Academy establishes representation and inclusion standards for Oscars eligibility
The Oscars introduce new diversity requirements to drive structural change.
Source: Flickr
On September 8, the Academy revealed that they would be introducing new requirements for Best Picture nominations in the name of increased diversity and inclusion in the film industry as part of their Academy Aperture Initiative 2025.
This move is preceded by years of outrage at the lack of diversity in recent nominees and winners across all categories of the awards. Perhaps most memorable is the hashtag “OscarsSoWhite” created by activist April Reign in response to the Oscars nominations in 2015. That year, every single one of the 20 actors nominated for the acting awards was white, despite “Selma” being nominated for Best Picture and “The Grand Budapest Hotel”, another Best Picture nominee, featuring Tony Revolori in a leading role.
The relevance of hashtag “OscarsSoWhite” was renewed the year after, when the 88th Academy Awards saw another year dominated by white stories portrayed by white actors. Out of the eight movies nominated for Best Picture, none featured any people of colour in a leading role. There was additional controversy surrounding the fact that the Academy recognised the white writers of “Straight Outta Compton” with a nomination for Best Original Screenplay while completely overlooking the African-American cast of the movie.
To put it mildly, the Academy has not had a good track record when it comes to inclusivity and diversity. This does not come as a surprise when one considers the past and present composition of the Academy. In 2012, the Los Angeles Times conducted a study that showed that the Oscar voters at the time were nearly 94% white and 77% male with a median age of 62. The attention surrounding hashtag “OscarsSoWhite”, led by Reign, placed mounting pressure on the Academy to diversify their members. As a result, in January 2016 the Academy announced their plan to double the number of women and people of colour amongst their members by 2020 as part of their A2020 initiative - a promise that they have since fulfilled.
Additionally, the 89th Academy Awards in 2016 saw something of a year of redemption for the Academy with “Moonlight” winning Best Picture and nominations in the same category for “Fences” and “Hidden Figures”. Furthermore, seven out of the 20 acting nominations went to people of colour, with Mahershala Ali winning Best Supporting Actor and Viola Davis winning Best Supporting Actress.
So, the announcement of these new requirements is not unprecedented, but it did not escape controversy and dissection. While some in the film industry have criticised these new standards for being potentially stifling for artists, others have criticised them for not being drastic enough. Upon first glance, the list of standards seems long and constrictive. However, in reality most, if not all in the past 20 years, previous Best Picture nominees and winners would not have been affected by it at all.
There are four standards in total, and to qualify for a Best Picture nomination a film has to fulfil at least two of them. The details are complicated (those interested should see the official announcement by the Academy), but the general idea is that the movie has to feature underrepresented groups in its cast, crew or leadership (including non-creative leadership roles such as in marketing and distribution). Underrepresented groups include women, people of colour, LGBTQ+, and differently abled people.
While on-screen representation will (most likely) not be affected hugely, it is interesting to see the Academy calling attention to representation within the crew and production team. Standard C is particularly noteworthy because it specifically targets opportunity and access to the film industry for underrepresented groups. To achieve it, the film’s distribution or financing company must have significant representation amongst their internships and apprenticeships from the specified underrepresented groups.
Additionally, the film’s production, distribution, or financing company must offer training or work opportunities for below-the-line skill development for underrepresented groups. The fact that this standard targets companies themselves, and not just individual film productions, indicates both the potential for and interest in industry-wide change that affects people directly.
It is difficult to say how much these standards will affect what the Oscars nominations will look like in the future, and because they will only come into effect starting in 2024 it will be a while before we know for sure. No matter what, the “OscarsSoWhite” conversation is far from over. This move is a start. A tentative, arguably soft-handed start, but one that is indicative of the power of discourse and the influence of the public. The Academy is not untouchable, and we, the public, have the privilege and responsibility of holding them constantly accountable.