# another "white" Oscars - does it matter\>? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 14, 2016, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169 "2016-01-14T21:48:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![madmonk28](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madmonk28/32/20811_2.png) [@madmonk28](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madmonk28)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/141 "2016-01-19T19:00:28Z")
I don’t know, if Rock quits it makes the point that black folk aren’t good enough to be invited to the party, but good enough to be invited to be the help at the party. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/142 "2016-01-19T19:35:12Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Sure, an open and visible nomination process would be a great idea, as would a board representative of the population as a whole. > > Still wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) guarantee black actors appearing on the nominations every year. And that’s the acid test for the Spike Lees of this world. Given an unbiased nomination process would they still accept an all-white best actor list? Whether or not that’s what Spike Lee wants, what about all the folks whose “acid test” is actual fair and unbiased nomination? If this boycott results in “an open and visible nomination process”, wouldn’t that mean the boycott was a great thing? ---
**Author:** ![Hiker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3be4f8/32.png) [@Hiker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hiker)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/143 "2016-01-19T19:45:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are two possibilities for why there are no black nominees: > > 1. No black performers/directors were as good as any of the white nominees > > or > > 1. There exists some bias in Oscar voting against black performers/directors > > Based on the movies I’ve seen, and what I’ve read, 2 seems a lot more likely to me than 1. I think such a boycott is reasonable. Further, it would be damn effective. If no (or very few) prominent black actors and directors show up for the awards ceremony, the Academy will definitely reconsider how they do things. This is one of those times, like the Missouri college football team, in which such a boycott could actually work quickly. Why don’t we try and get a second opinion? After all the Oscars are not the only prestigious award being handed out to actors these days. If the absence of black actors in this year’s nominees is a consequence of racism among the Academy voters, the other voting bodies surely would have recognized the worthy contenders. You may correct me, if I am wrong, but I’d say other than The Oscars the most prestigious awards given to English speaking actors during “awards season” are the Golden Globes, the BAFTA Awards, the SAG awards and the Critics Choice Awards. How many black actors were nominated there? (Only counting categories comparable to existing Oscar categories.) Golden Globes: 2 (Will Smith, Idris Elba) BAFTA Awards: 1 (Idris Elba) SAG Awards: 1 (Idris Elba) Critics Choice Awards: 0 So you could say most Awards had more black nominees than the Oscars. You could also say that based on previous nominations the only black actor who had reason to have strong hopes for an Oscar nomination was Idris Elba. Smith only got a nod at the Globes (and they have 10 nominees). The performances of Michael B. Jordan or Samuel L. Jackson were not included by any voting body. Is the omission of Elba alone reason enough to accuse the Academy of racism? Or are \*all \*the awards handed out by racists these days? ---
**Author:** ![Hiker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3be4f8/32.png) [@Hiker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hiker)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/144 "2016-01-19T19:56:00Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Sure, an open and visible nomination process would be a great idea, as would a board representative of the population as a whole. > > Still wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) guarantee black actors appearing on the nominations every year. And that’s the acid test for the Spike Lees of this world. Given an unbiased nomination process would they still accept an all-white best actor list? An open nomination process - in the sense that academy voters cannot cast their votes in secret - would hardly make the process more fair. Voters would feel obliged to vote for personal friends or for the champion of a producer they hope to do business with. Or they would feel obliged to make a “politically correct” choice. An open vote would hardly encourage anyone to vote based on artistic merit more than they do now. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/145 "2016-01-19T19:58:26Z")
Accepting 13% of the population being black (as cited above), then having zero of 20 nominees being black has a probability of 6.2% only slightly less than the 7.1% chance of having 5 or more black nominees as occurred in 2004 and 2006. (Zero happened 3 times out of 15 according to Robert163’s post.) But it seems to me that 13% of the US population being black is not particularly relevant. What fraction of actors and actresses are black, or what fraction of leading and supporting roles are performed by black actors? If that’s more like the 5% membership in the Academy, then you’d expect to come up with zero nominations of 20 nominations in 36% of the years, and you should get 5 or more in less than 0.05% of the years. Even at a much larger percentage of Blacks eligibles, it’s still not unusual to see what has occurred. If Blacks filled 10% of the roles (rather than 13%), then you’d see no nominees 12% of the time and five or more 3% of the time. I don’t take the cited **numbers** alone as satisfying even a preponderance of the evidence criterion. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/146 "2016-01-19T20:18:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Whether or not that’s what Spike Lee wants, what about all the folks whose “acid test” is actual fair and unbiased nomination? If this boycott results in “an open and visible nomination process”, wouldn’t that mean the boycott was a great thing? They don’t want a fair and unbiased nominations. They want more black nominees. It’s made clear by the consistent ignoring of the fact that despite no black nominees this year, the last 15 years shows a pretty close to what you’d expect ratio. Also, no one cares about any of the other ethnic groups that are by far less properly represented in the nominees. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/147 "2016-01-19T20:24:18Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > They don’t want a fair and unbiased nominations. They want more black nominees. It’s entirely possible that they believe that “fair and unbiased nominations” would lead to more black nominees. Considering the movies I saw the last two years, I think this is so. > [@](#): > > It’s made clear by the consistent ignoring of the fact that despite no black nominees this year, the last 15 years shows a pretty close to what you’d expect ratio. What is a “what you’d expect ratio”? I don’t necessarily buy this. > [@](#): > > Also, no one cares about any of the other ethnic groups that are by far less properly represented in the nominees. I disagree that focusing on a particular (possible) injustice means that one doesn’t care about other possible injustices. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/148 "2016-01-19T20:37:14Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > There is nothing at all ridiculous about separate acting categories for men & women since a large majority of the time, the roles played by men & women are different and could not be played by either sex. As I wrote in the closed thread, the Oscars have **always** had separate categories for men & women, as have the Tony Awards, Emmy Awards, etc… Just because it’s always been so doesn’t mean it makes sense. Now I am not arguing they should all be in the same category, but your flimsy justification makes no sense whatsoever. Acting is acting. There is no reason someone would have trouble differentiating between two performances just because the actors are of different genders. There are far more intra-gender differences in male performances than there are between any one male or female. > [@Hiker](#): > > Is the omission of Elba alone reason enough to accuse the Academy of racism? Or are \*all \*the awards handed out by racists these days? I wish people would stop assuming the critique of the Oscars means people are arguing the Academy and its members are themselves racists. That is generally not the issue, and it seems to be a tactic used by some as a strawman (eg. are we supposed to believe these Hollywood liberals are racist?) to undermine the idea that race plays any role (deliberate or otherwise) in this or any other sphere of life. Few people are saying these people watched Will Smith or Idris Elba, and consciously remarked to themselves that it’s a shame they are Black because otherwise they would have voted for them. That, I’d imagine, almost never happens. What happens is that many of the voters never see those movies because they aren’t required to watch all the possible contenders before voting. They often don’t see those movies because their old, White friends didn’t tell them about it at a party, and the movies Idris Elba does are generally not on their radar. It’s not intentional any more than most of these people not having any close minority friends. The above doesn’t mean you are a racist per se, but it does generally happen because of the role race plays in our country. Most older White people would have had to make a conscious effort to have multiple friends of different races. The lack of effort to be inclusive on the part of the Academy is generally what people are upset about. And to be fair, you could make the same critique about them being US-centric, and not nominating many Hispanic people or Asians. My point is that if a guy like Tyler Perry made a phenomenal movie next year that was worthy of contention, the chances that most academy members would have seen it is very, very low. That’s the crux of the matter: if you look at a bunch of Black performances, you will almost assuredly find some potentially worthy of nomination. If you know enough Black people and Black actors, you will start to recognize the subtleties and skill in some Black performances that may seem pedestrian otherwise. The Academy doesn’t seem to do that, and that is fairly problematic. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/149 "2016-01-19T20:37:18Z")
[Quote=iiandiiii] What is a “what you’d expect ratio”? I don’t necessarily buy this. [/quote] I find your confusion baffling. The U.S. population is about 13% black. The percentage of black nominees over the last 15 years approaches 10%. That is not some crazy disparity. Hispanics make up a decently larger % of U.S. population but are far less represented at the Oscars. ---
**Author:** ![sciurophobic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@sciurophobic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sciurophobic)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/150 "2016-01-19T20:45:41Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are two possibilities for why there are no black nominees: > > 1. No black performers/directors were as good as any of the white nominees > > or > > 1. There exists some bias in Oscar voting against black performers/directors No. The way the nomination selection process works is that if someone gets enough 1st place votes they get a nomination. A 2nd place vote is counted only if that ballot’s 1st selection had too few votes. So it’s possible that many who ranked Leonardo DiCaprio 1st also ranked Will Smith 2nd, and Will ends up with no votes. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/151 "2016-01-19T20:46:49Z")
> [@sciurophobic](#): > > No. The way the nomination selection process works is that if someone gets enough 1st place votes they get a nomination. A 2nd place vote is counted only if that ballot’s 1st selection had too few votes. So it’s possible that many who ranked Leonardo DiCaprio 1st also ranked Will Smith 2nd, and Will ends up with no votes. This does not eliminate the possibility of bias at play. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/152 "2016-01-19T20:54:25Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I find your confusion baffling. The U.S. population is about 13% black. The percentage of black nominees over the last 15 years approaches 10%. That is not some crazy disparity. Hispanics make up a decently larger % of U.S. population but are far less represented at the Oscars. What are the numbers for directing awards? Perhaps there was little bias at play for those years, or perhaps it was overwhelmed by other factors but “came back” for the last two years, or perhaps something else is going on. All I’m saying is I’m not convinced. Generally, when multiple black people in America say “this instance of how black people are being treated is wrong”, and then multiple non-black people say “no, those black people are wrong, there is no problem here”, then I am very skeptical and have an extremely high ‘bar’ for being convinced that the black people are wrong. From my reading and understanding of American history, that’s how _incredibly strong and valuable_ the opinions of black people about treatment of black people in America have been… over the decades and centuries, literally _ever time_ (that I’m aware of) that lots of black people were saying “this thing about how black people are treated is wrong”, they were right to some degree, regardless of the skepticism of contemporary white people. When it comes to possible injustice against black people, I admit a very strong bias towards accepting the reports and opinions of black people (en masse – not individuals)… just as I would for women when it comes to possible injustice against women, or gay people when it comes to possible injustice against gay people. I’m not convinced either way about this particular instance at this point. ---
**Author:** ![Hiker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3be4f8/32.png) [@Hiker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hiker)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/153 "2016-01-19T21:00:46Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > I wish people would stop assuming the critique of the Oscars means people are arguing the Academy and its members are themselves racists. That is generally not the issue, and it seems to be a tactic used by some as a strawman (eg. are we supposed to believe these Hollywood liberals are racist?) to undermine the idea that race plays any role (deliberate or otherwise) in this or any other sphere of life. > > Few people are saying these people watched Will Smith or Idris Elba, and consciously remarked to themselves that it’s a shame they are Black because otherwise they would have voted for them. That, I’d imagine, almost never happens. What happens is that many of the voters never see those movies because they aren’t required to watch all the possible contenders before voting. They often don’t see those movies because their old, White friends didn’t tell them about it at a party, and the movies Idris Elba does are generally not on their radar. It’s not intentional any more than most of these people not having any close minority friends. > > The above doesn’t mean you are a racist per se, but it does generally happen because of the role race plays in our country. Most older White people would have had to make a conscious effort to have multiple friends of different races. The lack of effort to be inclusive on the part of the Academy is generally what people are upset about. And to be fair, you could make the same critique about them being US-centric, and not nominating many Hispanic people or Asians. My point is that if a guy like Tyler Perry made a phenomenal movie next year that was worthy of contention, the chances that most academy members would have seen it is very, very low. That’s the crux of the matter: if you look at a bunch of Black performances, you will almost assuredly find some potentially worthy of nomination. If you know enough Black people and Black actors, you will start to recognize the subtleties and skill in some Black performances that may seem pedestrian otherwise. The Academy doesn’t seem to do that, and that is fairly problematic. It is neither a tactic nor a strawman. In the wake of the whole “Oscars so white” debate Academy voters are frequently accused of “racial bias”, which honestly is little more than a nicer term for racism. Your personal version of that is to claim that the Academy voters show a “lack of effort to be inclusive” and that they fail to even notice worthy black contenders “because their old, White friends didn’t tell them about it at a party”. Are you really sure that “Trumbo” and “45 Years” were seen by more Academy voters than “Creed”? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/154 "2016-01-19T21:03:21Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > . > > All I’m saying is I’m not convinced. Generally, when multiple black people in America say “this instance of how black people are being treated is wrong”, and then multiple non-black people say “no, those black people are wrong, there is no problem here”, then I am very skeptical and have an extremely high ‘bar’ for being convinced that the black people are wrong. From my reading and understanding of American history, that’s how _incredibly strong and valuable_ the opinions of black people about treatment of black people in America have been… over the decades and centuries, literally _ever time_ (that I’m aware of) that lots of black people were saying “this thing about how black people are treated is wrong”, they were right to some degree, regardless of the skepticism of contemporary white people. > > When it comes to possible injustice against black people, I admit a very strong bias towards accepting the reports and opinions of black people (en masse – not individuals)… just as I would for women when it comes to possible injustice against women, or gay people when it comes to possible injustice against gay people. Oh. Well I prefer to converse with people who put a little more thought into it rather than have me jump some high bar to convince them of something. Nevermind. ---
**Author:** ![sciurophobic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@sciurophobic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sciurophobic)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/155 "2016-01-19T21:10:52Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This does not eliminate the possibility of bias at play. How? Let’s say a sufficient number of voters submit ballots like this: 1. Leonardo DiCaprio 2. Will Smith 3. Idris Elba 4. O’Shea Jackson 5. Samuel L. Jackson Leo gets a nomination and the rest don’t, unless enough other ballots list them 1st. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/156 "2016-01-19T21:17:25Z")
> [@sciurophobic](#): > > How? Let’s say a sufficient number of voters submit ballots like this: > > 1. Leonardo DiCaprio > 2. Will Smith > 3. Idris Elba > 4. O’Shea Jackson > 5. Samuel L. Jackson > > Leo gets a nomination and the rest don’t, unless enough other ballots list them 1st. Yes, it’s possible bias is involved, and possible that no bias is involved. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/157 "2016-01-19T21:18:30Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Oh. Well I prefer to converse with people who put a little more thought into it rather than have me jump some high bar to convince them of something. Nevermind. You don’t have to try and convince me. My love for you remains even when we disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/158 "2016-01-19T21:20:10Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Whether or not that’s what Spike Lee wants, what about all the folks whose “acid test” is actual fair and unbiased nomination? If this boycott results in “an open and visible nomination process”, wouldn’t that mean the boycott was a great thing? A great thing? I never mentioned the boycott, people are free to attend or not. If the boycott means the academy now feels obliged to include a certain number of black actors in the nominations then the boycott would be a terrible thing. The cause of equality is diminished by such a scenario. Mind you, **Hiker** suggests that an open process may make a purely artistic decision less likely so who knows where that’ll lead. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/159 "2016-01-19T21:21:06Z")
> [@Hiker](#): > > An open nomination process - in the sense that academy voters cannot cast their votes in secret - would hardly make the process more fair. Structural transparency would be one thing; we’d know, for example, who was #6 on the lists. That might be helpful, if not a solution to anything in itself. Non-secret ballots are a very different thing. > [@Hiker](#): > > Voters would feel obliged to vote for personal friends or for the champion of a producer they hope to do business with. Or they would feel obliged to make a “politically correct” choice. An open vote would hardly encourage anyone to vote based on artistic merit more than they do now. I agree. It’s not important, for purposes of artistic merit, _which_ individual voters vote for which nominees–only the aggregate results. Though… the ballots could be enumerated _anonymously_. We could see, for example, what proportion of ballots missed non-white choices entirely, or which considered only “safe,” established superstars. Which awards were decided by such ballots. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169/160 "2016-01-19T21:36:16Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > I wish people would stop assuming the critique of the Oscars means people are arguing the Academy and its members are themselves racists. That is generally not the issue, and it seems to be a tactic used by some as a strawman (eg. are we supposed to believe these Hollywood liberals are racist?) to undermine the idea that race plays any role (deliberate or otherwise) in this or any other sphere of life. > … > What happens is that many of the voters never see those movies because they aren’t required to watch all the possible contenders before voting. They often don’t see those movies because their old, White friends didn’t tell them about it at a party, and the movies Idris Elba does are generally not on their radar. It’s not intentional any more than most of these people not having any close minority friends. > > The above doesn’t mean you are a racist per se, but it does generally happen because of the role race plays in our country. Most older White people would have had to make a conscious effort to have multiple friends of different races. The lack of effort to be inclusive on the part of the Academy is generally what people are upset about. Exactly. The basic problem as I see it is that people are allowed to vote for anybody they want to. Most votes are cast for people working in the voters’ comfort zones. This biases them toward people they know, people like themselves, people making films like those they usually make or watch, and not incidentally toward established stars. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-white-oscars-does-it-matter/743169.md?page=9)