Spike Lee, Jada Pinkett Smith Call for Oscar Boycott.

Key statistics:

• Caucasians (non-Hispanic) make up 63% of America's population and 54% of US ticket sales, yet they represent 94% of Oscar members/voters. Ethnic minorities represent 37% of America's population and 46% of US ticket sales, yet they only represent 6% of Oscar members.
• Females represent 51% of America's population and 52% of moviegoers, yet they only represent 23% of Oscar members.
• The median age of America is 36.8, yet the median age of Oscar members is 62. People over the age of 50 represent 32% of America's population and 25% of US ticket sales, yet they represent 86% of Oscar members.

Despite the diverse audiences, the Academy is heavily biased in favour of appealing to a small minority, white males aged over 50, who represent only about 10% of America's population and 7% of US ticket sales. They get to tightly control who enters the Academy, and therefore who gets to vote, and that way it remains an exclusive club. But as a result, the Academy has become very out-of-touch with their audiences, so the backlash shouldn't be surprising at all.

The standard excuse used by Oscar apologists to justify its heavy bias (in terms of ethnicity, gender, and age) is "merit". But who gets to decide who or what is more worthy of merit? Back in the early '80s, David Bowie called out MTV for using the same kinds of lame excuses to justify its bias against black musicians, like Michael Gaye, Prince, and even Michael Jackson, who were more creative and talented than most of the white musicians that MTV promoted. The Oscars are now going through the same phase that MTV went through over 30 years ago, dismissing great movies like Creed, Straight Outta Compton and Beasts of No Nation using the same kinds of lame excuses that MTV used to dismiss the likes of Marvin Gaye, Prince and Michael Jackson.

1) I still have yet to hear a compelling reason why the Academy's membership SHOULD be more diverse, or why the winners and nominations SHOULD fall closer in line with the demographic makeup of the country.

2) Never mind being racist, to a certain extent the Academy has always been sort of ELITIST. To what extent should their practices be dictated by what the public wants? The most popular movies of the year have also been things like Avengers, Jurassic World, and Star Wars. Should the Academy start rewarding those movies more heavily in order to avoid being seen as "out of touch"? And at a certain point, doesn't that sort of make them no more credible than trash like the MTV movie awards?

3) Do we even know how many nominations Creed got for Best Picture, Best Director, or Best Actor? Did anyone actually think it was THE BEST, or did the voters simply think it was one of thebest? Which voters actually voted wrong? And more to the point, if there's a problem with the Academy's demographic makeup, can anyone tell me which specific voters ought to be kicked off of the academy? This is a very important thing, because arguing that the Academy SHOULDN'T be too old and white and male entails that some of the people on the Academy shouldn't be there. So to anyone making that argument, I'd like them to tell me specifically who should get the boot, and why.

Might be kinda harsh this but if any actor/actress in Hollywood wants an Oscar then shouldn't they be the best actor/actress of the year and possibly star in the best movie of the year? So isn't it up to them to improve upon themselves if they don't get one so they might get one next time?

Cause I figured that was the whole point of the Oscars, to determine which movie had the best elements and which actors had the best performance on the big screen.

Oscar voters offer theories on Straight Outta Compton best picture snub

The Director

“Nobody can accuse the Academy of being racist — but they can be accused of being out of touch with the younger generation,” says the director. “Straight Outta Compton is a masterpiece, probably the best biopic since Amadeus — but many if not most of the Academy can’t fathom songs like “F— the Police.’ I know many members who wouldn’t even see the film because it represented a culture that they detest or, more accurately, they assume they detest. Younger people, even those under 50, are not only fans of the music, but much more willing to try to empathize with the world depicted in the movie. When the Academy expands to an even younger demo, movies like Straight Outta Compton will stand a chance.”

The Producer

“If we’re being honest, my bet is most Academy members didn’t see it,” says the producer. “I think the older members, those in their 60s and 70s, didn’t think it was a movie for them, and they didn’t watch it. It was one of the best-reviewed movies of the year. It was surprising how good it was, and I felt it should have been rewarded. I made sure it was on my list. But maybe it wasn’t high enough.”

The Publicist

“We have no way of knowing why anything with a lot of support doesn’t get in. Compton could have received 2,500 votes in the fourth or fifth slot, but if it doesn’t have at least 350 first-place votes, it gets ignored,” says the publicist, citing the Academy’s preferential ballot system, which puts greater emphasis on first-place votes. “I don’t think the Academy needs to have its motives addressed, but the weighted balloting system may need to be reconsidered. There isn’t a doubt in my mind that Compton got a lot of votes. The very fact that all the guilds voted for the film proves that. There just weren’t enough first- or second-place votes to get it over the hump.”

The Writer

“I’m sure it’s a demographic question,” says the writer. “I remember how I used to say about the Emmys that you really felt like most of the voters were people who rooted for the Munsters in the ’60s. I don’t know what the turnover has been at the Oscars to recognize that kind of work. I loved that movie. I think it was startlingly well done. You watch it and go, ‘Oh my God, they completely nailed it.’ It’s so hard to do. It’s very difficult to do music biopics. I’m fascinated by that. They found a way to talk about the music, talk about the culture, the politics, and the emotional conflicts to the band, the business. It’s a much more difficult movie than people understand. I am never surprised about the nominations being ridiculous, because it’s always silly. I don’t look at it as a fair judgment on anybody’s work, so I don’t actually care. I know most of those people don’t see half of the movies. I haven’t seen every single movie being discussed. Who has that kind of time? Especially when you gotta watch Making a Murderer.”

The Editor

“The screening where I saw it, it was very well-received. I can only surmise that it didn’t have real broad support from the below-the-line groups but everyone really liked it,” says the editor, referring to the fact that it wasn’t nominated by the editors guild, cinematographers guild, or the art director guilds in their best-of-the-year contests. “The cast was terrific. The editing was great. It was shot really well. I was really disappointed it didn’t get in, but I think it’s the system that’s flawed. The Academy has increased its members by 20 percent in the last three years, but it’s going to take a while to pay off.”

The Hyphenate

“I loved Straight Outta Compton. I took my teenage son, he loved it too,” says the writer-producer-director. “But I’m embarrassed to say, I kind of forgot about it when it came time to vote. We saw it when it was first released theatrically, last August. Love & Mercy, which was also released last summer, is another terrific film that slipped through the cracks. They’re both deserving, but neither was a part of the pre-nom drumbeat that tends to narrow the voters’ focus.

“For the record, my son and I loved Creed too, and I did vote for it for a best picture nom. I also thought Idris Elba should have been nominated for Best Actor this year. And the amazing young actor Abraham Attah in Beasts of No Nation might also have deserved a nod. I’m sorry they were excluded. But I don’t think they were excluded because they were black, but more likely because they were in a movie that got very limited theatrical release and was very tough to watch.

“I’m acutely aware of the diversity concerns within the Academy, and I wish I had a genius idea to help solve it. But I don’t. Any more than I have a notion on how to increase the ranks of black directors, writers, and stars in top-quality feature films. And any more than I can figure out why on a low-budget feature film set I recently visited, there was only one black crew member.

“I think employment is a bigger problem than awards, actually. An all-white ballot is the symptom; low minority hiring is the disease. Those of us in the industry, voters or not, need to do better!”

You know what would be funny? If the smiths owned a company that prefers to hire only one type of person in as many situations as possible then started bitching about how racist everone else is. Boy. That sure would be ironic wouldn't it?

Well, if we want to play the statistics game (aka, make the numbers say what we want them to say...), let's look at this:

The population of the US is ~14% black. The percentage of Oscar winners that are black is proportional:

"For most of the past 15 years, the Academy has largely judged what has been put in front of them: minority actors land 15% of top roles, 15% of nominations and 17% of wins. Once up for top roles, black actors do well, converting 9% of top roles into 10% of best-actor nominations and 15% of the coveted golden statuettes, a bit above their share of the general population." SourceThe article goes into more damning detail, however, especially concerning behind-the-scenes stuff such as black directors, and so forth.

The real problem, however, is the voting body; that is, the members of the board that contribute votes to the Oscars. There is not only potential racism involved, but also sexism and ageism: almost all of the members are over 50 years old; almost all of the members are white; and almost all of the members are male.

Would your grandparents enjoy Straight out of Compton? Probably not, no matter how good it is.

There's definitely racism out there, but it'd be easier to hear it if other people voiced it: right now, we have to stick with Will Smith's Wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), Always Angry Black Man Standing On Undeserved Soap Box(Spike Lee), and The Guy that Replaced Terrence Howard in Iron Man and Did a Terrible British Accent In the Oceans 11-13 Movies (Don Cheadle).

You know who has it bad? Women, asians, and hispanics.

Or better yet how about their representation in NBA and NFL? Blacks make up something around 75% of players in the NBA, and 60+% in the NFL.... IF we are going to talk about the entertainment business we might as well talk about this. That is far more distortional than anything come close to this complaint about the Oscars.

Are you seriously comparing sports to movies?

Why shouldn't we compare sports to movies? The same principle (allegedly) still applies. Everyone gets an equal opportunity to go into the field (in the sense that "the institution" isn't keeping ANY parent from encouraging their kids to go into either sports or the arts). Some make it, some don't, but the common thing here is that the people whose JOB it is to assess merit do NOT have the duty of making sure that the relative merits are proportional to the general population. If only a tiny percent of whites happen to make it to the highest tier in sports, tough shit. If only a tiny percentage of blacks manage to make it to the highest tier in the arts, then tough shit. The point is that it is NOT the job of the people recognizing merits to make sure that the achievements handed out fall in line with the proportional representation of the general population.

EDIT: And again, I have to clarify that disproportional representation is not necessarily a problem. There certain MIGHT be a problem, but if so, we have to specifically clarify what that problem is.

Is the problem that the Academy voters are just old white racists who refuse to vote for minorities?

Is the problem that there just aren't as many minorities making quality stuff?

Even if there just aren't as many minorities making quality stuff, is the problem that the racist institution isn't LETTING them make such quality stuff just because they're minorities?

Or does it start before then? Is the problem that not as many minorities attempt to go into the arts in the first place?

If not as many minorities attempt to go into the arts in the first place, is the problem that the racist white people running art schools just won't deal with minorities?

Or is the problem something that happens even before that? Is the problem that certain minority groups (for whatever reason) simply have less likelihood of encouraging their kids to go into that kind of work?

I don't know. But the big problem I have here is that I don't really see ANYONE going out and defining SPECIFICALLY what the problem actually is. Is the answer to just get rid of the old white people running the institution, or should we focus more on making minority groups actually want to encourage their kids to do this kind of stuff in the first place? Furthermore, how likely are blacks to encourage their kids to pursue the arts, when those parents see the entire field as racist? Now that's getting into a feedback effect. Maybe racism in the industry has largely disappeared, but the fact that heavy racism DID exist (and it did) keeps the older generation from encouraging the newer generation to enter the field. Or in other words, the old days were racist as shit, but now they're much more accepting, but the parents are keeping the kids from entering the field just because the field used to be a lot more racist. Thus guaranteeing a lower number of minorities trying to get into the field in the first place, thus guaranteeing a lower number of minorities reaching the highest level of achievement. Which looks like racism (even though it's not), thus resulting in minorities boycotting the New system and discouraging their kids from going into that field.

So...do you see the point? That this isn't really the least bit simple, and that it's a little bit disturbing that hardly anyone is actually specifically saying what the problem IS?

Is this the first time that no African American got voted in?...what about previous years?

Exactly.. I am more pointing out the hypocrisy that we have people bitching about the OSCARS even when we look at the math that blacks are still proportionately given awards to their % make up of the country and the industry... Meanwhile we ignore one of our largest entrainment venue in the US, sports.. In which blacks make up the majority of the NBA and NFL, while whites make up the vast majority of the NHL.. Are we trying to say that it's ok to base these on merit, but we can't do that for the Oscars because that is apparently racist?

Now if Spike Lee talk about specific examples and the like in which he felt should have won, I would be fine.. But he doesn't he specifically makes a generalized statement as if they deserve the award over others simply because the color of their skin and not the merit of their acting.. God forbid Spike Lee try to do something POSITIVE like pushing for blacks to joining acting and the arts industry in general..

See this is what kills me about this whole thing too. The Oscars and Academy Awards are trivial, they do not define the success of a actor in the industry quite often, if this were the case how could the Transformers series be incredibly successful through the years even when poorly rated, and never mentioned in the awards..

You would have a actual platform if it weren't for the fact that the nominated movies over them were all amazing..

It's precisely protests like this that make SJWs look like rabid degenerates that Machiavelli would've loved to have to deal with in his time.

Apparently a bunch of guys having a different opinion on what movies were good = racism. Pic related.

You would think by now people would realize the best way to increase ratings is to have a group boycott and call for a ban. People, who haven't ever watched the oscars or had no plan to watch the oscars, will now be watching the oscars just to see if there are any antics.

This is so stupid. It's like how some employers need to have a certain ratio of sexes and/or races of employees to make the people upstairs happy. It shouldn't be based on the colour of your skin, or you gender, or sexual orientation...but on qualifications. The same goes for this.
5-7 years ago I'm sure the whiners would be taken more seriously but pc culture has gotten so out of hand that most people are fed up.

Screen Actors Guild Awards

Four black actors including Idris Elba, who won twice, take home statues as Spotlight cast wins top prize and Leonardo DiCaprio continues likely march to first Oscar

The Screen Actors Guild (over 100,000 performers) voted Idris Elba as the year's best supporting actor, yet the Academy (6000 anonymous professionals, predominantly elderly white males) didn't even consider him worthy of nomination. This only goes to show how the demographics (profession, age, ethnicity, gender) of the members/voters greatly affects what gets nominated and awarded.

I'm curious Jag, have you seen either Beasts of No Nation or Straight Outta of Compton?

@Jag85: This brings up the question: are elderly white males somehow unfit to judge a movie (and its cast and crew) on its merits? Even if the people voting for the Oscars are mostly elderly white men, why is that a problem? Should we get rid of them and replace them with a younger more diverse set of voters? What exactly is it about Beasts of No Nation that inherently means that it has its odds against it when being voted by older white men? Is there some unproven stylistic approach here, or is the assumption simply that the older white men are all racists and therefore they refuse to vote for a black man?

Can we state SPECIFICALLY why a group of voters consisting primarily of older white men is a problem, and provide SPECIFIC examples of how the movies/people who didn't get nominated fit into a category that older white voters inherently ignore?