diversity. After the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' oversight of major awards hopefuls like Selma director Ava DuVernay and the film's star, David Oyelowo - both exemplary talents - accusations of racism hit not only the Oscars but organizations of the like across the map.

This scenario, sadly, was hardly an outlier. For decades, the academies, guilds, and associations that reign supreme over the scope of American pop culture have failed to dole equal favor toward artists of color. Case-in-point: DuVernay would have been the first black female to earn a Best Director nod (and, if she had won, only the second woman in history to snag the trophy after The Hurt Locker helmer Kathryn Bigelow). It's a sad reality, an all too common occurrence in many awards shows - and one that it's absolutely time be changed.

But, with the latter half of awards season - including this year's telecasts of the Grammy and Academy awards - fast approaching in the next few weeks, the question is worth asking: Though the Oscars may have overlooked diversity and artists of color involved in filmmaking this year, is the music industry any better? How about television?

While there is undoubtedly no facet of the pop culture world that couldn't stand to broaden its horizons, it's worth delving back into the histories of these varied art forms' respective awards circuits to determine which has done the best job of acknowledging a diverse collection of outstanding artists over the past 20 years...and, most importantly, why it's doing the best job of that.

The Oscars

The biggest culprit of the 2015 awards circuit's adherence to white performers, filmmakers, and films, the Academy Awards has waxed and waned over the past 20 years in its representation of racial minority artists. More interestingly, however, is the organization's disproportionate recognition of black and Latino figures in its supporting acting categories. Here are the stats:

TOTAL MINORITY ACTORS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 45 TOTAL MINORITY ACTORS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 16

Why is it that the Academy seems significantly more inclined to award minority actors in supporting categories than in the lead categories? Following his highly questionable snub, Selma star Oyelowo chastised the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for, as The Hollywood Reporter notes, favoring "subservient" black characters over powerful ones like his (he plays Martin Luther King Jr. in the film), and suggesting perhaps that the organization is more comfortable with racial minorities as background players charged principally with abetting the narrative and thematic journeys of white stars.

The Grammys

THOMAS SAMSON/AFP/Getty Images

The Grammys, unlike the Oscar awards, present a different kind of curiosity. A great deal more artists of color are nominated for the top Grammy Awards, but a very small percentage of these men and women actually walk away with trophies.

TOTAL MINORITY ARTISTS & PROJECTS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 151 TOTAL MINORITY ARTISTS & PROJECTS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 20

Album of the Year Albums by minority artists nominated in the past 20 years: 35 Albums by minority artists to win in the past 20 years: 5 ( Genius Loves Company, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, River: The Joni Letters, Speakerboxxx/The Love Below, and Supernatural)

How can it be that artists of color wind up taking home Grammys at such a remarkably low rate? As the mainstream music world is more tapped into the representation of black and Latin artists than the realm of cinema is, this data is much more surprising (and massively alarming) than the yieldings of our Oscar research.

But, now that we've looked at movies and music, what about television?

The Emmys

Unfortunately, the Emmys turned out to be the worst we've seen yet: television showcases absolutely dismal numbers both in terms of nomination and ultimate victory. Its supporting categories boast a greater sum of nods, but, ultimately yield just as few wins as their other awards show counterparts - even less than.

TOTAL MINORITY ACTORS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 66 TOTAL MINORITY ACTORS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 3 (...seriously.)

That only three people of color have won an acting Emmy of any kind in the past 20 years is a pretty embarrassing fact. But, does this lie on the Emmys themselves, or on TV in general? Let's look to other organizations devoted to TV (as well as film) to find the answer.

The Golden Globes

First, the Golden Globes, which is slightly more optimistic a vantage point of television than the Emmys is, though a bleaker state of affairs than the Oscars when it comes to film.

TOTAL MINORITY FILM ACTORS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 66 TOTAL MINORITY FILM ACTORS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 12

And for the television side...

TOTAL MINORITY TV ACTORS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 33 TOTAL MINORITY TV ACTORS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 6

The Screen Actors Guild Awards

And finally, the SAGs: arguably the strongest purveyor of diversity of the lot.

TOTAL MINORITY FILM ACTORS & PROJECTS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 80 TOTAL MINORITY FILM ACTORS & PROJECTS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 19

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture Casts that feature prominent minority players nominated in the past 20 years: 25 Casts that feature prominent minority players to win in the past 20 years: 5 ( Argo, Crash, The Help, Slumdog Millionaire, and Traffic)

And as for the SAGs' TV side...

TOTAL MINORITY TV ACTORS & PROJECTS NOMINATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 100 TOTAL MINORITY TV ACTORS & PROJECTS TO WIN OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS: 24

Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Comedy Series Casts that feature prominent minority players nominated in the past 20 years: 32 Casts that feature prominent minority players to win in the past 20 years: 10 ( 30 Rock, Aly McBeal, Desperate Housewives twice, Glee, Modern Family four times, and Orange Is the New Black)

Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Drama Series Casts that feature prominent minority players nominated in the past 20 years: 45Casts that feature prominent minority players to win in the past 20 years: 9 ( ER four times, Grey's Anatomy, Lost, NYPD Blue, and The West Wing twice)

While the Screen Actors Guild might showcase the greatest attention to minority actors and actresses, it cannot go unstated that this organization is also the one yielding the least attention from American viewers: For instance, the 2013 telecast of the SAG awards only nabbed 4.6 million viewers, while, according to Deadline, the 2013 Oscars recorded 40.3 million viewers. Does the sort of mass viewership undertaken by the Oscars, Grammys, and Emmys abet to these award shows' proclivities to lean white (reflecting, perhaps, the assumed population tuning in to each ceremony)?

Or is it, perhaps, the other way around? While it's easy to place all of the blame on faceless organizations like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (and blame for lack of diversity in nominations does lie with them, as voters are the ones actually choosing the nominees), the fact that movies like Selma make only modest headway at the box offices is for the most part on us.

Yes, part of an award show's merit is to get the word out about movies that we wouldn't otherwise hear of - but at present, there's no escaping conversation about Selma (thanks, ironically, to the Oscars after all). We might not see DuVernay and Oyelowo come home with trophies, but that doesn't mean we can't afford this movie, and others like it, a far more important victory: our viewership. With that, hopefully the awards and attention projects like this deserve will eventually follow.
Images: Paramount Pictures; Fox Searchlight Pictures; Getty; Fox; DreamWorks Pictures; ABC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Which Awards Show Is The Most Racially Diverse?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If there's one big topic of conversation surrounding this year's awards season, it's diversity. After the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' oversight of major awards hopefuls like Selma director Ava DuVernay and the film's star, David Oyelowo - both exemplary talents - accusations of racism hit not only the Oscars but organizations of the like across the map.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's no such thing as too much of a good thing, at least when it comes to diversifying media. Hollywood remains light years behind the ethnographic makeup of the US and industry leaders have, for years, used a variety of different excuses to hide their money-hungry, "safe" and downright racist decisions in casting actors of color for film and television roles.

The number of television roles for actors of color dropped dramatically over the last 15 years and it was not because of the various reasons given by Hollywood executives. Change is swift, but it's also most likely not as prominent as we imagine. The numbers from the 2015 diversity report on Hollywood, entitled Flipping the Script - a product of UCLA's Ralph Bunche Center for African American Studies - are only marginally better than previous years.

Consistent with previous reports, there is a major discrepancy between the actual population within the US and the representation of that population on TV. Minorities account for more than 40% of the US population and yet they are significantly underrepresented in the television industries. According to the report, minorities remain underrepresented nearly six to one in broadcast scripted leads and nearly two to one among cable scripted leads.

The numbers for series creators is even worse. Minorities are underrepresented at greater than six to one among the creators of broadcast shows, greater than three to one among the creators of cable scripted shows, and greater than seven to one for creators of digital platform and syndicated shows.

The demographics show that a greater percentage of black people in particular watch and engage with television than white audiences. According to a 2013 report from Nielsen, African Americans are more " aggressive consumers " of media. For example: "Blacks watch more television (37%), make more shopping trips (eight), purchase more ethnic beauty and grooming products (nine times more)," which translates to the two largest forces in television creation: numbers and advertisers. Despite those strong numbers and clear evidence, Hollywood insisted on practicing the same forms of structural racism as they have in the past.

However, Hollywood is a business at its core, and business, at least in terms of successes with minority leads and shows, is good. Longer running shows, like Shonda Rhimes's Scandal and Grey's Anatomy, as well as cable hits like The Walking Dead demonstrate a willingness from audiences to continue watching diverse shows. And after the success of Fox's Empire, as well as smaller successes with ABC's Fresh Off the Boat, How to Get Away With Murder, and Black-ish, it makes commercial sense to continue the "trend" of featuring more people of color on television screens.

But Nellie Andreeva's article in Deadline suggests a rapid, almost misguided sense of action on Hollywood's part and an underlying premise of "affirmative action"-type policies at work within Hollywood. Andreeva wrote: "Instead of opening the field for actors of any race to compete for any role in a color-blind manner, there has been a significant number of parts designated as ethnic this year, making them off-limits for Caucasian actors, some agents signal."

The tone of Andreeva's article suggests that this is a wrong practice. And yet it also negates mentioning this same practice had routinely been employed by Hollywood for years, but in exclusion of people of color. "From the earliest days of the industry, white males have dominated the plum positions in front of and behind the camera, thereby marginalizing women and minorities in the creative process by which a nation circulates popular stories about itself," wrote Darnell Hunt, head of UCLA's Ralph Bunche Center.

According to Andreeva, one year of targeted change and representation suggests those in charge have gone too far. Andreeva continues: "Many pilot characters this year were listed as open to all ethnicities, but when reps would call to inquire about an actor submission, they frequently have been told that only non-white actors would be considered. "Basically 50% of the roles in a pilot have to be ethnic, and the mandate goes all the way down to guest parts," one talent representative said.

Rather than state facts, Andreeva's scathing takeaway from the 2014-2015 television season, as well as the current pilot season casting process gave greater weight to the opinions of disgruntled casting directors. Readers can't know for certain if their words are true or if they are upset that their legion of subpar actors who previously slipped into roles on broadcast, cable, and online television shows could no longer do so at the frequency of the past.

But if TV executives are actually, finally paying attention to audiences, this new system of change will soon become the norm, one in which casting directors defer to what people actually want and respond to and not discriminatory exclusions.

Andreeva's article suggests that rather than restrict minority actors to roles that regularly represented uniquely minority experiences (the underlying trend of the most recent television season with shows such as Black-ish and Fresh Off the Boat), networks instead aim to include minority actors in a broad array of shows and characters. Which, obviously. Why wouldn't they?

Compared to past discriminatory hiring practices, incorporating more minority representation on television just makes more business sense. As the Flipping the Script report notes: "Median 18-49 viewer ratings (as well as most median household ratings among whites, blacks and Latinos) peaked for broadcast and cable shows that at least match the minority share of the population in terms of overall cast diversity."

Past reports from the Bunche Center show similar statistics. In 2013, they reported that, "during the 2011-12 season median household ratings were highest among cable television shows with casts that were from 31% to 40% minority (0.88 ratings points)." And in contrast to those numbers, "ratings were lowest among shows with casts that were 10% minority or less (0.39 ratings points)".

To increase ratings in an increasingly diversified field of options for entertainment consumption (the internet, video games, reality television shows), it would be foolish to ignore facts and simply play by the same rules which don't work in the 21st century. This is not merely a case of the pendulum swinging, "a bit too far in the opposite direction," as Andreeva wrote. Important change is often radical, but it doesn't mean that it's wrong. In order to greater diversify television to satisfy both the storytelling process and the bottom line of ratings, studio heads are finally waking up.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hollywood 'race casting': what the industry is getting wrong about diversity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's no such thing as too much of a good thing, at least when it comes to diversifying media. Hollywood remains light years behind the ethnographic makeup of the US and industry leaders have, for years, used a variety of different excuses to hide their money-hungry, "safe" and downright racist decisions in casting actors of color for film and television roles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Grammy Awards were last night, and it was quite the show to behold. Every ceremony has its fair share of surprises, some of which make the entire show more exciting, and some of which are simply infuriating. We witnessed both last night, with one slight standing out in particular.

First of all, when Prince took to the stage, nobody expected it to be time for the Album of the Year to be awarded, as the show still had plenty of time until it was supposed to end. AOTY is typically the final award of the night, so when the duo announced the prize they'd be handing out, everybody was shocked. Little did we know the surprise that was coming...

By now everybody is aware that the big upset of last night was alternative/rock artist Beck winning the highly-coveted Album of the Year over Beyoncé, who was heavily favored to win. If this had been a different artist, a different award, or a different night, such a surprise might have made for a bit of fun, but this time around it just feels wrong.

I truly believe that last night, we witnessed one of the most egregious snubs in Grammy history. There have been years where which artist deserves to win in any given category is anybody's guess, but I genuinely don't believe that was the case this year. Let's not beat around the bush: there was a clear winner, and that person went home without the golden gramophone they deserved.

Not to sound too much like Kanye (who almost repeated himself by interrupting Beck's acceptance speech last night), but Beyoncé had the best album of last year, hands down. Even though all five albums up for the prize were excellent works of art, there really wasn't any competition here. The pop star/R&B diva's fifth record was the best of her career, and that's really saying something for a woman who already had 17 Grammys going into the show last night. It was everything we could have hoped for from the world's most respected contemporary female chanteuse: sexy, honest, highly personal, all with every detail exceptionally well done. She showed everything, from being sexy for her husband to living as the world's most-watched singer, to being a new mom. There was something for everybody here, and somehow she found ways to express these feelings in new and catchy, earwormy ways.

This album is her masterpiece, and it deserved to be awarded as such.

Not only was Beyoncé a critical favorite, landing in the upper rankings of just about every end-of-year list and collecting praise like it was nothing, it is one of the few albums in the history of music that literally changed the industry forever. In an age where selling every album possible is vital to staying afloat, the singer's label took an enormous chance by greenlighting the project, allowing her to record with the biggest names in music, film 17 music videos, and release the thing, all without the slightest bit of promotion. When her self-titled unsuspectingly appeared on iTunes, the world seemed to stop. She completely changed the game, and in only a year, the repercussions are already visible. Several other high-profile artists have "Beyoncé'd" their albums or singles, releasing them without warning. It may seem trendy, but as time goes on, it's looking more and more like a legitimate way of securing valuable additional sales.

It is worth noting that I was not alone in thinking Beyoncé was going to win the top prize. While many Grammy categories are up in the air, there are often just one or two that are all but certainties, and aside from Sam Smith winning Best New Artist (which did end up happening), Bey's time to shine was the other. Several other knowledgeable music journalists at some pretty respectable publications- Billboard, Complex, Entertainment Tonight, Entertainment Weekly, Flavorwire, Gold Derby (a site that only sources experts to predict the winners at entertainment award shows), Huffington Post, Rolling Stone, USA Today, Vox, and Vulture, just to name a few-predicted her to succeed.

Let me also say that my thoughts on last night's outcome has nothing to do with Beck, who is an extremely talented musician and songwriter, and that Morning Phase is really a great album. His win for Best Rock Album earlier in the telecast didn't come as much of a surprise, because he had really earned that trophy. I personally mean no harm to Beck, and congratulate him on a big night of wins.

A sad outcome of his beating Beyoncé is that Beck is about to feel the full wrath of the internet. In the next few days, the BeyHive (the name given to Beyoncé's millions of fans) is sure to unleash all hell on Beck's social media channels, blaming him for the surprising outcome. This isn't his fault, and he doesn't deserve whatever blame is headed his way. We should be happy for Beck, while looking disapprovingly at the voting body of the Recording Academy.

Beyoncé's loss shines a bright light on a respectable but flawed organization. When the best minds in the industry and the general public all come to a consensus on what the best album of the past year was, it's a disservice to disagree with them. Now, I won't get into the politics and strategy around how voting works and of why this might have happened, but I will say that in my own opinion, I think the Academy screwed this one up. Bad.

I'm still a major Grammy devotee (and member), and I'm already excited for next year's celebration, though I must admit that today I feel incredibly let down by an organization I've looked up to for many years than I ever have before. While her time may come another year, I'm certain that we'll remember 2015's Grammys for being one of missed opportunity and incorrect awardings.

Update: This article previously stated that Stevie Wonder and Jamie Foxx awarded Album of the Year. Prince actually gave that award to Beck, whereas Stevie Wonder and Jamie Foxx awarded the Record of the Year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
We Witnessed One of The Worst Snubs In Grammy History Last Night

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Grammy Awards were last night, and it was quite the show to behold. Every ceremony has its fair share of surprises, some of which make the entire show more exciting, and some of which are simply infuriating. We witnessed both last night, with one slight standing out in particular.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lupita Nyong'o Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.subject
Lupita Nyong'o Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lupita Nyong'o winning Best Supporting Actress | 86th Oscars (2014)

# data[].attributes.headline
Jennifer Hudson Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.subject
Jennifer Hudson Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jennifer Hudson winning Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
George Clooney presenting Jennifer Hudson with the Oscar® for Best Supporting Actress for her performance in "Dreamgirls" at the 79th Academy Awards® in 2007.

# data[].attributes.headline
Octavia Spencer Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.subject
Octavia Spencer Wins Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Octavia Spencer Wins Best Supporting Actress: 84th Oscars (2012)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mo'Nique winning Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Robin Williams presenting Mo'Nique with the Oscar® for Best Supporting Actress for her performance in "Precious" at the 82nd Annual Academy Awards®.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Whoopi Goldberg winning Best Supporting Actress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Denzel Washington presenting Whoopi Goldberg with the Oscar® for Best Supporting Actress for her performance in "Ghost" at the 63rd Annual Academy Awards® in 1991.

# data[].attributes.headline
Halle Berry Wins Best Leading Actress Acceptance Speech

# data[].attributes.subject
Halle Berry Wins Best Leading Actress Acceptance Speech

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Halle Berry Wins Best Actress: 74th Oscars (2002)