Hollywood 'race casting': what the industry is getting wrong about diversity

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.