Curious to hear different thoughts on this.





http://variety.com/2016/film/awards/oscars-diversity-academy-emergency-meeting-1201685630/?preview_id=1201685630



Academy Overhauls Membership, Voting Rules to Promote Oscar Diversity
Tim Gray

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences has approved a series of major changes, in terms of voting and recruitment, also adding three new seats to the 51-person board — all part of a goal to double the number of women and diverse members of the Academy by 2020. The changes were approved by the board Thursday night in an emergency meeting.

Also on Thursday, the Academy met with ABC officials and reps of Chris Rock, confirming that he will host the Feb. 28 ceremony, according to sources. Jada Pinkett Smith, Spike Lee and Will Smith said they will not attend. Some other activists had urged Rock to withdraw; he never addressed those directly, but insiders said he believes he can do more good by remaining, since the Academy Awards reach a worldwide audience.

The membership changes were announced Friday in a statement, with Academy president Cheryl Boone Isaacs adding, “The Academy is going to lead and not wait for the industry to catch up. These new measures regarding governance and voting will have an immediate impact and begin the process of significantly changing our membership composition.”

The moves also affect the voting status of several new and longtime members.

Beginning later this year, each new member’s voting status will last 10 years, and will be renewed if the new member has been active in film during that decade. In addition, members will receive lifetime voting rights after three 10-year terms; or if they have been nominated for an Academy Award. The Acad will apply these same standards retroactively to current members. In other words, if a current member has not been active in the last 10 years they can still qualify by meeting the other criteria. Those who do not qualify for active status will be moved to emeritus status. Emeritus members do not pay dues but enjoy all the privileges of membership, except voting. This will not affect voting for this year’s Oscars.

In order to immediately increase diversity on the board, the Academy will establish three new governor seats, to be nominated by the president for three-year terms and confirmed by the board. The current board consists of 51 people.

At the same time, the Academy will supplement the traditional process in which current members sponsor new members by launching an ambitious, global campaign to identify and recruit qualified new members who represent greater diversity.

The proposals were passed unanimously at an emergency board meeting Thursday night. Academy honchos opted not to wait for the regularly scheduled board meeting on Jan. 26.

After worldwide media criticism over the Jan. 14 Oscar nominations, Academy officials knew they had to make some bold moves, and make them quickly. The image of the Oscars and the Academy were tarnished when the all-Caucasian lineup of 20 actors immediately led to bigger questions about the lack of diversity within the Academy — and ultimately within the industry.

Nobody was asking for quotas or affirmative action; instead, the protests were angry at Hollywood’s longtime failure to recognize racial and gender diversity in the country. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that non-whites constitute nearly 40% of the population. Yet studio decision-makers are overwhelmingly white and male, which is reflected in their films and especially their awards hopefuls.

Out of 305 eligible films, only a handful were made by directors of racial minority; only a few were directed by women.

Along with Boone Isaacs, the board’s membership and administration committee, chaired by Academy governor Phil Robinson, led the efforts to enact these initiatives.

Academy CEO Dawn Hudson and Boone Isaacs have helped champion a push to invite more diverse members; in June, the org announced invitations to a record 322 new members, representing a cross-section of the population. But with 6,261 voting members, the new additions apparently didn’t make much of a dent.

The Academy has 17 branches; actors nominate actors, editors nominate editors, and so on; the entire eligible membership votes on final Oscars.

Four days after the Jan. 14 announcement of nominations, Boone Isaacs issued a statement saying there would be “dramatic steps to alter the makeup of our membership.” She did not give details at the time.

The Academy said it will also take immediate action “to increase diversity by adding new members who are not governors to its executive and board committees where key decisions about membership and governance are made. This will allow new members an opportunity to become more active in Academy decision-making and help the organization identify and nurture future leaders.”

Poll result (11 votes) These are the right kind of changes - And I think it'll work (4 votes) Vote These are the right kind of changes - But this will not work (2 votes) Vote They've missed the mark - But right direction/got to start somewhere/might work (3 votes) Vote They've missed the mark - And this will not work (2 votes) Vote

just wondering why the ethnicity/gender of the board members isn't posted

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3409594/The-Academy-Motion-Picture-Arts-Sciences-Board-Governors-just-TWO-non-whites-51-elected-members.html

2 non-white members out of 51

'why do we only talk about this once a year' (c) Whoopi

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

>just wondering why the ethnicity/gender of the board members
>isn't posted
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3409594/The-Academy-Motion-Picture-Arts-Sciences-Board-Governors-just-TWO-non-whites-51-elected-members.html
>
>2 non-white members out of 51
>
>'why do we only talk about this once a year' (c) Whoopi
>

We don't get leads in the type of films that get Oscar noms.

******************************************
Falcons, Braves, Bulldogs and Hawks

Geto Boys, Poison Clan, UGK, Eightball & MJG, OutKast, Goodie Mob

the majority of the general movie-going audience of the films that get nominated.

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

large/larger proportion now

Can't find the exact stat but they talk about it a bit here:

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/24/137374242/minorities-at-the-movies-fill-seats-but-not-screens

Not that I disagree with your point. But if we DO makeup a large/larger proportion of the movie going audience, the lack of representation and recognition is even more sad.

waiting on White men for representation and recognition. You mean to tell me that with all the advances they made in the last 50+ years, they can't take it upon themselves to do it?

Rest In Peace, Bad News Brown

the Academy is an industry organization, it should be representative of the individuals that are a part of that industry? I think that's the issue.

Like, the NAACP is dedicated to the advancement of POC. So the target population there is POC, some of which may be in the motion picture industry.

But the Academy is supposed to be dedicated to the advancement of the motion picture industry. Some of this industry is POC. Why should POC not be represented or recognized by an association that is supposed to serve and honor all members of their chosen profession?


>waiting on White men for representation and recognition. You
>mean to tell me that with all the advances they made in the
>last 50+ years, they can't take it upon themselves to do it?

gloating over this situation.


He was like: "I'm boycotting the Oscars too. I've always boycotted the oscars" (because he doesn't like left-wing smug hollywood liberals).


Then dude was like: "black people need affirmative action to get an Academy Award"


He was in the zone for real.

>
>Then dude was like: "black people need affirmative action to
>get an Academy Award"
>
>
>He was in the zone for real.

smh

WAT?!

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

Especially the removal of old, no-longer-working Academy members after a decade-long period of dormancy.

The Academy *has* been better in recent years about trying to add more women and people of color... but a few years of adding diverse people simply won't catch up the percentages to where they need to be when you have 80 years of old rich white men who never die who are still living in the past. If a bunch of those old rich white men who don't work anymore no longer are given a free lifetime pass, that thins out the ranks of the overwhelming old rich white male majority.

There's no quick fix to this insanely complicated and historically deep-set problem... but this is unquestionably a good thing. I'd be hard-pressed to hear an argument against it. It shows that, even if Hollywood studio heads and financiers are still struggling to listen, at least the decision makers on the Academy board have their ears open and are willing to use their influence in order to take positive steps toward a system that better represents the masses.

And, to answer the poll more directly, it should have a near-immediate impact on the Academy as a whole.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

Ya I voted green. I agree it's a great first step, things have to start somewhere etc. But then reading over it again I was like, but wait.. does this actually address diversity though??? lol

I think revamping voting eligibility would help the constituency remain fresher, and more representative of the creatives actually working and winning/getting nominated for awards. But if barriers with respect to gender and race still exist, which prevent people of certain groups from actually getting the big roles (or recognition for the big roles they venture off the beaten path to produce/play), then... it sort of sounds like the same rinse-repeat but with a shorter cycle, if that makes any sense??

I'm not knowledgeable on the industry by any means, so not sure if what I'm about to suggest already exists.. But why can't there be a suite of subcomittees within the Academy, serving as internal special interest groups for women, LGBT, and underrepresented races and ethnicities? The subcomittees could then advise on projects that have major cultural significance/impact, as well as advocate for better inclusion and even fair depiction of the groups in motion pictures. The subcommittees could have a say on membership and board nominations too.

But like you said (perfectly), "there's no quick fix to this insanely complicated and historically deep-set problem."

It's somewhat of a positive step. I don't think it will solve the problem though. Black people have limited power, limited voice, no institutions to form a viable competitive economic base. Until this changes, these issues will persist .... Yes there will be some window dressing but the dynamics will remain largely the same. As someone pointed out, if black people are not being cast in the sort of roles that qualify for Oscars then this change will have limited impact

> Until this changes, these issues will persist .... Yes
>there will be some window dressing but the dynamics will
>remain largely the same. As someone pointed out, if black
>people are not being cast in the sort of roles that qualify
>for Oscars then this change will have limited impact

But Academy Award nominations for prestige pictures mean more box office. So if more black indie/prestige films get nominated, more black indie/prestige films will continue to do even greater box office, and studios/production companies will continue to be more comfortable funding them.

At least that's the way it works in theory. When you consider the high percentage of contemporary movies in which the main characters are black, female, or both that make it to theaters and turn a profit, you'd think the studios/production companies would realize the easy money to be made there. Audiences are craving something different-- they'll go.

So as I said above, there's no real immediate fix to the problem, but this step can't hurt and obviously helps. You can tell it helps because of how mad white Academy members have been in their reactions, lol.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

advocate/advise on the nomination process within the Academy, not directly influence production.

So for instance (random example).. maybe the majority of Academy voting members wouldn't think to see 'Straight Outta Compton' or appreciate it, but an internal subcommittee charged with advocating for black projects/black film professionals could help educate other members and translate the cultural significance of such films, and explain what about the screenplay, acting, etc. is nomination worthy. That sort of thing.

If there were subcommittees like this formed among Academy members for different underrepresented groups - women, LGBT, black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, etc. that might help diversify professional recognition in such a way that what you've described becomes more commonplace for them, I'd hope?

But again, I'm not super knowledgeable about the industry and not sure if such internal groups already exist in the Academy or if something like that is feasible. Should be though.

>But Academy Award nominations for prestige pictures mean more
>box office. So if more black indie/prestige films get
>nominated, more black indie/prestige films will continue to do
>even greater box office, and studios/production companies will
>continue to be more comfortable funding them.
>
>At least that's the way it works in theory.

Because if they're helping educate members about specific movies, that's free publicity.

I do think there are ways to educate-- though I'm not sure what the Academy can do. They could send out mailers about the importance of diversity-- which would land in the trashcans of 75% of the Academy unread. I think ditching inactive members helps in a big way, as those people are more likely to be in touch with what's going on, and I think the individual guilds can help encourage diversity the best they can.

Unfortunately, when it comes to getting nominations, it'll come down to what it always comes down to: money. The studios need to spend in order to educate.

The Imitation Game last year (two years ago? it blurs together) is a great example. They ran *so many ads* saying, in no unclear terms, that a win for The Imitation Game would help make up for the unjust and homophobic treatment of Turing way back when. In short: by nominating our film, you will be an activist for social justice. Is that offensive? Is it pandering? Yep and you bet. But it got the movie a shit ton of Oscar nominations. I wouldn't be surprised if in next year's campaigns, we see similar pandering from studios-- Fox Searchlight bought Birth of a Nation by Nate Parker for 17.5 mil, so clearly they see Oscar written all over this. Watch for them to run a "a win for this is a win for racial justice" type of campaign. It may be icky... but politics often is.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

weeding out the old, white fogeys (men and women) who likely won't vote for POC, let alone a cutting edge film, is key.

adding more diverse new members is key.

the things that can make a more direct impact (having POC in charge of studios, casting POC in lead roles, etc.) are things that are much more difficult to achieve and are not something the Academy can implement anyhow.

>
>the things that can make a more direct impact (having POC in
>charge of studios, casting POC in lead roles, etc.) are things
>that are much more difficult to achieve and are not something
>the Academy can implement anyhow.

Black folks are natural Born citizens to this racist country and represent 13% of the population and you have to be told common sense things?

they will make nice and throw a couple of cookies and then what?

Chris Rock needs to sit his behind down, because it ain't like his film career gonna exactly get a lift and nothing is funny about the constant racist nature coming out of their.

if they wanna impress me get Paul Mooney to host that cornball show and let it be kept on the real

mistermaxxx R.Kelly, Michael Jackson,Stevie wonder,Rick James,Marvin Gaye,El Debarge, Barry WHite Lionel RIchie,Isleys EWF,Lady T.,Kid creole and coconuts,the crusaders,kc sunshine band,bee gees,jW,sd,NE,JB

Miami Heat, New York Yankees,buffalo bills

...in an uncomfortable manner if he was the host, lol.



Since 1976

___________________________________________________________


DJTB YOMM

I'd hold off on attacking Chris Rock until after the show

http://www.blackoutforhumanrights.com/about-blackout-festival.html

I attended this year's blackout festival at the grammy museum

one portion of the events, they had a panel of black actors/actresses/directors/execs...etc...

and they were actually discussing the topic of diversity in Hollywood

2 chairs were open directly in front of me

and security was holding them...for Chris Rock and his lady (IDK much about his personal life, but ol' girl was FOINE!!!)

anyway, I doubt Rock mails this one in.

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't understand it without an explanation

you can't understand it with an explanation

Because they're far less represented in the industry vs. their population in America.

Could be how the entire industry works is like how ACTUAL INDUSTRY WORKS in the United States - white men have had the advantage for hundreds of years. Don't expect them to let it go anywhere - including the "industry."

------------


Gone: My Discogs collection for The Roots:
http://www.discogs.com/user/tomhayes-roots/collection

that has come out of these supposedly progressive liberal white actors and actresses.

http://mashable.com/2016/01/25/celebrity-diversity-oscars/#YAfWjK4a_PqM


I like how Julie Delpy's White Women Feminisim doesn't consider black women.

Kristen Stewart, though talking about Gender Quality and not OscarsSoWhite, still manage to say something pretty dumb.

Alex Baldwin, what are you even talking about?

http://www.yohaig.ng/entertainment/linda-ikeji/war-of-the-words-between-adam-baldwin-and-don-cheadle/


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

>that has come out of these supposedly progressive liberal
>white actors and actresses.
>
>http://mashable.com/2016/01/25/celebrity-diversity-oscars/#YAfWjK4a_PqM
>
>
>I like how Julie Delpy's White Women Feminisim doesn't
>consider black women.
>
>Kristen Stewart, though talking about Gender Quality and not
>OscarsSoWhite, still manage to say something pretty dumb.
>
>Alex Baldwin, what are you even talking about?


^^^^^^^^^^

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

Doesn't mean they aren't racists.

______________________________________

Everything looks like Oprah kissing Harvey Weinstein these days

Hollywood is the problem. Seems like trying to treat a cough and not the cold. Also I'm not sure what a few black actors getting nominations and possibly awards will do for the many more black people who will never be in the entertainment industry i.e. those that live regular lives.

______________________________________

Everything looks like Oprah kissing Harvey Weinstein these days