• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Hollywood/Academy Awards Racist?

Is Hollywood/Academy Awards Racist?

  • Total voters
    34
Dragonfly said:
Many companies and industries do "award" type things for their people. These just happen to be "pretty people" so they get tv coverage.

If you don't like it you can change the channel.

Question I'm asking isn't if you like it or not, but if there's honestly some racial discrimination going on.
Click to expand...

We can't see into those people's hearts.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Who does the nominating, and can they nominate more than one person? If they are able to nominate many, I think there might be a case for some racialism occurring. But, if they can are limited to one nomination, only, I think it's less likely.

I heard about this on television, but, not knowing the process, I don't know enough to form an opinion.
Click to expand...

Designers nominate designers, directors nominate directors, and etc.
 
dimensionallava said:
all awards shows are racist thats why macklemore has more rap grammy's then 2Pac, Biggie, Nas, DMX, Busta Rhymes, KRS-One, Rick Ross, Snoop Dogg, Mos Def, Run DMC, Public Enemy, Big Pun, Jeezy, Ja Rule and Kendrick Lamar, combined.

A White Guy Won the Rap Album Grammy Again, but This One Won’t Apologize | TakePart
Click to expand...

That is amazing. I don't begrudge Macklemore. He is doing what he loves and has succeeded at it. I enjoy his work. But he is certainly not among the best rappers of all time. Eminem actually is one of the best rappers of all time and arguably THE best lyricist. Most hip hop artists will agree with that statement.

If anyone is guilty of "cultural appropriation", though, it is Iggy Azalea. At least Macklemore and Eminem sound like Macklemore and Eminem. They are also very self-aware. Iggy straight up imitates the accent of a Southern black woman from the American South. It is almost a parody.

Their success IS in large part because they are white. The number one buyers of hip hop are young whites. It is human nature that artists that look like them will tend to appeal more to them. And if success in sales is going to play a part in the award nomination process then whites, as long as whites are the majority of consumers, will be nominated a disproportionate number of times.
 
Thought "we" are to color blind and each person stands on their own merits.

Unless you are a minority and didn't get a nomination. Then its "racist" or "discrimination".

Bottom line, those who did not get a nomination, didn't muster up. Get over it.
 
Dragonfly said:
No "people of color" nominated for Academy Awards this year. Some talking of boycotting the awards.

Is this racism, or simply that nobody of "color" did anything "good enough" to warrant a nomination?

Must there be a specific number of non-white nominees every year or chants/charges of racism will be shouted?

Spike Lee, Jada Pinkett Smith to Skip Oscars in Protest

I'm wondering, who did not get nominated that should have? Who got nominated that shouldn't have?

Were any Asian's nominated? Any American Indians?

Does it become sort of a reverse racism if in the future, the nominating committee starts sprinkling non-whites into the mix just to prevent this kind of hullabaloo?

What if non-whites are nominated, but don't win? Does that constitute racism as well?

Do "we" HAVE to have non-white nominations AND winners to prove "we're" not racist?
Click to expand...

The Oscars are not awarded on the basis of affirmative action..

Straight Out of Compton had some merit, they say. But with lyrics like "F*** the cops" I would guess it reminded people of some unpleasant and divisive recent events. Also, whether it was better than any of the nominees is debatable. Some critics complained that it was unfocused and never fully developed the characters.

The way that some blacks have been insulting, blaming, disrespecting and otherwise ragging on whites lately it should come as no surprise that blacks are not thought of in warm and fuzzy terms when it comes time to vote for the Oscars. MLK knew what today's black activists have forgotten -- they have to have the support of most whites in order to make progress. They have to appeal to the better nature of the majority. As it is they are just pissing people off and getting nowhere with their shrill demands and accusations. MLK could convince a majority of whites that blacks were being treated unfairly in his day because they were in fact being treated unfairly. Those who think that fairness means a set share of Oscars have a tougher row to hoe.

The way these rich and highly privileged Hollywood blacks go around talking like they're oppressed is certainly off-putting. Some of them even have their own production companies where they produce stuff that's exclusively black.
 
nota bene said:
Designers nominate designers, directors nominate directors, and etc.
Click to expand...

It seems to me then that narcissism might figure in more than racism. It sounds as if Hollywood is simply hosting these awards events to pat themselves on the backs.

I don't know the ratio of minority designers and directors to non-minority designers and directors, but if there ARE minority people who do the nominating, they must not have nominated minority actors, etc.

I still don't understand the process well, but it seems more than a little self-serving of the entire industry.
 
The end of the film era is in sight. TV series are taking the high ground. Has any film in the last ten years come anywhere the near the quality of, say, House of Cards? Soon the only people watching film will be teenagers. So how long has the oscar charade got left 10 years, 15 years? So does it actually matter if a few token 'people of colour' are seen on the stage?
 
If your movie celebrates phases like "**** the Police" and you think you should receive an award, the chances are good that you will never own your own home.
 
HowardBThiname said:
It seems to me then that narcissism might figure in more than racism. It sounds as if Hollywood is simply hosting these awards events to pat themselves on the backs.

I don't know the ratio of minority designers and directors to non-minority designers and directors, but if there ARE minority people who do the nominating, they must not have nominated minority actors, etc.

I still don't understand the process well, but it seems more than a little self-serving of the entire industry.
Click to expand...

Well, of course, it's "self-serving." It's the Academy's awards. Only other Foley artists really understand what fantastic work in their area is, and I think that most nominations are on merit. It's not all about "Best Picture" or "Best Actor."

This isn't to say that there haven't been sentimental "lifetime achievement" Oscars for a few or that the Academy hasn't punished a few. This isn't to say that hopefuls don't campaign. DiCaprio has been pretty shameless this go-around.

I'm just curious to see whether there will be indignant backlash or whether the industry indulges itself in an angsty examination of collective conscience. Perhaps the nomination process will be revised to make sure is always a quota. Rather than talent being acknowledged by one's peers, maybe exquisite sensitivity to special groups should come to the fore.
 
Maybe somewhat. Given the topic of Straight Out of Compton, can you blame if the Academy Voters aren't interested? Regarding Will Smith and Concussion, it was a whole fuss in the black community when white actors portrayed Egyptians in Gods of Egypt, but criticism of Will Smith playing a Nigerian only faced minor criticism. Jada Smith wouldn't even be protesting if it wasn't for Will Smith being left out. You should read how they feel about Pinkett Smith on a black forum:

Jada Pinkett Smith to Oscars: We're Not Begging You Anymore - You're Irrelevant to Us [VIDEO]
 
nota bene said:
Well, of course, it's "self-serving." It's the Academy's awards. Only other Foley artists really understand what fantastic work in their area is, and I think that most nominations are on merit. It's not all about "Best Picture" or "Best Actor."

This isn't to say that there haven't been sentimental "lifetime achievement" Oscars for a few or that the Academy hasn't punished a few. This isn't to say that hopefuls don't campaign. DiCaprio has been pretty shameless this go-around.

I'm just curious to see whether there will be indignant backlash or whether the industry indulges itself in an angsty examination of collective conscience. Perhaps the nomination process will be revised to make sure is always a quota. Rather than talent being acknowledged by one's peers, maybe exquisite sensitivity to special groups should come to the fore.
Click to expand...

From my recent CNN link:

On Monday, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, the president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, issued a lengthy statement on the subject, saying she was both "heartbroken" and "frustrated" and promised big changes. "The Academy is taking dramatic steps to alter the makeup of our membership," she said in the statement. "In the coming days and weeks we will conduct a review of our membership recruitment in order to bring about much-needed diversity in our 2016 class and beyond."
Click to expand...

So to combat such "embarrassing" results from happening in the future, it appears the Academy will simply flood it's membership with more ethnically diverse members and thereby increase the odds that more ethnically diverse nominations will occur.

"You want more black nominations, lets bring in more black members."

We will manufacture a membership that provides the best "politically correct" awards process as possible based on public outcry.

Nice.
 
Dragonfly said:
From my recent CNN link:



So to combat such "embarrassing" results from happening in the future, it appears the Academy will simply flood it's membership with more ethnically diverse members and thereby increase the odds that more ethnically diverse nominations will occur.

"You want more black nominations, lets bring in more black members."

We will manufacture a membership that provides the best "politically correct" awards process as possible based on public outcry.

Nice.
Click to expand...

Earlier in this thread somebody suggested "participation" awards, and maybe that's the way the Academy should go. Just give everybody a little statue. Never mind that the award will then have no meaning at all; everybody will feel good. But I will expect new categories--best actor with a disability (including mental), best gay actor, best puppy-owning actor....
 
Oh, I was watching CNN and it was said only 5 black actors/actresses ever won an Academy Award for a leading role, which greatly annoyed me. It's only 4, Halle Berry is half white.
 
There are many Awards Galas all over the world dedicated to acknowledging the best in film. Curiously, hardly any acknowledged black stars in film last year.

It's far more likely that there simply wasn't strong enough performances by black stars to warrant inclusion at these Awards ceremonies than some type of racist conspiracy against people of color.

The Cannes Film Festival is known for its consistency and authority on film, and its winners list has never conformed to what the likes of Spike Lee and company are demanding. Their goal will not be realized unless film associations make a conscious effort to no longer judge according to talent and on merit.
 
Alternatively, Cannes could also examine its collective conscience (if it has one, LOL), find itself lacking, and follow politically correct suit.
 
:roll:

Honestly people, you need to get over it. The Oscar has been awarded to plenty of only "so-so" films over the years, simply because they happened to be "politically correct."

Also, there are a lot of movies out there on any particular year. Given that black-centric films, with black lead actors, only make up a small minority of the overall whole, why on Earth would you expect a black actor to always be nominated, every year?

Some years, the odds simply aren't going to be in their favor. That's a mathematical certainty. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Its interesting that some will barely entertain the idea of racism when theres no minorites being honored but will in the next sentence call Spike Lee a racist for preferring to work with black people. So if Spike Lee was in charge of the Oscars and no white people were up for awards, would it then be racist since he has already been established as a racist?
 
Andalublue said:
Michael B. Jordan for Creed
Idris Elba for Beasts of No Nation
John Boyega for Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Jason Mitchell for Straight Outta Compton
Spike Lee for Chi-raq

Just off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

John Boyega for Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Did you see anything Oscar worthy in his performance, or should he have gotten a nom because of the color of his skin?
 
Dragonfly said:
No "people of color" nominated for Academy Awards this year. Some talking of boycotting the awards.

Is this racism, or simply that nobody of "color" did anything "good enough" to warrant a nomination?
Click to expand...
I haven't seen a lot of new movies this year, but it does seem that a lot of non-white actors put in excellent, Oscar-worthy performances this year. That's one reason why the snub is getting so much attention this year.

I don't think the Academy is as much racist as they are non-representative. The members of the Academy are 94% white, 77% male, average age is 62. This is not a group to whom Straight Outta Compton is likely to have much appeal. (In contrast, the US as a whole is 72% white, 49% male, median age is 37.)

It's up to the AMPAS to choose their membership. I don't think anyone made a conscious decision to exclude anyone, rather it's the nature of the business -- a problem in and of itself, but again not likely to be due to an explicit choice to exclude anyone.


Must there be a specific number of non-white nominees every year or chants/charges of racism will be shouted?
Click to expand...
I don't think there is a fixed number, but: I'm guessing at least 1. Out of 20 possible slots, that is hardly a stretch.

And yes, I think that future snubs like these will be called out more and more, as our society becomes less white.


I'm wondering, who did not get nominated that should have? Who got nominated that shouldn't have?
Click to expand...
From Variety:

Will Smith
Michael B Jordan
Tessa Thompson
Idris Elba
Abraham Attah
Any lead from Straight Outta Compton


Were any Asian's nominated? Any American Indians?
Click to expand...
Uh, no. It's like a loaf of Wonder Bread this year. Hence the problem.


Does it become sort of a reverse racism if in the future, the nominating committee starts sprinkling non-whites into the mix just to prevent this kind of hullabaloo?
Click to expand...
No.


What if non-whites are nominated, but don't win? Does that constitute racism as well?
Click to expand...
That depends. If the winners turned in genuinely better performances, it'd be hard to make the accusation stick. If there were several stand-out performances by non-whites, and they all lost, that'd be a bit disconcerting.


Do "we" HAVE to have non-white nominations AND winners to prove "we're" not racist?
Click to expand...
What "we"?

The AMPAS is a very small group that represents an industry, not America. Again... hence, the problem.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Honestly people, you need to get over it. The Oscar has been awarded to plenty of only "so-so" films over the years, simply because they happened to be "politically correct."
Click to expand...
Such as?

Birdman? Argo? The Artist? The King's Speech? The Hurt Locker? No Country For Old Men? The Departed? Lord of the Rings? Chicago? A Beautiful Mind? Gladiator -- do Romans and Aussies now count as minorities? American Beauty, Shakespeare In Love, Titanic, English Patient, Braveheart, Forrest Gump, Unforgiven, Silence of the Lambs, let me know when I go back beyond the year of your birth. :D

The only remotely plausible "PC" candidates are:
12 Years a Slave (not mediocre)
Slumdog Millionaire (not mediocre)
Crash (OK, yeah)
Million Dollar Baby (is Clint Eastwood PC? I can never keep the vague accusations straight)

Looks to me like that is 1 or 2, out of the last 23 years... and that most of the mediocre stuff did not win because it was "PC."


Also, there are a lot of movies out there on any particular year. Given that black-centric films, with black lead actors, only make up a small minority of the overall whole, why on Earth would you expect a black actor to always be nominated, every year?
Click to expand...
There are 10 slots for Best Picture, and 20 slots for Best Actor / Supporting. In a society that is 77% white, it is not unreasonable to expect at least one nominee to be non-white. Especially 2 years in a row.


Some years, the odds simply aren't going to be in their favor. That's a mathematical certainty. :shrug:
Click to expand...
Very true. At the same time, given that the Academy is 97% white, it seems like some other statistical data may be subtly influencing the outcome. Again, not as a form of explicit racism, more as a product of the members' preferences.

And I hate to break it to you, but it is highly unlikely that anyone will get over it any time soon. Every year, the minority population grows as a percentage of our nation. This means that each year, it makes less and less sense for the nominees to all go to white actors. Unless the Academy does something soon (which is unlikely), you can expect to hear about this many times during your lifetime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom